13 replies to this topic

[SanDiegoBurrito]

I'm running this game on a 6 year old machine, and maintaining a 20-35 fps on everything low. Not an optimal machine.

I'd like to upgrade/build so that I can run this game on High Settings and maintain 60 fps at 1920x1080 resolution. What are the minimum system specs I should keep in mind when upgrading/building my machine? Primarily interested in knowing the following three:

CPU, GPU, Memory.

[AEgg]

Until a few months ago I was running the game at max settings (except for no AA) at 1920x1200, averaging around 60 FPS with this system:
i5-2500k
Radeon HD 6950
8GB RAM

So anything equal or better than that should be fine. If you go AMD, you need a much, much better processor than an equivalently powerful Intel, cryengine doesn't like AMD, apparently.

[Tarl Cabot]

http://mwomercs.com/...re-accessories/

Wrong sub forum, but tis okay.

What are your current specs and what is your price range?

I am currently running i5-3570k oc 4.5ghz, 8megs ram, ATI HD 7950 w/3gigs vram.

Run at med settings. Without 80 FPS locked via config file, anywhere form 150ish FPS to 55ish when being plummeted by LRMs and laser fire at the same time

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 24 January 2016 - 06:45 PM.

[GrimRiver]

Im running:

i5-4670k

GTX760SC

8g ram

On mostly very high and high.

I get around 80-60fps, in big fights it dips to 40-30.

[xWiredx]

You *might* be able to get away 60fps at high settings with the Core i3 6320, but so far we're recommending i5/i7 chips and high clock speeds as far as the CPU is concerned.

Your choice of second-tier GPU (like Radeon 380/GTX 970 or similar) should definitely be able to get you where you need to be on that side of the equation. I believe you really could go down to the Radeon 280/GTX 960 range and even get high settings to work pretty well.

As far as RAM goes, DDR3-1866, DDR4-2800 (quad-channel Haswell-E systems), or DDR4-3000 (dual-channel Skylake systems) is where you want to be, and 8GB or more will suffice.

Drive specs: any 7200RPM drive or faster will be just fine. SSDs help load the assets faster, but once the match starts it doesn't help anything at all that we've seen.

The hardware subforum is definitely the place to be doing reading if you're considering building a system with this game in mind.

[Troutmonkey]

i7 4790k
8GB RAM
MSI Gaming 970 4G

Still only 50-60fps on Ultra @ 5760*1080 (no AA) with frequent enough dips into the single digits. Only seems to get slightly better peformance than my old rig

AMD 1090T (OC
16GB RAM
MSI Lightning 6970 OC
About 30-50FPS @1920*1080 on Ultra (no AA) with dips

Short story is MWO is very poorly optimized. Turning off AA and particles have the biggest impact on frame rate

[Accused]

Gameplay is probably better on low settings anyway. With that said if money is no object may as well go all out.

Things to keep in mind:

Get 16gigs of ram and a 4gig gfx card. You can get away with 8gigs but newer games (and bad ports - which is all of them) can benefit (memory leaks, etc) from the extra 8gigs. 4 gig gfx cards are the normal now.

Also the newer chips from AMD and Intel will require Win10 (if running windows). I would go splurge on the k version of intel chips (if you choose) and then overclock. Remember better to overclock when a card is new versus when it's older.

[OznerpaG]

best way to get max FPS is only turn on object detail and texturing to very high, everything else turned off

also i did research building my own computer 6 months ago and i read everywhere that more than 8gb RAM is a waste unless you use film editing programs a lot. can't hurt to have more, but i get 140fps in-game with my i7 /GTX970 /8gb RAM

[SanDiegoBurrito]

AEgg, on 24 January 2016 - 02:46 PM, said:

Until a few months ago I was running the game at max settings (except for no AA) at 1920x1200, averaging around 60 FPS with this system:
i5-2500k
Radeon HD 6950
8GB RAM

So anything equal or better than that should be fine. If you go AMD, you need a much, much better processor than an equivalently powerful Intel, cryengine doesn't like AMD, apparently.

Those are great numbers considering the older CPU and GPU. Did you overclock that CPU and/or GPU?

[William Mountbank]

The only thing that matters for MWO is CPU horsepower. The GPU is really not important. I would guess it's also single core limited (?) so and overclocked older CPU would probably do pretty well.

I'm vsync limited, but never drop below 60fps on a GTX750Ti, 1GB, with everything set to max. Using the same card with my previous Core2 Duo system I had trouble getting over 10fps on minimum setting, and with the resolution dropped. The difference is the i7 4790K.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

i5 and a GTX960 or R9 370 is what you want for 60 fps with new parts

[Troutmonkey]

SanDiegoBurrito, on 25 January 2016 - 08:55 PM, said:

Those are great numbers considering the older CPU and GPU. Did you overclock that CPU and/or GPU?

It depends on whether he's talking in game or testing grounds, because you get like 20 extra FPS in testing grounds. As I posted my old system which has a better GPU gets less FPS

[Chuck Jager]

AMD is bad
I got a 4690k i5 and it works great the i7 does not help most current games. I also bought tested asus boards and an nvidia card. Reliable devices mean better updates and long term support.

No more cutting edge or AMD for me.

[TexAce]

get a beefy old-generation i7 like the i7 3770K
A GTX670 (should be cheap now) or something new with the same benchmark
8GB Ram is enough

And you should be good to go. It's my setup and I'm playing on very high (except shadows) with vsync on and can maintain 50-60fps, I use PostAA though.

Edited by TexAce, 26 January 2016 - 04:31 AM.