Meaningless recommended PC specifications

[TW]Fox

[TW]Fox

[TW]Fox

Man of Honour
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
160,303
Has anyone else noticed how completely meaningless most games recommended requirements these days?

Noticed Supreme Commander said it 'recommended' at least a 3Ghz Intel CPU.

Really... so that means that, according to the box (Which is all most members of the public have to go on) a P4 3.06 is better suited to Supreme Commander than an Intel Core2Duo E6600...
 
This is why Microsoft is pushing it's WEI (Windows Experience Index) which it's included with Vista.

The system rates different parts of your system - CPU, graphics etc. and gives you a score for each.

I think it's only a matter of time before we see "Required: A CPU with a WEI of 4 or greater..."
 
How else are you gonna do it though, in a tiny box on game case? There's just too many possibilities to cover so they try and come up with a general view to cover the most common possibilities.
It's been that way for years, I mean we all know an AMD at 2.8ghz is gonna be a lot better than the P4-3.06B as well.

The real blame should lie at the door of the hardware manufacturers. AMD at least tried to keep things comprable with the "3000+" type ratings, but Intel part names are a total nightmare these days. Even before C2D arrived, we had all these P4s with 600 series, 800 series, 900 series etc like they are some kind of motor.

As a general rule of thumb, my idea of the min specs for games is to take the recommended spec, and add 50% power. So in this case 4.5ghz P4 (or equivalent) and 1.5gig ram with a ~7800GT.
 
I actually wonder if certain pre-built PC chains will ever go to Core2Duo processors, it would mean admitting to their customer:

"You remember I sold you that PC last year and I told you that megahurts was all that mattered?"

"Yes"

"Well, I was lying."

:D
 
Here's a challenge, try and get a good smooth flight out of FSX on the minimum recomended specs.

  • Windows XP SP2 / Windows Vista
  • Processor: 1.0 Ghz
  • RAM: Windows XP SP2 - 256MB, Windows Vista – 512MB
  • Hard Drive: 14GB
  • Video Card: 32MB DirectX 9 compatible
  • Other: DX9 hardware compatibility and audio board with speakers and/or headphones
  • Online/Multiplayer Requirements: 56.6 kbps or better for online play
It simply just cannot be done.
 
dont know why they just dont say something like

3Dmark 06 score of 6k or better

or processor score of 2k or something
 
The problem is that a lot of normal gamers just wouldnt have an idea whats in their box or how to check their WEI rating. Since most of these people will be buying pre-built, perhaps its ideal for PC manus to start sticking the WEI rating on a label on the machine to save confusion instead of/in addition to the actual PC spec...

ps3ud0 :cool:
 
geeza said:
dont know why they just dont say something like

3Dmark 06 score of 6k or better

or processor score of 2k or something
Click to expand...

Because 90% of the people who need to check the box won't have run 3DMark. The idea of the Windows Experience Index is that it will be obviously marked on PCs and the test is a part of Windows so that, in theory, lots of people will know their score.
 
Yeah I think WEI (or something similar) is probably the way forward, assuming it's realistic (I've no idea of how accurate it is in terms of rating gpu performance etc).

One potential issue I guess with quoting the score for pre-built PCs is that people could start complaining if they run the tests themselves and score lower than what was quoted - say they've got something running in the background owning cpu cycles, windows is all cluttered up with crap etc.
 
the recommended box should just say

"If you have a £200 of the shelf Dell, put the box down."

ags
 
HangTime said:
Yeah I think WEI (or something similar) is probably the way forward, assuming it's realistic (I've no idea of how accurate it is in terms of rating gpu performance etc).

One potential issue I guess with quoting the score for pre-built PCs is that people could start complaining if they run the tests themselves and score lower than what was quoted - say they've got something running in the background owning cpu cycles, windows is all cluttered up with crap etc.
Click to expand...
Well if you think about it if the publishers/developers when they formulate the minimum/recommended WEI mark, run WEI on the systems they consider worthy of playing the game then the relative differences would still withstand to the users PC - this would negate how exactly accurate the mark is as it would be off by the same threshold on every PC...

ps3ud0 :cool:
 
Anyone whose bought a conroe should have been told that they have a better range of processor. My conroe runs at 3.5ghz anyway :)

They have tried multiple times to get a better system then MHZ. I remember this being the case over 10 years ago, it never took off.

They could have just said 3ghz or dual core. or

CPU level required - HIGH spec


Anything that requires 3ghz is pretty dam beefy, that'd make me double check the whole list tbh
 
HangTime said:
The real blame should lie at the door of the hardware manufacturers. AMD at least tried to keep things comprable with the "3000+" type ratings, but Intel part names are a total nightmare these days. Even before C2D arrived, we had all these P4s with 600 series, 800 series, 900 series etc like they are some kind of motor.
Click to expand...
The problem is that clock speed is a pretty meaningless number. Especially now that processor architechture has changed considerably in the last few years.
 
Minimum recommended system specifications :
-------------------------------------------

C.P.U : LEET

R.A.M: UBER

Hard drive : Ownage

Video card : Wack

-----------------


i like simple :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom