PC system requirements for Dirt 5
Click here to post a comment for PC system requirements for Dirt 5 on our message forum
D1stRU3T0R
I bet minimum even a Phenom II X4 is enough with a R9 285 for stable 60FPS
Undying
Phenom II with lack of cpu instructions cant start the game.
VenTK
Sorry, but how on earth does this make sense? This game is coming out on PS4 and XBOne, which have much weaker video cards than the GTX970.
Are developers just assuming everyone has a 20XX card now, so they don't have to optimize games properly on PC?
KissSh0t
Damn I don't even meet the minimum.... well that's a first.
Alessio1989
For the GPU probably, not sute about the CPU, if the game requries at least AVX than no Phenom 2
Kool64
The original Dirt still looks and plays pretty good even by today's standards. I wonder what D5 will have in terms of fancy graphics that a card like a 1050Ti won't work as a minimum spec?
CPC_RedDawn
You do realise that PC LOW settings could be even higher than console settings right? A lot of the time console settings are below low and most the time simple setting we have taken for granted on PC for years such as 16xAF is at a low 2-4x or missing entirely. Then you also have much more overhead within windows too which needs accounting for in specs.
Sure I grant you that most "spec recommendations" are complete BS, but you can't just compare tflops of consoles v pc its not that simple.
oli3
Time for an upgrade
VenTK
Yeah, I realize that this game is also releasing on PS5/XBSX, which might mean the PS4 and XBOne ports would have settings catered to those consoles, and would indeed be missing features from the other ports. I think one of the Call of Duty games got a PS3/XB360 port which had features removed, because those consoles couldn't handle them.
XP-200
News just in, pc game devs rarely optimize their games and hope sheer grunt fixes all issues.....and in other news water is wet. Lol
KissSh0t
It's a stupid joke, I have a stock overclocked 470, the minimum states default 480... taking into account the GTX 970 has 3.5GB of memory and then 512mb of slow memory, then an overclocked 470 is fine.
schmidtbag
You do realize that games on consoles are optimized for their hardware, right? I really don't understand how so many people think that console hardware is an apples-to-apple comparison. Consoles have always yielded better performance with inferior hardware.
That doesn't necessarily mean it's fair that so many PC ports are coded sloppily, but at the same time, it isn't cost effective to micro-optimize a game for such a drastically wide variety of hardware. That's why Nvidia and AMD supply game-specific profiles in driver updates, because it's in their best interest to make a popular game run as good as it can on their platform.
CPC_RedDawn
Whilst unoptimised games on PC are more abundant than on console saying that devs don't even test their games and fix performance issues or have a stable optimised build on release is just not true.
Its 2020 my friend, not 2010 or prior. PC games are generally way more optimised than they were and a lot of them actually go above and beyond including PC specific features such as RT, DLSS, UWS, etc.
People need to remember that consoles are now x86 and will probably stick with this for many many years to come making porting to and from PC easier. The same can't be said for the Switch but that's a completely different story and for massively different reasons lol :P
XP-200
That's the good thing about the unified architecture of a console, only one hardware across the board for everyone and no doubt way cheaper to optimise that one hardware, than the plethora of almost unending PC setups, hence why we usually get PC games dumped into the wild in the hope grunt and the old excuse of "patch issues later", will see them through the day. lol
