TechSpot

Titanfall minimum PC system requirements revealed

By Scorpus
Feb 5, 2014
Post New Reply
  1. It will soon be time to fire up your gaming PC for one of the biggest multiplayer game launches of the year: Titanfall. The hotly-anticipated title from Respawn Entertainment is set to launch March 11 on both PC, Xbox One...

    Read more
  2. Razer

    Razer TechSpot Enthusiast Posts: 131   +11

    Ooh, finally revealed.. I'm really looking forward to playing this game :)
  3. JC713

    JC713 TechSpot Evangelist Posts: 6,876   +889

    Really looking forward to this game. I am getting bored of Planetside 2 and Battlefield 4! Good I also just got an invite to the ESO beta!

    As for the requirements, it is interesting why they are requiring a 64bit OS... if it is running on the source engine like rumors have been speculating, I wouldnt expect the game to be that demanding. Eh, whatever. The 32bit crowd is very small anyways. I just didnt expect this.
  4. TS-56336

    TS-56336 TechSpot Booster Posts: 571   +98

    Who doesn't run 64-bit nowadays?
  5. Titanfall = COD. Oops!!! Seems as if I already played this game.
  6. j05hh

    j05hh Newcomer, in training Posts: 96   +15

    Too bad this isn't being released on PS4. Not that I'm excited for another COD based game play (just an assumption). What engine are they using?
  7. 9Nails

    9Nails TechSpot Paladin Posts: 962   +84

    I'm still Win 7 32-bit at home. I know... <hangs head low> I am bad and I should feel bad. But I just cannot justify the money to switch to Win 7 64-bit with no performance gain. And upgrading to Win 8 is not in my plans. My next system build will include 64-bit Windows 9 when it's available.
  8. Lionvibez

    Lionvibez TechSpot Enthusiast Posts: 561   +80

    So you like using a machine with only 4GB's of ram?
  9. 9Nails

    9Nails TechSpot Paladin Posts: 962   +84

    Well, I wouldn't say that I "like" it. I'd say that it's paid for and therefore exactly what I can afford! But as long as it's still meeting my needs I see nothing wrong with it. My next PC home build might have 8 Gigs, which will be in gross excess, but memory is so cheap it's almost a crime not to. There's very little that I do at home which can push more than 2 gigs of RAM. A web browser (~400 MB), a game window (~1.7 Gigs), they usually fit under my total of 4 Gigs combined.

    I'm using 32-Gigs RAM on my work desktop. And I'm usually around 7 Gigs there with only a few programs running. It gets crazy when I get bombarded with work, so the memory is justified there.
  10. Lionvibez

    Lionvibez TechSpot Enthusiast Posts: 561   +80

    Based on what you wrote I understand you don't do enough at home to require more. But I can tell its been awhile since your built a pc if you do.

    8GB of ram is standard these days and not in gross excess. Alot of builds now are coming with 16GB of ram but that would be more power users. And most of the newer games will not run well if your total system memory is only 4GB's unless you close everything down to run the games.

    Good luck with the next build you have alot of options to look at.

    I'm going to assume your current machine is also using a hard drive and not an SSD.
  11. 9Nails

    9Nails TechSpot Paladin Posts: 962   +84

    The motherboard I used is about a 6 year old Gigabyte EX38T (which will support up to 8 GB) with an Intel E8400 CPU. It's using a GeForce GTX 570 1280 MB GPU, and an Intel 240GB 520 SSD. By most measures its old and time to for a refresh. I don't run the resolution that newer PC's have, because my monitor is just a 22" (1680x1050). But it's runs just fine with the upgrades it's had over the years. Boots in seconds, only has a limited number of background services running. The last "new" game that I ran on it was probably Tomb Raider 2013, which was silky smooth in max detail (minus the hair thing.) And even that game didn't use 4 Gigs RAM. I think, for RAM, most games suggest that you have more than what they actually need.
     
  12. lipe123

    lipe123 TechSpot Guru Posts: 423   +75

    It doesn't cost a thing to goto 64bit, the same 32bit license key you are using now can be used to install the 64bit of win7. Besides win7 is way more user friendly than 8 (and most likely 9 will be).
    Backup yo stuff and reinstall that sucker.
  13. Lionvibez

    Lionvibez TechSpot Enthusiast Posts: 561   +80

    ahh now that I've seen the rest of the specs. Sticking to the 22' monitor has keep gaming viable for you with a system of that age. a GTX 570 should still run most games at 1680 no problem. Glad you already put an SSD in the machine such a nice boost coming from a hard drive.

    Tomb Raider

    would definitely run well on your system at that res.

    http://www.techspot.com/review/645-tomb-raider-performance/page2.html

    And yes most game do suggest more because people often leave a ton of other apps open and just jump into games. Are you thinking Haswell Quad core for the next build?
  14. 9Nails

    9Nails TechSpot Paladin Posts: 962   +84

    I see several of those people each week asking for help. Their 6 GB system only has 300 meg free and they didn't know that all their widgets, toolbars, and background services are chewing up the RAM.

    Yeah, I am thinking Haswell, probably on a Z87 chipped motherboard. And at least quad. It's hard to find justification for the 8-core Haswell-E's coming out later this year. But I'll hang on just long enough to my money to see if they're right for me or not.

    Microsoft provided me with a 32-Bit Windows 7 disk and license as a recipient for attending one of their conferences. That wasn't the typical box kit with both versions (with 32 and 64 bit disks). So it's not exactly an OEM or a retail disk kit. I'm not certain if my code will work or which media I need! But I'll be in a new rig soon enough! Thanks for the good suggestion.
  15. hahahanoobs

    hahahanoobs TechSpot Booster Posts: 958   +96

    If the min requirements are 4GB, how else are you supposed to use it without a 64-bit OS?
  16. JC713

    JC713 TechSpot Evangelist Posts: 6,876   +889

    Yeah, I understand that. I just wonder if the source engine requires that much. Eh, who knows. The game probably didnt play that well on systems with <4GB of RAM, so that is probably why they went with the requirement of >4GB.
  17. Lionvibez

    Lionvibez TechSpot Enthusiast Posts: 561   +80

    I hope this game is as good as the hype surrounding it.
  18. St1ckM4n

    St1ckM4n TechSpot Evangelist Posts: 3,457   +620

    Well, it's 6 v 6. But that's okay, "because AI will cover some additional slots".

    Basically, don't buy it. I guarantee you will rage because of stupid AI that you have no choice but to rely on.
  19. Skidmarksdeluxe

    Skidmarksdeluxe TechSpot Evangelist Posts: 2,985   +732

    Multiplayer... You can count me out.
  20. amstech

    amstech TechSpot Enthusiast Posts: 832   +213

    No it isn't. Sure sounds good on paper though.
  21. St1ckM4n

    St1ckM4n TechSpot Evangelist Posts: 3,457   +620

    Are you literally saying that 32GB RAM is not justified for him? Without knowing what he does for work?
  22. Would the game run on these specs?
    • AMD A-Series A10-5750M (2.50GHz)
    • 6GB Memory 1TB HDD
    • AMD Radeon HD 8650G
    • 1366 x 768
    • Windows 8
  23. St1ckM4n

    St1ckM4n TechSpot Evangelist Posts: 3,457   +620

    Yeah, it'd probably run.


Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.