Bioshock's Final PC Specs

Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
458
Reaction score
0
Straight from IGN.

- Operating Systems -

Windows XP (with Service Pack 2) or Windows Vista

- Minimum System Requirements -

CPU - Pentium 4 2.4GHz Single Core processor

System RAM - 1GB

Video Card - Direct X 9.0c compliant video card with 128MB RAM (NVIDIA 6600 or better/ATI X1300 or better, excluding ATI X1550).

Sound Card - 100% direct X 9.0c compatible sound card

Hard disc space - 8GB free space

- Recommended System Requirements -

CPU - Intel Core 2 Duo processor

System RAM - 2GB

Video card - DX9 - Direct X 9.0c compliant video card with 512MB RAM (NVIDIA GeForce 7900 GT or better) / DX10 - NVIDIA GeForce 8600 or better

Sound Card - Sound Blaster X-Fi series (Optimized for use with Creative Labs EAX ADVANCED HD 4.0 or EAX ADVANCED HD 5.0 compatible sound cards)

http://pc.ign.com/articles/802/802466p1.html

Is not too bad.
 
X-Fi cards don't even work with Vista right now despite their claims, and I decided to let Creative cards drop from my future upgrade plans so this optimized for X-Fi shit kinda ticks me off.
 
X-Fi cards don't even work with Vista right now despite their claims, and I decided to let Creative cards drop from my future upgrade plans so this optimized for X-Fi shit kinda ticks me off.
Yeah I don't like the idea that EAX is proprietary. MS changed how sound works in Vista so it's software based and EAX (hardware) doesn't work. But for $10 you can get Creative's work around.
 
Yay! My computer is OFFICIALLY obsolete!

Wait..
 
Yeah I might be doing something something in the meantime before I get a new card.. just you know, to see stuff.
 
Remember a ridiculous thread about you needing a 3ghz dual core + 8800GTX? Where did that come from?
 
Nice. Once I get my new puter, I'll be all set for this.
 
Service Pack 2?!?! NNOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!11




That ain't too bad. At least they didn't make it a DX10 Vista-exclusive.
 
Not bad, i need to find more ram untill i build my new pc. 1 gig of ram is really ****ing me over right now.
 
excellent post, I MET all req.

so this title ain't a DX10 after all ?
 
excellent post, I MET all req.

so this title ain't a DX10 after all ?
"Video card - DX9 - Direct X 9.0c compliant video card with 512MB RAM (NVIDIA GeForce 7900 GT or better) / DX10 - NVIDIA GeForce 8600 or better"

The puter I'll be getting will have an 8600, but I probably won't bother with DX10 unless I can do it without a huge performance hit (which I somehow doubt).
 
"Video card - DX9 - Direct X 9.0c compliant video card with 512MB RAM (NVIDIA GeForce 7900 GT or better) / DX10 - NVIDIA GeForce 8600 or better"

The puter I'll be getting will have an 8600, but I probably won't bother with DX10 unless I can do it without a huge performance hit (which I somehow doubt).

AMD and NVIDIA had the chance to define the minimum performance of a DX10 class part higher than what we can expect from cards that barely get by with DX9 code. By choosing to design their hardware without a significant, consistent performance advantage over the X1600 and 7600 class of parts, developers have even less incentive (not to mention ability) to push next generation features only possible with DX10 into their games. These cards are just not powerful enough to enable widespread use of any features that reach beyond the capability of DirectX 9.

Even our high-end hardware struggled to keep up in some cases, and the highest resolution we tested was 2.3 megapixels. Pushing the resolution up to 4 MP (with 30" display resolutions of 2560x1600) brings all of our cards to their knees. In short, we really need to see faster hardware before developers can start doing more impressive things with DirectX 10.

to sum up the above text, wait for the next DX10 card.
 
to sum up the above text, wait for the next DX10 card.

Just as it was with DX9 cards and below. We'll be waiting for the 2nd or 3rd gen DX10 cards till we something that can really push the extra features.
 
On a side note that ALchemy doesn't work for shit. If you have Vista do not expect to get EAX working.
 
$10 or not it is shit. All Alchemy does is create a very small dll and ini file. The Alchemy program itself is nothing more than an interface that drops these two files wherever you tell it with whatever specs you designate. You don't even need it to take advantage of whatever it is supopsed to do, reroute directsound to openAL or whatever. On my machine in particular, rerouting directsound to openAL totally screws up the timing and altering the "settings" has absolutely no effect. It's a SHAM and I am going to put my sound card back into my XP machine and get a whatever it was I was lookin at.
I'll be playing games in stereo until then. >:[
 
Yeah and EAX on the card won't be working even then. From how I understand it, all EAX functions/calls would be redirect and translated to some other sound process and done by the CPU not the hardware on the creative card.
 
All I want is for my front left and rear right sound to come out of my front left and rear right speakers. Is that so much at ask?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductReview.aspx?Item=N82E16829271002

I think you are right about the CPU processing the sound but that doesn't explain why my sound got choppy when I tried the ALchemy/2 files. My C2D was nowhere near maxing out. It's gotta be crappy drivers in general and I think having a card with native Vista support will help.
 
Looks like a slick card.
I think you are right about the CPU processing the sound but that doesn't explain why my sound got choppy when I tried the ALchemy/2 files. My C2D was nowhere near maxing out. It's gotta be crappy drivers in general and I think having a card with native Vista support will help.
Yeah, I doubt sound would max out a CPU.

What puzzles me is that if EAX is borked on Vista why this game recommends an EAX card along with DX10...
They are going to shine on different platform (EAX works on XP, DX10 for Vista).
 
Back
Top