Guessing the system requirements

aceface123 · Post by **aceface123** » Sat Jan 07, 2006 4:04 pm

256 mb of ram is the system requirements for "Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind." There is no way on earth you could run "Oblivion" with that amount of ram. 512 is a definite possibility, but let me say that I don't think it's too far fethced to expect 1 gig recommended requirements. Yeah it might run on 512 but not very well. And further, I don't think that a gig of ram is more than standard for a huge number of gamers. Maybe it was a year ago. There are more and more games coming out that require 1 gig of ram to run properly. If you check the box for "the matrix online" it says that 1 gig of ram is recommended to run the game well. That game is much older than "Oblivion." There are others. "World of Warcraft" 1 gig recommended, "F.E.A.R. Files" website says that the minimum system requirement will be 1 gig of ram. This is just to name a few. The fact is that there will be graphic options for gamers to scale down "Oblivion" but I seriously doubt that it will run well on less than 512. To say the least the minimum system requirements will probably be 512 mb of ram with 1 gig recommended. Also, to respond to what you think runs counter to what I said earlier, I think we disagree on what the average gamer has in their cpu. Yes I know Bethesda wants to market the game to as wide a group as possible, but I think more people have 512 to 1 gig of ram than you might think. ANd I don't think my second claim contradicts the first one. You probably won't be able to run the game WELL without 1 gig of memory and a high end video card. Bethesda says so themselves on their website that the latest hardware will run the game to best. That is a no-brainer to me. I never said the game won't run on less, but just not as well.

fable · Post by **fable** » Sat Jan 07, 2006 4:12 pm

Run well? No: I agree. With 256 MB RAM, it will not run well. But it could be listed as "minimum system requirements," which many companies do; and it would work, after a sort. Unlike you, I feel that most gamers still have 512 MB RAM or less on their PCs. Hell, over the last couple of years I've spent a fair amount of time on the Elder Scrolls' modding forum, and even many of the modders (who could be expected to have much more memory, given the way mods eat it up) still had 512 MB RAM.

But we're arguing speciously over what/if's, here. I still think Bethsoft won't breathe the words "1 GB RAM" in relation to their product. You disagree, and we'll let it go at that. I'm in any case prepared, because I *do* have 1 GB RAM: plenty of windows for work, or Morrowind with 210 mods going.

aceface123 · Post by **aceface123** » Sat Jan 07, 2006 4:19 pm

I'm with you on a gig of ram. When I first heard that Oblivion would be hitting shelves soon I started upgrading my pc. I heard from Game Stop that it is supposed to hit stores on March 21st. I hope it is sooner than that but oh well, it's worth waiting for.

aceface123 · Post by **aceface123** » Sat Jan 07, 2006 4:20 pm

By the way, what kind of GPU do you have, I think I'll need to get a new one personally.

ashtaroth · Post by **ashtaroth** » Sun Jan 08, 2006 2:22 am

Will this Due?

Can someone make a proper guess on the requirements of oblivion and tell me if a Sapphire Radeon x1800xl 256mb (GDDR3)** + Amd 64 3700+ + 1gb (2gb?) ram will enabl e optimal gameplay in oblivion? I have no experience with the 9800-series so i ask if the 1800-series might be able to pull it of.
I am quite worried regarding the graphic cards required by oblivion.

** http://bjorn3d.pricegrabber.com/search_ ... d=12872030

Rookierookie · Post by **Rookierookie** » Sun Jan 08, 2006 10:24 am

No problem at 1280x1024 I think, but if you are going to run at 1600x1200 you might be pushing it a little.

RebelousDarkElf · Post by **RebelousDarkElf** » Sun Jan 08, 2006 3:16 pm

I'm not very good with the computer lingo, but do you think a new Dell that cost $600 with 2.59 GHz and 512 MB of RAM??? The graphics card is good enough for Rise of Nations if you need to know. (That is the best quality looking game on my computer)

Rookierookie · Post by **Rookierookie** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 8:54 am

No, and Rise of Nations is to TES4 what Solitaire is to RoN.

aceface123 · Post by **aceface123** » Sat Jan 14, 2006 4:11 pm

PCI vs PCIe

Here is a question for you guys. Does a PCI Express graphics card require a different slot than just a PCI card? I am in line to get a new GPU but I don't know if I can run a PCIe in a PCI slot. Any thoughts.

fable · Post by **fable** » Sat Jan 14, 2006 4:15 pm

[QUOTE=aceface123]By the way, what kind of GPU do you have, I think I'll need to get a new one personally.[/QUOTE]

I'd thought I had replied to this, but apparently not. I'm running an AMD Athlon 64 Processsor clocked at 3.1 gHz (which is standard, not over-clocked).

Rookierookie · Post by **Rookierookie** » Sat Jan 14, 2006 8:25 pm

fable, he asked for the GPU (graphics card), not the CPU, which means you still haven't answered his question.

[QUOTE=aceface123]Here is a question for you guys. Does a PCI Express graphics card require a different slot than just a PCI card? I am in line to get a new GPU but I don't know if I can run a PCIe in a PCI slot. Any thoughts.[/QUOTE]
PCI-E cards cannot be put into PCI slots.

On the issue of RAM, I don't see how 256MB is going to run Oblivion, or even 512MB for that matter. Even in 2004, games like FarCry absolutely needed 512MB RAM on Windows 2000 and XP, while Doom 3 absolutely needed 384MB, and runs in single-digit FPS even with a top graphics card in Ultra quality with 512MB RAM. Even Half Life 2, which has a relatively low requirement, performs extremely poorly in a 512MB RAM environment. In 2005, Battlefield 2 and F.E.A.R. both require at least 512MB RAM. Not sure about Quake 4, but it could only require more than Doom 3 did.

aceface123 · Post by **aceface123** » Sun Jan 15, 2006 10:10 am

So do they make the Geforce 7800 GT that works in a PCI slot or are they all PCI Express. If so, that is the dumbest thing I have ever heard of. That means that unless you have the PCIe slot you can only get like a geforce 5500 which I already have (which already sucks) I know that they are coming out with a bridge so that PCIe cards are compatable with PCI motherboards but God only knows when that will be. Way to go computer industry! Nice transition!

Denethorn · Post by **Denethorn** » Sun Jan 15, 2006 12:09 pm

aceface, as far as I'm aware no high-end cards of any description are produced for the PCI interface, and very very few mid-range. PCI graphics cards are for the most heavily budgeted of users.

If you're referring to 'legacy' AGP slots however... I think the transition has been handled very well. As far as I'm aware you can purchase AGP ATI x850s, which are still an exceptionally good card (very high end, though no longer the cutting edge). Atleast x800s.

aceface123 · Post by **aceface123** » Sun Jan 15, 2006 11:16 pm

What did you mean by "PCI graphics cards are for the most heavily budgeted of users?"

aceface123 · Post by **aceface123** » Sun Jan 15, 2006 11:29 pm

Okay, here is a question fro you guys. I currently am running a Pentium 4, 1.25 gig of ram, and a geforce fx 5500 (hate this card.) My motherboard is PCI. I want to upgrade my video card. What kind of card could I get that would be better than the one I have but still PCI compatible? If you guys have any suggestions let me know. Thanks

Rookierookie · Post by **Rookierookie** » Mon Jan 16, 2006 2:43 am

So do they make the Geforce 7800 GT that works in a PCI slot or are they all PCI Express. If so, that is the dumbest thing I have ever heard of. That means that unless you have the PCIe slot you can only get like a geforce 5500 which I already have (which already sucks) I know that they are coming out with a bridge so that PCIe cards are compatable with PCI motherboards but God only knows when that will be. Way to go computer industry! Nice transition!

The 7800GT is for PCI-E only.

As for dumb, the PCI slot has about 1/16th the transmission speed of the PCI-E slot, which means that the 7800GT would perform no better than a Geforce 5500. Do not comment before gathering the necessary knowledge.

If you are rich enough to consider the 7800GT, and your motherboard doesn't have an AGP slot, you might as well upgrade your motherboard to one that has an AGP slot and buy an AGP graphics card.

Hill-Shatar · Post by **Hill-Shatar** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 11:59 am

I just realized a while ago that this is one of the top resources for Oblivion on web searches.

I just recently linked this up to another site, and the number one thing they mentioned was the amount of space that you have listed in the first post.

And what games take up 6-8 Gigs? The biggest game I have is 3 gigs, that would be black and White 2. Doom 3 uses 2 gigs. City of heros and city of villians together uses 2.5 Gigs. And Morrowind used an insignificant 650 Megs. I really can't see Oblivion using more than 3 Gigs. Especially when you take into consideration that DVDs single sided double layered only hold 5.5 Gigs. Meaning that Oblivion would be the first 2 DVD game made yet.

Ashen · Post by **Ashen** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 6:15 pm

[QUOTE=fable]I'd thought I had replied to this, but apparently not. I'm running an AMD Athlon 64 Processsor clocked at 3.1 gHz (which is standard, not over-clocked).[/QUOTE]

I have an Athlon 64 too actually. Too bad no 64 support ah?

Rookierookie · Post by **Rookierookie** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 9:44 pm

And what games take up 6-8 Gigs? The biggest game I have is 3 gigs, that would be black and White 2. Doom 3 uses 2 gigs. City of heros and city of villians together uses 2.5 Gigs. And Morrowind used an insignificant 650 Megs. I really can't see Oblivion using more than 3 Gigs. Especially when you take into consideration that DVDs single sided double layered only hold 5.5 Gigs. Meaning that Oblivion would be the first 2 DVD game made yet.

Steam - that is, Half Life 2, CounterStrike: Source and Half-Life 2: Lost Coast, plus SDK - took up 6.79GB hard disk space. I listed 4GB as the optimum, which, frankly, isn't very big at all. It also takes up only 1 DVD, so I don't know what the person you quoted is saying.

And for being the 2 DVD issue, I think someone failed to do his homework, because Myst IV: Revelation took up 3 DVDs. You heard me, 3 DVDs, a MINIMUM of 3GB hard disk space, and 8GB for a full-installation.

AIIO · Post by **AIIO** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 3:26 am

I really confused, been lookin at all the different specs. i just wanna ask if my system will run oblivion now.

AMD ATHLON 64 3800+
2 GB TWINX-3200 (400 MHz) DDR RAM
RADEON X800 GTO
SONY DVD-RW