Duke Nukem Forever's PC specs released
45
Gearbox has released the PC specifications for Duke Nukem Forever and, unfortunately, you won't quite be able to get away with a 14-year-old graphics card. PC players can squeak by with one gig of RAM and either an Nvidia GeForce 7600 or an ATI Radeon HD 2600. Sorry, but it looks like its finally time for an upgrade from that Voodoo Banshee.
Minimum Specifications
OS: Windows XP/Vista/7
Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2.0 Ghz / AMD Athlon 64 X2 @ 2.0 Ghz
Memory: 1 Gb
Hard Drive: 10 Gb free
Video Memory: 256 MB
Video Card: nVidia GeForce 7600 / ATI Radeon HD 2600
Sound Card: DirectX Compatible
Recommended Specifications
OS: Windows XP/Vista/7
Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2.4 Ghz / AMD Athlon 64 X2 @ 2.6 Ghz
Memory: 2 Gb
Hard Drive: 10 Gb free
Video Memory: 512 MB
Video Card: nVidia GeForce 8800 GTS / ATI Radeon HD 3850
Sound Card: DirectX Compatible
OTHER REQUIREMENTS & SUPPORTS
Initial installation requires one-time internet connection for Steam authentication; software installations required (included with the game) include Steam Client, Microsoft DirectX, Visual C++ 2005 Redistributable (ATL), Visual C++ 2008 Redistributable, and AMD Dual Core Optimizer. (AMD optimizer required only for specific AMD processors to run the game correctly, but installs for all of them.)
Minimum Specifications
OS: Windows XP/Vista/7
Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2.0 Ghz / AMD Athlon 64 X2 @ 2.0 Ghz
Memory: 1 Gb
Hard Drive: 10 Gb free
Video Memory: 256 MB
Video Card: nVidia GeForce 7600 / ATI Radeon HD 2600
Sound Card: DirectX Compatible
Recommended Specifications
OS: Windows XP/Vista/7
Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2.4 Ghz / AMD Athlon 64 X2 @ 2.6 Ghz
Memory: 2 Gb
Hard Drive: 10 Gb free
Video Memory: 512 MB
Video Card: nVidia GeForce 8800 GTS / ATI Radeon HD 3850
Sound Card: DirectX Compatible
OTHER REQUIREMENTS & SUPPORTS
Initial installation requires one-time internet connection for Steam authentication; software installations required (included with the game) include Steam Client, Microsoft DirectX, Visual C++ 2005 Redistributable (ATL), Visual C++ 2008 Redistributable, and AMD Dual Core Optimizer. (AMD optimizer required only for specific AMD processors to run the game correctly, but installs for all of them.)
Reader Comments (45)
Posted: May 3rd 2011 10:33PM TraceurRyuk Part III said
Seems like a fairly versatile game in terms of requirements. Still doubt my PC will run it smoothly.
Posted: May 3rd 2011 10:38PM Faceless Troll said
That's it?
Posted: May 4th 2011 6:25PM monkeyontherun4 said
@MrCheeks
funny he said the same thing to me...
Reply
funny he said the same thing to me...
Posted: May 3rd 2011 10:41PM xiLeShadow said
Low Specs are Low....
I Don't Care, This Game WILL BE AMAZING!!!!!
I Don't Care, This Game WILL BE AMAZING!!!!!
Posted: May 3rd 2011 10:41PM Tradio said
the ipad 2 has better specs that that....
Posted: May 3rd 2011 10:51PM This Little Man Says His Name Is said
@Tradio
And it still can't multitask.
Reply
And it still can't multitask.
Posted: May 4th 2011 12:23AM WiredKnight said
@Tradio
And yet it will still never run Duke Nukem.
How about that.
Reply
And yet it will still never run Duke Nukem.
How about that.
Posted: May 3rd 2011 10:43PM enriquein said
Not bad. GeForce 8800GTS is 2-3 years old now and you can probably get one off ebay for less than $100. I'm pretty sure the recommended CPU's also are from a couple of years ago. Good to see game developers learning from Crysys 1's mistake to cater to people with insane computer specs.
As for the game itself... well, I'll gladly buy it once it goes on black friday or holiday Steam sale.
As for the game itself... well, I'll gladly buy it once it goes on black friday or holiday Steam sale.
Posted: May 3rd 2011 10:52PM This Little Man Says His Name Is said
@enriquein
Crysis 1 was intended that way, it wasn't a mistake.
Reply
Crysis 1 was intended that way, it wasn't a mistake.
Posted: May 4th 2011 2:08AM LEONLEONLEON said
@enriquein
The only reason I bought Crysis 1 was because I wanted to see how well I could run it...
I think they got a huge amount of attention for pushing PCs with Crysis 1. IF it was just an average looking game it would have done alot worse, Because the campaign wasnt the best thing ive ever played. Its something ill also never replay, And believe me, ive tried many times to have a second run through.
Reply
The only reason I bought Crysis 1 was because I wanted to see how well I could run it...
I think they got a huge amount of attention for pushing PCs with Crysis 1. IF it was just an average looking game it would have done alot worse, Because the campaign wasnt the best thing ive ever played. Its something ill also never replay, And believe me, ive tried many times to have a second run through.
Posted: May 4th 2011 6:43AM T for Troll said
@enriquein
The amazing graphics were for attention, FPSs were starting to build the massive overcrowding. So, even with the legacy of Farcry, Crytek would barely take any of the popularity that Halo and subsequently COD faced.
Ironically, even with a lot of press attention thanks to the mindblowing graphics, it still didn't get close to meeting the sales of Halo 3 or COD4.
But now, Crysis has a blockbuster sequel, on all three consoles, and Crysis managed to make 3 million sales (very impressive for an FPS that isn't COD or Halo) and what sucks is it probably didn't even work on half of those computers. :(
Reply
The amazing graphics were for attention, FPSs were starting to build the massive overcrowding. So, even with the legacy of Farcry, Crytek would barely take any of the popularity that Halo and subsequently COD faced.
Ironically, even with a lot of press attention thanks to the mindblowing graphics, it still didn't get close to meeting the sales of Halo 3 or COD4.
But now, Crysis has a blockbuster sequel, on all three consoles, and Crysis managed to make 3 million sales (very impressive for an FPS that isn't COD or Halo) and what sucks is it probably didn't even work on half of those computers. :(
Posted: May 3rd 2011 10:43PM Sherlock Homey said
Wow these specs are seriously low (huzzah!). Then again it doesn't surprise me considering the legendary development time.
Posted: May 3rd 2011 10:44PM Revengez said
I swear, once I see that whiteboard I am drawing a gigantic penis on it.
Posted: May 3rd 2011 11:41PM RickGhastly said
@The Scout
In all fairness, Duke only knows how to write in the relatively obscure pictographic scripts of "Penis" and "Very Big Penis". If the kid expects anything else from Duke Nukem then he probably won't survive the apocalypse long enough for a lawsuit.
Reply
In all fairness, Duke only knows how to write in the relatively obscure pictographic scripts of "Penis" and "Very Big Penis". If the kid expects anything else from Duke Nukem then he probably won't survive the apocalypse long enough for a lawsuit.
Posted: May 3rd 2011 10:48PM JohnAHD said
Decent, even low specs.
So much for this game and theres me not even knowing its genre lol.
So much for this game and theres me not even knowing its genre lol.
Posted: May 3rd 2011 10:59PM RickGhastly said
Voodoo Banshee? Weak. My rig handled my last DAoC relic raid at an average of 15fps.
Posted: May 3rd 2011 11:02PM enriquein said
@kgoo867 Modern day perspective: get to play at recommended specs by chopping off 3/4 of your current Geforce 560 Ti. Better?
I'm guessing anything in the 500 series should be ok. Even the mobile versions. As for AMD, I'm not particularly well versed in how the performance gaps have been between generations 3000-6000.
I'm guessing anything in the 500 series should be ok. Even the mobile versions. As for AMD, I'm not particularly well versed in how the performance gaps have been between generations 3000-6000.
Posted: May 3rd 2011 11:03PM ChainSmoker said
I'm kind of stoked that my computer MAY be able to run this - But I doubt i'll pick this up for PC..
Posted: May 3rd 2011 11:17PM holysocks said
recommended specs are about computers 4 years ago. I know because that's how old mines is.
Posted: May 3rd 2011 11:31PM jcox20 said
They should have recommended specs for having every setting maxed at a common like 1920x1080 res.
Posted: May 3rd 2011 11:57PM R Planteer said
@kgoo867
500 and 6000 series don't "give it a run for it's money", they destroy them. The old 5770 gave it a run for its money, and those are dirt cheap. I just replaced a 8800GT with a 460 1GB and the difference is significant.
http://www.hwcompare.com/1203/geforce-8800-gts-g92-vs-radeon-hd-5770/
5770's significantly outperform the 8800GT and those have been in mid-range laptops for about a year now in the form of the 5870M. The 460M is also comparable in power, and can be found in laptops at around the $1k mark, which is the low end of what you would be spending if you are buying a gaming laptop.
My friend dropped $1200 on a new laptop last August and got a low-clocked i7, 4 gigs of DDR3 1333, and a 5870M
500 and 6000 series don't "give it a run for it's money", they destroy them. The old 5770 gave it a run for its money, and those are dirt cheap. I just replaced a 8800GT with a 460 1GB and the difference is significant.
http://www.hwcompare.com/1203/geforce-8800-gts-g92-vs-radeon-hd-5770/
5770's significantly outperform the 8800GT and those have been in mid-range laptops for about a year now in the form of the 5870M. The 460M is also comparable in power, and can be found in laptops at around the $1k mark, which is the low end of what you would be spending if you are buying a gaming laptop.
My friend dropped $1200 on a new laptop last August and got a low-clocked i7, 4 gigs of DDR3 1333, and a 5870M
Posted: May 4th 2011 8:21AM enriquein said
Yup.
@kgoo867 The generation gap is pretty marked. Consider that the 8800GTS turned into a 9600 GT on the next generation. Then came the 200 and 400 series. I'm sure a 450M and up would handle it fine. Sure, don't forget to take the display's resolution into the equation. The bigger resolution, the more horsepower you'll need.
Reply
@kgoo867 The generation gap is pretty marked. Consider that the 8800GTS turned into a 9600 GT on the next generation. Then came the 200 and 400 series. I'm sure a 450M and up would handle it fine. Sure, don't forget to take the display's resolution into the equation. The bigger resolution, the more horsepower you'll need.
Posted: Aug 31st 2011 1:25PM Jim Carey Grant said
Finally! I can dig out that rig I built in 2002 specifically to play DNF. I even painted it red and everything! It was Maximum PC's Rig of the Month back in the day when to win it all you had to do was paint your box or slap some stickers on the side.
Oh, it's been a while alright.
Oh, it's been a while alright.
Posted: May 4th 2011 12:07AM R Planteer said
@kgoo867
You dont purchase low end graphics cards to game on, you purchase them for things like multiple monitors, HD videos, and HTPC's.
If your gaming you're not going below the mid-low range, which last gen would be the 5770/450, and this gen is the 6790 and the 550 Ti.
I mean seriously, 5770's sell for about a $100 nowadays. With super low end cards running around 50-60, it would take a very un-savvy gaming consumer to have purchased a graphics card in the past few years incapable of running this game on reccomended settings.
You dont purchase low end graphics cards to game on, you purchase them for things like multiple monitors, HD videos, and HTPC's.
If your gaming you're not going below the mid-low range, which last gen would be the 5770/450, and this gen is the 6790 and the 550 Ti.
I mean seriously, 5770's sell for about a $100 nowadays. With super low end cards running around 50-60, it would take a very un-savvy gaming consumer to have purchased a graphics card in the past few years incapable of running this game on reccomended settings.
Posted: May 4th 2011 12:08AM R Planteer said
@kgoo867
Oh, and the laptop was actually a rock-solid MSI with plenty of extras. Deals are everywhere if you look for them.
Oh, and the laptop was actually a rock-solid MSI with plenty of extras. Deals are everywhere if you look for them.
Posted: May 4th 2011 12:25AM Anticrawl said
@kgoo867 500Ms are weaker in performance than the 400Ms bro
Posted: May 4th 2011 12:47AM Soiden said
But, but... my 1998 PC can't run this!
Posted: May 4th 2011 1:04AM elisabet said
Well, those specs are very doable.
Posted: May 4th 2011 12:59AM R Planteer said
@kgoo867
Right. Taking stabs at my friends laptop of which you have no first hand knowledge while completly ignoring the root of the debate here, which is GPU speeds, totally lets "your point stand."
Bravo, I r defeatedz.
Right. Taking stabs at my friends laptop of which you have no first hand knowledge while completly ignoring the root of the debate here, which is GPU speeds, totally lets "your point stand."
Bravo, I r defeatedz.
Posted: May 4th 2011 1:40AM KungFuChaosNinja said
This game looks so great. Sure, many will say it's dated in this way and that way, but that'll be its charm. Yes please.
Posted: May 4th 2011 1:51AM beez1717 said
I don't care about requirements for two reasons: 1: My computer can't run it period, and 2: It's coming out of onlive.
Posted: May 4th 2011 2:58AM HermanNugent said
I'm just glad it's going to be carried through Steam. Most things are these days, but there's still a few that aren't.
Posted: May 4th 2011 8:12AM djnforce9 said
I still remember back when 3D Realms were saying how the system requirements are going to be super steep and I guess back when they made that announcement, these listed specifications were unheard of so in a sense that was true. Now of course, they are about average for most current gen FPS games. A good thing too since I plan to run this in stereoscopic 3D for an even cooler experience and don't want a unplayable framerate because of it.
Posted: May 4th 2011 10:20AM Chyron said
Voodoo will always hold a place in my heart...
..but not my PC
Duke, yea he'll find a home on my PC. Not going to upgrade for that game, but the time is getting near.
..but not my PC
Duke, yea he'll find a home on my PC. Not going to upgrade for that game, but the time is getting near.
Posted: May 4th 2011 5:27PM ThePenIsMightier said
@kgoo867
As a former Dell server build employee, I can confirm KGoo's comments as being true. Dell, MSI, both shit, many parts for both come from the same overseas manufacturing facility. There is only a small handful of manufacturing facilities-you don't actually think these hundreds of companies are all custom designing and making their own products entirely in house do you?
As a former Dell server build employee, I can confirm KGoo's comments as being true. Dell, MSI, both shit, many parts for both come from the same overseas manufacturing facility. There is only a small handful of manufacturing facilities-you don't actually think these hundreds of companies are all custom designing and making their own products entirely in house do you?







