Skip to main content

Quantum Break recommended PC requirements updated, slightly less crazy

The announcement of Quantum Break for Windows 10 brought with it some pretty crazy recommended specs. We're expecting it to be taxing on any machine, but recommending a GTX 980ti or AMD Fury X shocked many. After all, these are $500+ graphics cards.

Remedy has now released some updated requirements which are a little more manageable for many of us. They're still high, but those previously recommended specs are actually what you'll need for Ultra settings.

The minimum requirements remain the same, but the recommended GPU has come down to a GTX 970 or R9 390 with 4GB VRAM. 16GB of RAM is still suggested, and you'll be wanting a Core i5 4690 processor or higher. And of course, Quantum Break is Windows 10 only and uses DX12.

So, you don't have to have the highest end graphics cards to get a great experience from Quantum Break after all. Panic over.

Source: @QuantumBreak

Richard Devine is an Editor at Windows Central. A former Project Manager and long-term tech addict, he joined Mobile Nations in 2011 and has been found on Android Central and iMore as well as Windows Central. Currently you'll find him covering all manner of PC hardware and gaming, and you can follow him on Twitter and Instagram.

78 Comments
  • Imma let you finish, but it's Friday and I'm waiting for WCentral Universal App.
  • Not sure how that's at all relevant to the post. But OK then.
  • Come on, Richard. You've been here long enough to know these clowns long spewing off-topic stuff in the gaming articles.
  • I know it would be difficult, but a reddit-like upvote/downvote system, where the lower voted comments are near the bottom would be great. The WC comment section seems to be 90% trash in most of the articles.
  • Talking about trash posts and then putting reddit out as an example of good posts? Posted via the Windows Central App for Android
  • did I miss anything? They are gonna update it today?
  • Just get it on xbox one as it will optimised and look great
  • Yeah, I get that PC versions of games CAN look better (if you have the money), and that the mods can be fun, but for me, the troubleshooting is too much. I like that with my console I can afford to play fun games that still look good without (most of) the headaches.
  • *that look decent
  • I also like how on consoles you don't constantly have to be trying to balance frame rate, resolution, texture, quality, etc vs the power of your system.  I understand that all the choices are loved by many (some prefer better framerate at lower quality, etc), but I can never make up my mind and just keep futzing with it and wasting time, and then obsessing over how I should upgrade the card.  Just give me a game that looks great and plays smooth.
  • I've got an i5-2400, 16GB DDR3 RAM, and a GeForce GTX 760, so looks like I don't even meet the minimum requirements. Guess I'm hoping for an Xbox One release.
  • Same day on Xbox One.
  • Yeah I noticed the article saying about Xbox One release, went back to edit my comment, you'd already replied. Now I feel like a fool. :(
  • No need to, perfectly reasonable that you might not have known about it!
  • Yeah fair enough. With the Xbox One same day release though I'm definitely going to at least look into this game. Plus if I wanna stream it I have a capture card (no direct console streaming to Hitbox) so less pressure on the PC itself. Screenshots I've seen thus far look cool though.
  • Another thing you might have missed is that if you pre-order for the XO, you also get it for your PC. :)
  • Is it only for Pre-orders then? It's not a permanent Cross Buy thing?
  • As of right now, for some stupid reason, the cross-buy promotion is limited to pre-orders.
  • I've got an i7-860, with the same ram and graphics card as you do. I think I probably need to start looking at upgrading assume of my components. : / Posted via my HTC One M7
  • I've got exactly the same specs as your pc would also like to know if I should start upgrading and what first
  • I think I'm going to be upgrading the motherboard/cpu first. The other stuff can follow. Posted via my HTC One M7
  • Dude never trust requirements, theyre made to sell processor and graphic cards, just try to run it. I have 960 geforce and run both Tomb raider and divison beta on high
  • your processor should be fine. you can go ahead and try it.
  • No crazy requirement that's good enuff
  • So....my Atari 2600 is out of the question? That's just wrong.
  • Ok. Yeah, this seems more like it... Is there any game that recommends a 980 or 980ti? I can't think of one... Obviously I'm talking about 1080p gaming here. 1440p or 2160p is a completely different story...
  • Or buy it on Xbox
  • *after one buys an Xbox*
    :P
  • Any real gamer has both consoles already.
  • Owning an Xbox One doesn't make you real gamer. I could say the same about owning a PS4, but that's equally ridiculous.
  • Owning a ps4 just makes you the subject of the old saying "a fool and his money are soon parted"
  • I don't own a PS4 (I do own a PS3), but that statement just makes you look like a sad little Microsoft fanboy.
  • i7-6700K, 8 GB RAM and R9 290 Nothing overclocked. But I think it might run if I add in another 8 GB of RAM.
  • I have AMD PII 4x 965, 8GB and R9 280X and I'm still getting ~40-45fps with high settings@1080p with majority of games
  • Yup, we can juice out enough from them.
  • I know a lot of people want the best graphics experience possible, but this is why consoles are more popular than PC gaming. For $350, you don't have to worry about if your graphics card is good enough or if you have enough RAM. You just plug it in and it works. It may not look like a fully rendered cgi movie, but to me games on Xbox One still look great and you get the same overall experience.
  • Totally agree.
  • Still PCs have the best performance.
  • No ****, Sherlock.
  • Actually... PC's have worse performance if you look at what you can do with the hardware in the XO compared to a PC with similar specs. Consoles are simply optimized for gaming beyond what a regular PC can ever be. You can get PC's with higher performance though, but not performance per dollar.
  • Lol then a strained(from over use) xb1/ps4 should barely be able to work
  • BahauahahahahazahahazagagGHa no. Tomb raider, jc3, call of duty, assassins creed, every ea game at launch, arkham knight and and and. Pc has not the best performance . And so you cannot argue against : Developers are console first these days. Then the game gets ported to pc by smaller teams and mostly never optimized or only till the degree where it runs on a pc.
    That is it.
  • Not a PC guy but I find it fascinating that most games are made and developed on a PC yet the final product has to be ported back to a PC
  • Yes it does, deal with it
  • Errrm. no. If you read about performance problems for titles like those listed (excepting Batman) it's basically elevated standards not being precisely matched. Anything below 1080p/60 tends to make most PC gamers grumpy. Any half decent gaming PC would have supplied at least that on all the titles listed and offer an infinitely better standard of graphics or performance compared to either of the console versions. Comparing Rise Of The Tomb Raider on PC versus XBox One using even a mid range current card is laughable. At least the same jump as from Xbox 360 to Xbox One. So... no. This difference will be increasingly apparant as 14/16nm GPUs ship this year, and DirectX 12 becomes more prevalent. Essentially any gaming PC worth sh** from the past few years can drop in a mid range new GPU by year end and capably handle anything other than ultra settings @ 4k. Do feel free, however, to enjoy your <1080p/30fps/tearing/stuttering, if that's your idea of optimised. ;)    
  • I jumped from PC gaming to console when the 360 was released. At the time I was planning an upgrade to my PC for next gen gaming and got fed up at the costs of repetitive upgrades. I bought the 360 for almost the cost of the graphics card on the PC. I've saved a lot of money since sticking to console, the difference in graphics is not worth the money. Besides, if it's a good game you get immersed in the gameplay and don't realize the graphic differences.
  • Microsoft should release a full keyboard and mouse set for gaming with the XB1s when it come out. With the same windows kernel and Windows Store, they could advertise it as the console that can replace your desktop. And bam, MS is making desktop PCs.
  • I beg to respectfully disagree. The difference does make a noticeable difference. X360's Skyrim was uninspiring when I got it. It looks stunningly better on PC and I've played over 384 hours since. On L4D2, turning on more graphically intense features like realistic blood made the game way more realistic, and made it a better game for sure. I know the differences can be small, but the impact and environs become way more immersive and captivating in a way that (thus far) only PC has been able to do. And this is coming from GameCube/wii/xbox360/ some time with an xb1. Versus a mid range PC from 2011/2012.
  • Its not just about the graphics. I own a pretty good gaming pc and the xbox. A mouse always beat the controllers. Only exception are racing games.
  • Add a stick PC and a desktop PC covers both your computing and TV gaming/Kodi & Plex streaming needs. A console now seems pretty redundant for anyone unless they have no PC at all. Even the old mid-range gtx660 in my AMD (so not exactly gamer oriented) PC makes my neighbour's XB1 seem pretty basic, so no significant expense. I feel that consoles will increasingly get passed down to the kids now that streaming is taking hold. Steam sales now make PC gaming so cheap it's only the convenience that keeps consoles afloat. Streaming is ending that last remaining reason to have a console too.
    And with a Steam controller as well as KB/M on the PC, console controllers really make using a console feel very 2nd rate. They will have to do a lot to stay relevant and I can't imagine what that would be.
  • Hmm I have a i5 with a gtx 960 and a Xbox one
  • Running i5 4690k 3.5 ghz quad, 8 gig 1600 mhz ddr3 ram and a gtx 750 TI, im basically screwed....
  • Nah. A 750ti is the equal to the chip the xbone has :)
  • Yeah but not equal to the GTX 760 minimum requirement of the PC version.  I've got 750 ti (i7 2600, 16gb ram) in my machine too so it'll be interesting to see how it actually performs on one.
  • Actually the chip inside the xbox one is more like a r9 270x.
  • Surface Pro 4 with i7 chip? Maybe? :P
  • Surface 3 i7 was able to run Witcher 3 just fine
  • These specs are just best case scenario, if you set it the gfx settings to what's on xbox it should run fine on older hardware.
  • If the minimum requirements are that high, it's very likely the game is poorly optimized for pc hardware
  • windows 10 only that's means because it uses DX12 or any other exclusives for MSFT will be windows 10 only ;)
  • It uses DX12. It says so in the post ;)
  • My i7 4770k and GTX 980 OC are ready, i've got a Xbox One too but it will just be awesome on PC maxed out
  • If this game indeed uses DX12, should that not mean it can take advantage of the "closer to the metal" nature of the new version to get more performance out of the same hardware? If so, these are still some pretty high requirements.
  • That's what I was thinking as well. Starting to think this whole thing was just marketing bs.
  • Hmm I wonder how my rig would fare
    i45 4670k, 16gb ram, r9 280x. Probably squeak by the recommended. These numbers are insane.
  • My pc runs on console peasants' tears
  • You've also tried sticking your dick in your pc before because you wanted to know what it is like having a girlfriend.
  • I find that hard to believe. Most console games are completely satisfied with the experience they get. It's PC gamers who are always chasing the ghost. Never satisfied with their rig. Always pretending to be happy that some else has better components than they do, but secretly envious and sad.
  • A question, it's windows and Xbox exclusive but will it be coming on steam? Or just the windows store.
  • It's not coming to Steam. It's an Xbox exclusive, only available on Xbox One and Xbox for Windows 10 via the Windows 10 Store. Steam is Xbox's competitor.
  • My device has a custom 1.75 GHz AMD 8-core APU with 8 GB DDR3. It can run Quantum Break without any issue. It only cost me a few hundred bucks too.
  • I guess I'll get it for Xbox One then.
  • How do game developers get away with "or AMD equivalent"? That's such a huge slap in the face to all the people involved in manufacturing one of the most complicated things on our planet. I'm taking about the people that work at AMD. I don't understand why developers list all these very specific system component requirements, including what Intel processor to use, then give that vague suggestion about AMD. They can't take the time to figure out what the f'ing equivalent is? Some nerve....
  • Pc master race lol, that's absolutely ridiculous. Console can run it
  • Great I have everything this game needs for ultra settings except the graphics card! What can I do with 1GB -_-
  • Wait my gaming pc I've built this summer barely makes the minimum requirements?? These games are getting ridiculous. (i5 4460, gtx 960, 16GB RAM)
  • I think my HD 7970 will be going to have hard time...
  • I'm about to order a dell AMD(gaming edition) pc. It has a FX-8800P, 16GB Dual Channel DDR3L 1600MHz, and Radeon™ R9 360 2GB DDR5. Would this be a decent gaming pc?