Fallout 3 Has Gone Gold; System Specs

[Pyrex]

The clock is spiffy, but an extra $50 for it? Ouch.

*preordered the Collectors edition that has everything but the clock for $70...*

 

[Rl'Halsinor]

Heck, yeah. Nearly equivalent to early Core 2 Duos, that CPU. I think the E4300, for example, was around the 4400+ or 4600+ mark. And that's not a mile away from 3800+, by any means. Relative to the minimum spec of a 2.4GHz P4. . . *snort*. Your CPU would (and does) eat a pair of them in tandem for breakfast.

Thanks Aus Snow. Your descriptive language is metaphorically clear.

Additional Information:

Supported Video Card Chipsets:

NVIDIA GeForce 200 series
NVIDIA Geforce 9800 series
NVIDIA Geforce 9600 series
NVIDIA Geforce 8800 series
NVIDIA Geforce 8600 series
NVIDIA Geforce 8500 series
NVIDIA Geforce 8400 series
NVIDIA Geforce 7900 series
NVIDIA Geforce 7800 series
NVIDIA Geforce 7600 series
NVIDIA Geforce 7300 series
NVIDIA GeForce 6800 series
ATI HD 4800 series
ATI HD 4600 series
ATI HD 3800 series
ATI HD 3600 series
ATI HD 3400 series
ATI HD 2900 series
ATI HD 2600 series
ATI HD 2400 series
ATI X1900 series
ATI X1800 series
ATI X1600 series
ATI X1300 series
ATI X850 series

 

[Ranger REG]

Minimum System Requirements:

Windows XP/Vista
1GB System RAM (XP)/ 2GB System RAM (Vista)
2.4 Ghz Intel Pentium 4 or equivalent processor
Direct X 9.0c compliant video card with 256MB RAM (NVIDIA 6800 or better/ATI X850 or better)


Recommended System Requirements:

Intel Core 2 Duo processor
2 GB System RAM
Direct X 9.0c compliant video card with 512MB RAM (NVIDIA 8800 series, ATI 3800 series)

Just curious, do we really need minimum and recommended system requirements for computer games? Can't we just have one (preferably the recommended requirements)?

 

[Fallen Seraph]

Just curious, do we really need minimum and recommended system requirements for computer games? Can't we just have one (preferably the recommended requirements)?

I like having minimum since it means that while yeah maybe with one game I can't make it as pretty as it can be, I can still play it, which is most important.

While on the other side if I see I got recommended it means it can still look nice and run smoothly.

 

[TwistedBishop]

I like having minimum since it means that while yeah maybe with one game I can't make it as pretty as it can be, I can still play it, which is most important.

Minimum specs tend to mean it can be booted up. That doesn't necessarily mean playable. My old PC met the minimum specs to run Supreme Commander...if I felt like seeing 1 frame every second.

Personally, I'd like to replace minimum specs with playable specs, and recommended with maxed-out.

I'll be playing this on the 360, despite having a gaming PC. The fact that I can rent or resell the game afterwards, and play it on a bigger screen, means more to me than slightly better graphics.

 

[TwistedBishop]

Heck, yeah. Nearly equivalent to early Core 2 Duos, that CPU. I think the E4300, for example, was around the 4400+ or 4600+ mark. And that's not a mile away from 3800+, by any means. Relative to the minimum spec of a 2.4GHz P4. . . *snort*. Your CPU would (and does) eat a pair of them in tandem for breakfast.

I wouldn't compare it to the E4300. That chip was all about overclocking. If we assume that Fallout 3 is comparable to Oblivion, this benchmark might be helpful.

AnandTech: Intel Core 2 Duo E6300 & E6400: Tremendous Value Through Overclocking

The 3800+ X2 should be fine. It's on the low end of the dual core chips, but the fact that it IS a dual core is what's most important to you.

 

[Aus_Snow]

I wouldn't compare it to the E4300.

Cool. Neither would I. Or not directly, at least.

That chip was all about overclocking.

Which is something most computer owners - and yeah, even gamers - don't do. Right.

But as I said, the E4300 (OK, at stock speeds, to be 'precise') was [or is] closer to around about an AMD x2 4400+ or even 4600+ of the same era. Going by several reviews, benchmarks and so on. For overall gaming purposes, is also what I was meaning.

 

[TwistedBishop]

Which is something most computer owners - and yeah, even gamers - don't do. Right.

I'd say most people don't overclock, even among PC gamers. But that's neither here nor there.

It's much clearer to say the X2s are comparable to the Core 2s. The specs don't qualify the type of Core 2s anyway.

 

[Ranger REG]

Personally, I'd like to replace minimum specs with playable specs, and recommended with maxed-out.

EXACTLY. That's all I want. I mean, honestly, who here would shell out $40 just to see the computer game boot up only?

 

[GlassJaw]

I'll be playing this on the 360, despite having a gaming PC. The fact that I can rent or resell the game afterwards, and play it on a bigger screen, means more to me than slightly better graphics.

+1

I've always been a PC gamer but I'm getting to the point now where I'm done with PC gaming. It's just too much of a PITA to deal with system specs, patches, DRM crapola, etc.

There's something to be said for putting a disc in a console and having it run without problem immediately.