News

Creative Assembly details Total War: Rome II PC system requirements
Posted: 28.06.2013 13:41 by Simon Priest Comments: 66
What's it going to take to get those legions marching in Total War: Rome II this September? Developer Creative Assembly has released the PC system requirements for this new ambitious Rome.

It will support Windows XP, and need at least a 2.6GHz single core processor. It will also take up 35 GB of HDD space, or SSD if you're fancy. All in all they're reasonable.

As an extra treat Creative have also published some more of their giant sweeping panoramas for Rome II which can be enjoyed over on the official Total War Wiki.

Minimum:
◦ OS: XP/ Vista / Windows 7 / Windows 8
◦ Processor:2 GHz Intel Dual Core processor / 2.6 GHz Intel Single Core processor
◦ Memory: 2GB RAM
◦ Graphics:512 MB DirectX 9.0c compatible card (shader model 3, vertex texture fetch support).
◦ DirectX®:9.0c
◦ Hard Drive: 35 GB HD space
◦ Screen Resolution: 1024x768


Recommended:
◦ OS: Windows 7 / Windows 8
◦ Processor:2nd Generation Intel Core i5 processor (or greater)
◦ Memory: 4GB RAM
◦ Graphics:1024 MB DirectX 11 compatible graphics card.
◦ DirectX®:11
◦ Hard Drive:35 GB HD space
◦ Screen Resolution: 1920x1080


Total War: Rome II releases on PC September 3rd.
Source: Total War
Game advertisements by <a href="http://www.game-advertising-online.com" target="_blank">Game Advertising Online</a> require iframes.

Comments

By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on Jun 28, 2013
SirRoderick
35GB is definitely continuing the trend with these games! Quite a chunk of space for a game.
By Gale47 (SI Core) on Jun 28, 2013
Gale47
I agree. A tad bit too much, if you ask me...
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on Jun 28, 2013
SirRoderick
Well TB drives are really pretty standard these days so it's not all bad is it? :)
By nocutius (SI Elite) on Jun 28, 2013
nocutius
The fact that this game "can be run" on a single core CPU worries me a bit, it kinda indicates that we'll most likely be getting yet another TW game that does not properly exploit quads, hope I'm wrong.

Those 35 gigs can be an issue if you're on an SSD otherwise it's not an issue at all.
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on Jun 28, 2013
SirRoderick
You just know that minimum reqs are overly optimistic. They always are :/
By nocutius (SI Elite) on Jun 28, 2013
nocutius
I know, that's why those quotes are there, I'm just being a bit paranoid :).
But these requirements are also basically identical to those of Shogun 2 and that game didn't use quads fully.
By danfreeman (SI Elite) on Jun 28, 2013
danfreeman
Hmm,should be fine with these requirements,the fact that it doesn`t look far better than Shogun 2 is fine with me since i can`t upgrade my rig anymore anytime soon and Shogun 2 looked damn good anyway.
By JonahFalcon (SI Elite) on Jun 28, 2013
JonahFalcon
Played it at E3. The game just has too much for me to absorb. Wonder when Kohan will be resurrected.
By danfreeman (SI Elite) on Jun 28, 2013
danfreeman
What do you mean by too much to absorb exactly?
By Gale47 (SI Core) on Jun 28, 2013
Gale47
Well I still haven't gotten a new PC so this is a lot of gigs in my book :D
Moreover, I don't really see the need. I mean, sure, the textures are getting nicer and objects have a higher poly-count, but bloody hell.
Still, they always go overboard with HD space requirements so whatever :)
By danfreeman (SI Elite) on Jun 28, 2013
danfreeman
I agree Gale,the way graphics are now is enough for me,any more and it becomes too expensive to develop and that`s bad for the industry overall.
By Gale47 (SI Core) on Jun 28, 2013
Gale47
Exactly ^^
Besides, I've got more that a dozen awesome games that I can't currently play so new ones don't interest me all that much.
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on Jun 28, 2013
SirRoderick
Nonsense!

I for one want a game that will make my system CRY! PROGRESS AHOY!

Can't wait for Star Citizen, will probably be one of the only games that will let me tax my rig properly.
By nocutius (SI Elite) on Jun 28, 2013
nocutius
Nah, now with the next gen consoles finally here there's suddenly gonna be a big jump in how demanding games are gonna get. Look at Witcher 3, no way you PC is gonna run that without breaking a sweat. We've been waiting for progress for the last ~3 years but it's finally here :)
By FoolWolf (SI Elite) on Jun 29, 2013
FoolWolf
Nice, seems like an update end of next year would be fine. Still, my rig has no hassle running this. :)
By nikola1010 (SI Core Member) on Jun 29, 2013
nikola1010
Luckily for me I only need to buy a new graphic card, wich isn't so bad :)
By herodotus (SI Herodotus) on Jun 30, 2013
herodotus
A specification of what sort of videocard for 'recommended' would have been appreciated (AMD 4 million, or GTX 1000 for example). A list of specs for what CA would play the game on at Max settings would be appreciated.
By nikola1010 (SI Core Member) on Jun 30, 2013
nikola1010
You want max settings without glitches? Just buy the most advanced gamer configuration and you're all set :)
By Kres (SI Elite) on Jul 01, 2013
Kres
35G, I am literally going to have to get a new HDD for that.
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on Jul 01, 2013
SirRoderick
I can heartily recommend the SATA 1TB drives you can get these days. Not too expensive and great bulk storage! I have seen a lot of people use a cached SSD drive to speed them up for less money than a full SSD drive as well.
By JustCommunication (SI Core) on Jul 01, 2013
JustCommunication
Imagine downloading 35GB over Steam. And they say discs are dead... no way I'm waiting for all that to download. Just going to get a boxed copy.

In other news: I really want this game now :(
By Kres (SI Elite) on Jul 01, 2013
Kres
I've been sniffing SSDs lately. Would be a replacement for my now totally outdated Raptor WD 150G that I use for system/programs disk. Too easy to fill up. I just ran out of space yesterday! Found 24G of temp files jesus.
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on Jul 01, 2013
SirRoderick
You can get a seagate SATA 1TB with 7200RPM for around 60 euros off the web. More than worth the cash for the upgrade, I love the added space I got these days.
By nocutius (SI Elite) on Jul 01, 2013
nocutius
Hardly an upgrade over the Raptor it's SSD all the way, they are not that horribly overpriced anymore. Samsung 840 250GB goes for ~150EUR, I would not get anything smaller specially when dealing with TLC nand, the 256GB PRO model with better longevity and performance goes for ~200EUR.
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on Jul 01, 2013
SirRoderick
The raptor is 150GB, the Seagate is 1TB. Hardly an upgrade you say? Seriously now :P

Question is how badly do you want SSD speeds? You can get a regular 1TB HDD for 60 EUR or a quarter of that volume for more than double the price. this is not a situation where either is better. The SSD is fast and expensive with very limited volume, the classic HDD is cheap and great for bulk storage at normal speeds.

This is exactly why I'm seeing such frequent use of cached SSDs. You use a 30GB SSD drive to speed up the mechanical HDD for a compromise between the two.
By nocutius (SI Elite) on Jul 01, 2013
nocutius
People didn't get the Raptors for their size, they were what SSD's are now. The only real upgrade for a Raptor is a SSD anything else is a sort of a side step.

I guess the HDD + a small SSD route makes a bit of sense but it's not cheaper enough in comparison to a single SSD, also the smaller the SSD is the slower it is. I was in the same position at one point but the reasonably big SSD + a slow but huge HDD route made more sense to me. I just don't like hybrids and compromises when it comes to performance, a SSD will always be fast with the hybrid approach being only occasionally fast.

PS: I consider 60EUR for 1TB massively expensive considering that's what their price used to be 2 years ago as well, those profiteering bumpkins :/.
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on Jul 01, 2013
SirRoderick
I don't yhink you're quite arguing the same thing here, I never said that the 1TB drive would be faster than his raptor, of course not ^_^

But considering the rather massive difference in price and volume, I think it's more than fair to say both have their place in the current market. Ideally you'd have your OS and some more demanding games running off a dedicated SSD and a bulk storage drive of perhaps multiple TBs.

Also I'm not entirely sure you know what I mean b using a small cached SSD together with a HDD. You essentially slave it to the HDD to enhance the read/write speed for repetitive processes, it's not nearly as expensive as a useable SSD drive and boosts the operating speed of the HDD significantly, it is NOT used as a seperate storage disk.

All that aside, if money is not an object then by all means stack up the SSDs :D

The next time I do a major system overhaul I will have a bunch of them lined up in the trays.
By nikola1010 (SI Core Member) on Jul 01, 2013
nikola1010
Quite the dialogue here, but I have to ask someting. What is SSD and what's the difference between HDD and SSD?
I know it looks stupid to you but I'm not caching up here... :(
By Gale47 (SI Core) on Jul 01, 2013
Gale47
Well, SSD is the equivalent of a memory card, so to say. There is no physical disc to write on. It's all fancy and digital.
On the other hand, HDD is your classic hard drive that is using a fine laser (I think) to write data on the inserted rewritable disc. Hope this helps ^^
By herodotus (SI Herodotus) on Jul 01, 2013
herodotus
SSD is faster than HDD in general, however this is not true with all brands. The differences in access speeds also depends on how full or 'clogged' the HDD is. I have both, but use my 2TB HDD as a storage device and the SSD as a fast loading 'card' for quick programs. SSD is also highly transportable from one PC to another.
@Nicola
Define "most advanced" these days, with new hardware on the drawing boards every other week.
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on Jul 01, 2013
SirRoderick
Also bit of a difference, SSDs do not need to be defragmented. As a matter of fact it can reduce the life cycle because you are essentially wasting cycles.
By herodotus (SI Herodotus) on Jul 01, 2013
herodotus
Too true. Lot to be said for SSD's, but I look forward to what comes next in terms of storage devices.
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on Jul 01, 2013
SirRoderick
Quantum Storage Drives? :3
By Kres (SI Elite) on Jul 01, 2013
Kres
I was in disbelief when I saw SSD performance. Double faster! Jesus! So I'm making plans on buying one. But pff can live without it for the moment. Especially since I'd need higher size, say 300G or so. And 300G on SSD is expensive. So just enjoying the thought for the moment. Hopefully an SSD eventually as well. Well I was talking about this before already... still empty handed
By herodotus (SI Herodotus) on Jul 02, 2013
herodotus
I'm still saving for a newer graphics card. I'll deal with the slower speed of my 2TB HDD if my GPU can run "Rome 2" at Max.
By nocutius (SI Elite) on Jul 02, 2013
nocutius
Raptors were all about performance at the cost of size, SSD drives are "spiritually" the same that's what I meant when I said the only real upgrade to a Raptor is SSD, sorry if I was unable to make it clear enough.

Roderick I knew what you meant all along it's just that the 30GB SSD drives still cost 50-60EUR and they are not even guaranteed to be that much faster over a fast HDD. The smaller the SSD the slower it is and also has a shorter life cycle specially with the newer TLC nand drives, that's why I don't consider these small drives to be a good deal at all.

150€ for a good 250GB SSD is not that expensive specially considering it's the upgrade that will make by far the biggest impact on how fast your PC's gonna feel.

250GB SSD + a 2TB "green" HDD = 150EUR + 80EUR
30GB SSD + 1TB HDD = 50EUR + 60EUR
230EUR vs 110EUR, 2.2TB vs ~1TB

Sure you pay double but you also get double space and a guaranteed performance at all times. The hybrid approach only makes sense if you simply cant afford those 100EUR but you're REALLY making a compromise.
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on Jul 02, 2013
SirRoderick
GPU over SSD, sounds like you have your priorities straight! :D
By nocutius (SI Elite) on Jul 02, 2013
nocutius
Honestly I'd put a SSD over the GPU as long as you have at least a mediocre card. Upgrading the GPU half a year later takes much less effort than the other way around :).
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on Jul 02, 2013
SirRoderick
Look, I just want to play my games at higher settings, I don't mind having to wait 10 more seconds for my system to boot x3
By nocutius (SI Elite) on Jul 02, 2013
nocutius
It's not about boot at all sure it's nice but not the main benefit, *everything* is snappier. You click an icon and bam the program's already running. Using your PC is literary a completely new experience no matter how cliched that might sound.

A 300€ PC will feel faster if you then add an SSD when compared to a 1000EUR PC without one. That 1000EUR PC will not feel like a high end PC at all, the difference is THAT noticeable.
I don't know if you have one or not but I know that whenever I have to use a PC without an SDD it feels like some ancient artifact.

Sure if the PC is being used purely for gaming then a better GPU is obviously the better choice but for general use you simply can't make an upgrade that's gonna speed up you machine more.

If I absolutely had to choose between a machine with a great SSD and a crappy GPU and one with a great GPU and a regular HDD as a gamer I'd obviously chose the one with the good GPU.
BUT I'd prefer to have a good SSD (doesn't need to be great) and a decent GPU (again, doesnt need to be great) over both of those options cause such a PC simply feels more balanced to me.

Basically I'm a greedy SOB that wants to have it all :)
By JustCommunication (SI Core) on Jul 02, 2013
JustCommunication
I've head a lot about the virtues of SSD's, but like many I'm waiting for the price to come down, or at least the storage-price ratio to get better. I run two HDD's at the moment, one 1 TB as my main and 1 500 GB just for games, although I have Steam installed on the primary drive as I was worried it was going to slow things down. Used 560gb of the primary drive so far.

Next rig I'm going to go SSD for main drive, then a bigger HDD for storage. Hopefully the prices will be better... I never like spending more then 700-800 pounds on a rig, and the Hard Drive is NOT where I want to be splashing out.
By Kres (SI Elite) on Jul 02, 2013
Kres
Nice speech Nocutius, I'm sold! :) I'll buy this thing sooner or later... Roderick, as for mere faster loading, I bought Raptor for BF2. Map loads faster then to anyone else, and you're half map away in a vehicle of your choice before anybody else is even loaded and joined. Now that applied to everthing else that uses HDD, you get lot more power. On another note, Raptor sounds like taking any HDD and throwing it down the stairs. When it starts working people start thinking my computer is dying, or something inside it... It's a monster.
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on Jul 02, 2013
SirRoderick
I am familiar with Raptors, scary things x3

I'm of the same mind as JC, gonna hang around for a decent price drop and then pounce.
By nikola1010 (SI Core Member) on Jul 02, 2013
nikola1010
@herodotus
Well, "most advanced" can be interpreted like "best configuration of today". I purchased 400 euro-worth configuration 3 years ago and it runs shogun 2 on high settings with huge unit scale without problems. By my opinion, if you buy the most advanced config of the day, you can easily play all upcoming games for at least 3 years (excluding max full HD ultra super sonic settings), and that's fine with me, I just want to play it on 1440x990 resolution with no glitches :)
@nocutius:
Although I belive that SSD's are much faster than ordinary hard drives, I prefer 1TB of HDD to 300GB of SSD, but just because of spaca available for storage. If SSD's prices equal those of HDD (and they will one day, when they invent something better than SSD at least), I'll think of buying one, I don't mind waiting the game to load 5 or 10 secounds longer and have 3 times more storage space :)
By FoolWolf (SI Elite) on Jul 03, 2013
FoolWolf
I have an SSD for my OS and programs. Install a few hefty games on it - but the games are on a special 1TB HDD disc with enough RAM for search etc. Files like music, photos, movies etc are on yet another separate drive, 2TB green power slower, but working ok and with no noice.

The loading of games from SSD are only making a real boast in certain games with really hige textures or maps, BF3 would be such a game. A game with many smaller things to load wouldn't (i.e not as big files but plenty) don't make that much difference. at least that's how I had it explained in an article I read.
Boot up time is amazing with SSD. it is the main props really for the SSD. The noise level another - the price and small size is something against it. The hybrid discs might be a sollution though for all the problems?
By Kres (SI Elite) on Jul 05, 2013
Kres
Ok so fortunately my comp fried the other day. A friend plugged in a USB HDD and at the moment it got plugged in, the comp was dead. So I need to sort that out and thought it would be a good time to get an SSD with it. I?m looking at one SSD that has 550kb\s reading speed and 320kbs writing speed. I see there are other SSD of course with higher writing speed. How cruicial is that?
By nocutius (SI Elite) on Jul 05, 2013
nocutius
I cant really answer that all that well but I'll try.

It matters but it's not the necessarily the main thing, IOPS (Input/Output Operations Per Second) and significantly lower latency are far more important and are the main things that really sets HDD and SDD drives apart.

I have a 2-3 years old Vertex 2 240GB that has Read/Write declared at ~250MB/s (less IRL) and it's already a huge improvement over an HDD so I would not worry too much about that, any new SSD model will absolutely demolish any HDD, in a way the things that matter the most are reliability and possible firmware issues.

The safest bet would currently be the Samsung 840 PRO, it's all round super fast and is supposed to be among the more reliable ones (Samsung drives ever since the 830 series in general). Lower capacity also usually means lower performance and lifespan so I would get a 250/256GB drive over the 120GB ones if at all possible.

Otherwise you also have Intel, Crucial and OCZ to chose from when it comes to the big boys, they develop their own controllers and then sell them to the rest. Even when you see some OEM SSD that you never heard of you only need to look at the controller and you'll know exactly what to expect from the drive cause you can then simply compare it to another better known drive with that controller.
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on Jul 05, 2013
SirRoderick
Seems like a pretty good answer to me!
By nikola1010 (SI Core Member) on Jul 07, 2013
nikola1010
Does anyone know when will demo for Rome II be released? I think they already have the full game working and are just adjusting some minor bugs and tweaks, I want to get a taste of campaign map and amphibious landing already...
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on Jul 07, 2013
SirRoderick
Around the same time as release, as per usual with CA
By nikola1010 (SI Core Member) on Jul 07, 2013
nikola1010
Come on... Demo for Medieval 2 was released a month before game release or more :( They could speed it up a bit :P
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on Jul 07, 2013
SirRoderick
Usually is just a little before
By nikola1010 (SI Core Member) on Jul 07, 2013
nikola1010
That sucks. Well, thanks anyway :)
By Kres (SI Elite) on Jul 08, 2013
Kres
Aight so instead of going with an SSD I went for CPU upgrade. Got Intel 3770 CPU instead! Ye! Upgrade from i7 760. So SSD will then wait quite a bit till I get it. I would like to take this oportunity to congratulate myself for a new CPU. I feel awkward for how good it feels. Nothing beats comp upgrades.
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on Jul 08, 2013
SirRoderick
that is a very solid CPU as I hear, so good on you :P
By nocutius (SI Elite) on Jul 08, 2013
nocutius
True, upgrading your comp simply feels great specially when it means getting the latest toy on the market :).
By herodotus (SI Herodotus) on Jul 08, 2013
herodotus
Oh, if only I had the spare cash to buy the upgrades I want. Unfortunately, it would be a small fortune for me to do so and there are more pressing real world things to pay attention to.
By FoolWolf (SI Elite) on Jul 09, 2013
FoolWolf
Too bad to hear that Hero.
I can still relax having both a laptop and desktop rig that can boost enough graphic and power-calculations to last me well into next year :) (Probably longer, but my update-cravings will unbearable at that time!)
By nocutius (SI Elite) on Jul 09, 2013
nocutius
I'm all set on the CPU front for another generation or two but my GPU is going to struggle to last another year, it depends on how big of a jump in performance will those nextgen games require.
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on Jul 09, 2013
SirRoderick
Well if you find that you can hold out for the 800 series Nvidia cards that would be ideal. The so-called Maxwell architecture is supposed to be a nice step up from Kepler.
By Kres (SI Elite) on Jul 09, 2013
Kres
And it's in da box! Everything runs sooo soooo well can't see any difference. But I know it is different. That is enough. But didn't managed to install any game yet. You can bet that that is my main goal and that shall be done very soon.
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on Jul 09, 2013
SirRoderick
You should run quite a bit smoother for games that warm up your CPU a little ^_^
By Kres (SI Elite) on Jul 09, 2013
Kres
Holly Jesus almighty, the mouse works in BIOS. New mobo. So they pulled that off! I've never seen that so far. Magic
By SirRoderick (SI Elite) on Jul 09, 2013
SirRoderick
I want that really badly for some reason
By Kres (SI Elite) on Jul 09, 2013
Kres
I now know this was a reasonable purchase
By herodotus (SI Herodotus) on Jul 10, 2013
herodotus
Mouse functionality in BIOS? Unheard of...and long overdue.