PC Game Recommended Specifications

[TW]Fox · 27 Sep 2007 at 21:04

When are they going to overhaul these?

Many games on the shelves today claim you need a '3Ghz CPU'.

Fantastic. So that means Mr Average will think hey, why is my mates P4 3.06 ok to run this game but my new Core2Quad Q6600 won't?

The CPU industry moved on from Ghz years ago. Why are games companies still using this meaningless and misleading method of demonstrating which hardware is required to run their products?

A 3Ghz P4 is nowhere near as powerful as a 1.8Ghz Core2Duo CPU.

modo77 · 27 Sep 2007 at 21:09

Some have started too now, looking at the recommended specs on the bioshock cover it just says Intel core2due. No mention of mhz.

Azagoth · 27 Sep 2007 at 21:10

I know what you mean. My system runs games that claim to require a 3GHz CPU perfectly fine, even though my X2 4200+ is only rated at 2.2GHz (clocked to 2.6GHz though).

One has to wonder how many people have been put off from buying a certain game because the recommended specs on the box are misleading.

Duke · 27 Sep 2007 at 21:18

I think this is why Vista has the rating system? Hopefully they will use this.

[TW]Fox · 27 Sep 2007 at 21:26

You may as well put 'ATX Case required' becuase its about as relevant.

No wonder PC gaming is struggling, the average joe hasn't a hope in hell of understanding any of this. As far as they know they've got a 2.6Ghz E6700 or whatever.

Minstadave · 27 Sep 2007 at 21:55

With Vista's performance rating system they could make a move to a more quantitative set of specs, e.g (CPU score >4.6 GFX>5.0 etc...) that would atleast make things more objective.

Edit - already been mentioned!

Dureth · 28 Sep 2007 at 07:26

[TW]Fox;10170339 said:
No wonder PC gaming is struggling, the average joe hasn't a hope in hell of understanding any of this. As far as they know they've got a 2.6Ghz E6700 or whatever.

As far as they know they have a Dell/HP/Sony/Packard Bell etc. Most people shop for a PC by brand name and what the sales advisor recommends. I doubt most have any idea what components are in there.

smit101 · 28 Sep 2007 at 08:20

Azagoth said:
I know what you mean. My system runs games that claim to require a 3GHz CPU perfectly fine, even though my X2 4200+ is only rated at 2.2GHz (clocked to 2.6GHz though).

One has to wonder how many people have been put off from buying a certain game because the recommended specs on the box are misleading.

Didn't AMDs Athlon speed ratings give an equivalent of a netburst P4's GHZ? e.g a 4200+ is equal to a P4 at 4.2Ghz,3500+ = P4@ 3.5Ghz etc.

If indeed that is how the ratings work then your 4200+ is way over spec for any 3ghz rated game,Joe Public might not know that though,so yeah,I'm sure in the past many people have been put off from buying.

Sone · 28 Sep 2007 at 08:36

smit101 said:
Didn't AMDs Athlon speed ratings give an equivalent of a netburst P4's GHZ? e.g a 4200+ is equal to a P4 at 4.2Ghz,3500+ = P4@ 3.5Ghz etc.

If indeed that is how the ratings work then your 4200+ is way over spec for any 3ghz rated game,Joe Public might not know that though,so yeah,I'm sure in the past many people have been put off from buying.

i believe the official meaning is a 4200+ is as fast as an original slot A athlon @ 4.2ghz

hellforleather · 28 Sep 2007 at 09:38

why dont they just say the cpu type in the spec (like bioshock does)? all this talk of a rating system just seems a bit unnecessary
they do it with graphics cards and it seems to work

Muffin` · 28 Sep 2007 at 12:37

Maybe they just need a governing body to take them by their heads and show them the way, UK controlled on a better age system and a PC specification taking control of the Vista system and until Vista is main stream use an application which is downloadable from their website which can read a persons DELL and HP and tell them a score and the score needed for that game is on the back of the box.

I wouldn't of thought the games company’s would be bothered as it will introduce more sale's which will keep the share holders happy.

Fox, get on MSN.

manic111 · 28 Sep 2007 at 12:52

Its absolutely ridiculous! My 1.6ghz C2D laptop ran Oblivion well, while my 3.0Ghz P4 had a torrid time with it!!

VeNT · 28 Sep 2007 at 13:10

hehe why not have a knobbled ver of 3d mark in every copy of windows and then use that score? ie must have a min score of xxxxxx ?

smit101 · 28 Sep 2007 at 14:18

Sone said:
i believe the official meaning is a 4200+ is as fast as an original slot A athlon @ 4.2ghz

Officially maybe,but as time progressed it unofficially became known as 'Intel equivalency Numbering' it's always been a controversial system though.

But you are right,in that originally they were using equivalency numbering with their earlier lines,makes things even more confusing for the poor old game buyer.

snowdog · 28 Sep 2007 at 14:30

No 4200 means its as fast as a P4 4.2 ghz, For example the 3ghz northwood was easely faster in some stuff than an athlon 3000+, while the athlon was faster in some stuff than the p4.

Also stop exgaggerating people, a 1.6 ghz c2d is just as fast as a 3.2 ghz p4 ( in single core apps) and as a 3.2 ghz pentium D ( in dual core apps, its not like its twice as fast or something), don't say a p4 is nowhere near as fast as a c2d, as a 3.8 ghz p4 would still be faster than a 1.6 ghz c2d in an old single-core game.

Also I doubt people are confused by it, cpu is hardly a limiting factor in any game these days, I mean I doubt people look at the cpu specs, aslong as you have something among the lines of a 2500 + athlonxp or 2.5 ghz p4, you're mainly going to be limited by gfx card or ram, wich is the main problem for people these days, they see : 128 mb shader 3.0 card required, and think: what's shader 3.0? Ohwell I have a 256 mb geforce 5200 so it will be fine.

FrankJH · 28 Sep 2007 at 14:53

VeNT said:
hehe why not have a knobbled ver of 3d mark in every copy of windows and then use that score? ie must have a min score of xxxxxx ?

Great idea (apart from Futuremark requiring a fee for every copy of Windows sold - which probably/rightly wouldnt go down well with MS)

The analogy and theory would work well - wonder if MS could come up with a "testing" system a little more obvious and graphical in Vista 2010 (or whatever its called)

Amnesia · 28 Sep 2007 at 17:52

snowdog said:
cpu is hardly a limiting factor in any game these days, I mean I doubt people look at the cpu specs, aslong as you have something among the lines of a 2500 + athlonxp or 2.5 ghz p4, you're mainly going to be limited by gfx card or ram, wich is the main problem for people these days, they see : 128 mb shader 3.0 card required, and think: what's shader 3.0? Ohwell I have a 256 mb geforce 5200 so it will be fine.

there are some games but its mainly online games.....more characters/npc's/players more cpu power required

Moredhel · 28 Sep 2007 at 18:20

Steam still does it and that's dynamic. I regularly get told that my shiny (albeit year old) C2D won't play Half Life 2 Episode 1 because I only have a 2.4Ghz processor.

TheVoice · 28 Sep 2007 at 18:26

Moredhel said:
Steam still does it and that's dynamic. I regularly get told that my shiny (albeit year old) C2D won't play Half Life 2 Episode 1 because I only have a 2.4Ghz processor.

Yeah I got that when I ran Lost Coast; it said it wanted at least 2.9GHz, but my E6750 was 'only' 2.66GHz.