What a waste.

[SharraShimada]

 

@Madanexx - Really "fallout 4 can literally run on a potato..."

Windows 7/8/10 (64-bit OS required)

Intel Core i5-2300 2.8 GHz/AMD Phenom II X4 945 3.0 GHz or equivalent.

8 GB RAM.

30 GB free HDD space.

 

NVIDIA GTX 550 Ti 2GB/AMD Radeon HD 7870 2GB or equivalent.

This doesn't look like a potato to me, this looks more like $800+ that I don't have.

Looks, and you even did not bother yourself with checking for prices...

You can build a pc, running FO4 medium für ~200$, if you buy it 2nd hand more in the 80-150$ range.

 

[dayglo98]

I also run it very very well at 1080p, ultra with some stuff toned down (god rays, shadows) and using all the texture optimizers; on a i5-2500k, R9 280X, 8Gb RAM, very mainstream machine.

 

200$ new machine eh, not so much :p

Edited December 1, 2015 by dayglo98

[twoiko]

I got it running fine with a few optimization mods on my 7 year old potato @900p, all settings on ultra except shadows and godrays:

 

Phenom x4 2.5GHz
6GB DDR2 RAM
AMD 6950 2GB

Edited December 6, 2015 by twoiko

[Nixsy]

I can play this at 30-50 fps on an old 8gb quad core amd pc. certainly no 16gb monster required.

[robberfox]

Did you actually try to play the game or did you just see that the specs were changed, because I have a decent gaming pc that's nowhere near that powerful and I can run on high graphic settings on like 40-50 fps with only occasional dips when the screen is full of super mutants exploding

[Obituary]

Although Fallout 4 doesn't run that bad I think they can learn a thing or two from Rockstar Games (Well, after GTA IV obviously) when it comes to optimizing. GTA V runs pretty much Ultra with 50-60 fps while I struggle to get High on Fallout 4.

 

I just capped the frame rate at 40 which is perfectly playable in my opinion. Maybe you should try that too. Don't forget to turn off vsync or just play in (borderless) windowed mode.

[jones177]

I am still using my old i7 2600k rig I built for Skyrim. I have a 980 ti in it now & playing Fallout 4 at 3840 X 2160.

Fallout 4 is the only modern triple A game I can play at 4k with descent frame rate. Games like Witcher 3 & Dragon Age Inquisition I played at 1440.

 

Later

[CEFranklin]

Hrmm. This is just me, but why are you griping here? Shouldn't you be over on Bethesda's site, expressing your concerns?

[Mikemc31]

I was skeptical about my setup as well, until someone showed me YouTuber's who benchmark games on just about every setup.

I run FO4 on High settings, 1360 x 768. My computer was purchased from BestBuy in 2010, for $600. I know it's mucho cheaper to build your own, but I opted for a no-frills just-buy-the-darn-thing option. Since then I have only added 4g of Ram and last year a GTX 750.

 

FO4 aside, you really ought to think about investing in new hardware just because games are getting bigger. Otherwise you could opt for one of the consoles.

[UhuruNUru]

If you want to play the latest AAA games on the best settings, you need hardware to run those games and nowadays at least an i7, not an i5 as Bethesda claims, though technically it may run the game, it won't be a consistent and stable frame rate.

Of course, mods can improve the situation.

 

In the end though, to be a PC gamer, playing all the latest games on release, you must upgrade components

Now you say your PC ran Skyrim fine, but Skyrim's a 4 year old 32-bit game and that limits the available memory to under 4 GB. Not to mention that the major components have about a 3 year usage limit for new games. So think yourself lucky you got at least that average. My very first PC was obsolete within 6 months of the CPU's release, it was the last Pentium before Dual Cores arrived and all new games, then required dual core.

 

No PC gamer with any sense and little money, buys an entire PC in one go (1st one maybe). They replace each component separately, as and when required.

 

Also $800 is about double the Amount you need to spend, for an entire new PC. Publisher's want as many customers as possible and set minimum requirements for that. The quality of a PC game isn't fixed.

 

The range starts below the consoles and goes much higher and the basic fact is, a PC capable of the same quality as consoles, is actually the cheapest of those options.

Indeed if you look at your individual components, you may find you only actually need a new GPU or Mobo. Though obviously if you never upgrade, every component, will need replacing, eventually.

 

Also you don't upgrade for one game, though it may trigger the upgrade, you upgrade for all of them.

 

It doesn't matter how low your income may be, you can afford to upgrade, if you choose to do so. It's always a choice and the often used excuse, "I don't earn enough, to save anything", is a lie. You may believe that lie, but you simply chose, to buy other things. Whether "sex, drugs and rock 'n' roll" or simply a daily, expensive, take out coffee. Instead of instant, at a fraction of the cost, you make those choices.

I earn very little, but spend even less. Do only that and you save a little, each week. It mounts up. It took me five years to replace that OEM Pentium with my dream £4,500 (same parts would be about $5,000 in US) Gaming setup.

That's only saving about £20 a week, not a huge amount. Within six months you can have £/$500 and get a PC to play Fallout with better than console quality.

 

The only issue that is different with Fallout is, for the first time in years, games can be CPU limited, not just GPU limited.

 

It's been years since that last happened. To use all the power of the grapihics card, now requires an i7 CPU.

An i3 is obsolete and though Bethesda Softworks claim it can run on an i5, it will run poorly, with stutters and dropped frames caused by the CPU bottleneck limiting the GPU's performance.

 

The main reason that this wasn't an issue for years was because, games were 32-bit, due to the Consoles being 32-bit.

 

The memory limits of 32-bit are 4 GB, which is simply too small to cause issues for any modern 64-bit CPU.

 

The days of playing the latest games with a PC older, than about three years are over. The flip flop between either the CPU or the GPU, limiting the other are back.

 

So if you are running games on a "potato", simply changing your GPU, won't help when you're limited by the CPU.

The aberration of 32-bit memory limited gaming on 64-bit PC's is over and won't return, unless 128-bit PC's arrive and Consoles stay at 64-bit for another decade or so.

Make no mistake, 64-bit also has a memory size limit and we will reach that limit, one day, but not for a while.