Battlefield 1 Minimum System Requirements Are Here

Written by Felix Nova on Mon, Sep 5, 2016 8:30 PM
System Requirements Optimum 1080p PC Build Low vs Ultra Screenshots GPU Performance Chart CPU List That Meet System Requirements GPU List That Meet System Requirements

Battlefield 1 minimum system requirements are now official. Following the huge uptake in the Battlefield 1 Beta, that went live last week, we now have eyes on the entry level BF1 sys specs. 

Official Battlefield 1 Minimum System Requirements are

  • OS: 64-bit Windows 7, Windows 8.1 and Windows 10
  • AMD CPU: AMD FX-6350 processor
  • Intel CPU: Core i5 6600K processor
  • RAM: 8GB System Memory
  • AMD GPU: AMD Radeon HD 7850 2GB graphics card
  • NVIDIA GPU: nVidia GeForce GTX 660 2GB graphics card
  • DX: 11.0 Compatible video card or equivalent
  • NET: 512 KBPS or faster Online Internet Connection Requirements
  • HD: 40GB space

We are informed that the official recommended BF1 specs will be announced once they have further processed their Beta data.

To give you an idea of some of the frame rates you are likely to get with Battlefield 1 at 1080p and some other resolutions we have already run some benchmark tests with an Nvidia GTX 950 GPU and provided a Low versus Ultra graphics comparison slider article, so you can get an idea about what you can expect between the two BF1 extreme settings.

We are certainly not surprised by the minimum system specs listed above, apart from that Intel CPU min spec. That looks a bit high based on what we have seen so far. Lower powered Intel CPUs will likely run BF1 beta just fine, and you can head over to our main BF1 game page to see how your rig will run the World War 1 recommended through to min. One other thing to consider is that what we have seen so far is one map. There is a chance that the other maps could have higher requirements than we have seen in the Beta map, so we will just have to wait and see.

As we have reported before, you can play Battlefield 1 on the absolute lowest graphics level and still get a good playable game. And modern hardware can easily return a solid frame rate even at Ultra settings. We saw one of the latest Nvidia cards, MSI GTX 1070, deliver 90 FPS at Ultra 1440p resolution, while that figure went up to 170+ FPS on low graphics settings and 1440p.

Dont forget to check out other members Battlefield 1 Frames Per Second scores and to submit your own results as well. [Felix - Adding this info as accurately as you can will further improve your personal profile's results as you view other game reports on Game-Debate.]

Low Vs Ultra Nvidia MSI GTX 1070 Battlefield 1 screenshots and RAM Useage

(Slide mouse over or CLICK for larger view)

 

Login or Register to join the debate

Rep
-31
Offline
11:01 Sep-11-2016

will a phenom 945 and a gt 640 gddr5 run this on low settings(lowest res) with over 30 fps?

0
Rep
94
Offline
11:13 Sep-11-2016

I think it will, but the cpu will hold it back for sure. Your test rig needs a better cpu, the fx 4170 is very weak and probably on the line with an i3 cpu.

1
Rep
41
Offline
03:53 Sep-12-2016

Well, if my GTX 650 ran it with 60 FPS on low 1360x768, GT 640 be able to play it with 30 FPS or more.

0
Rep
0
Offline
03:37 Sep-15-2016

Game is CPU heavy so the GPU doesn't matter as much.

0
Rep
41
Offline
14:04 Sep-15-2016

If GPU doesn't matter I would run this in 1080p fine, of corse GPU matter! While I run BF4 on Low 1080p 60 FPS, I run BF1 on Low 768p 60 FPS. And his CPU will get at least 30-40 FPS.

0
Rep
2
Offline
12:28 Sep-07-2016

Im getting 60-70fps on high (ultra texture and texture filtering + fxaa). Well optimised game/map.

0
Rep
0
Offline
04:53 Sep-10-2016

I along with others had maxed out CPU usage during the beta which was causing frame stutters.


Optimized no not yet at least.

0
Rep
13
Offline
17:24 Sep-13-2016

course you get frame stutters on ultra with our cpu. i overclocked mine to 4.9ghz and still have sum drops down to the high 40s

0
Rep
0
Offline
03:40 Sep-15-2016

There were plenty of others having stutters due to the same problem using 6900ks and I5 6600ks.


Optimization wasn't done but then again people are saying that the beta wasn't even a beta but a pre-alpha version.

0
Rep
105
Offline
01:36 Sep-07-2016

I played the beta at ultra texture and texture filtering, all the other settings médium without DOF and medium fxaa @32 fps.

1
Rep
0
Offline
03:02 Sep-08-2016

Why do you have a gt 730?

1
Rep
11
Offline
18:54 Sep-08-2016

Meaby becuse not everyone needs a high end 400$+ GPU or in most cases cant aford it.

1
Rep
105
Offline
03:34 Sep-10-2016

I used to have a gtx 750 ti, but have to sell it for food and clothes, so now im using my dad´s GPU and did an extreme OC to it, so it surprisingly can handle everything i throw at it, except quantum break.

0
Rep
0
Offline
19:48 Sep-06-2016

With my rig i can play it in mininum graphics at 1440x900 :P, 45 fps approximately :P

2
Rep
39
Offline
19:07 Sep-06-2016

Since when is a FX-6350 comparable to a I5 6600K? :p

4
Rep
769
Offline
admin approved badge
14:49 Sep-10-2016

Hah! Finally ... :D
-Since EA launched BF1's system req- :P

0
Rep
94
Offline
11:14 Sep-11-2016

How can a top tier i5 cpu be in the minimum requirements list?

2
Rep
41
Offline
15:38 Sep-06-2016

GTX 650 @1241MHz/1500MHz (6000MHz effective) gets 60 FPS locked (Vsync enabled) on Low 1360x768, few drops to 50-55, ocasionally.

1
Rep
41
Offline
15:27 Sep-06-2016

Game Debate is pro-NVIDIA?


-They always use NVIDIA cards to test games.
-When GTX 1060 released, they made a lot of tests, but no test with RX 480.
-The GTX 1050's specs has been leaked yesterday, and the GTX 1050 page already is updated with new specs. RX 470 has been released a month ago, the specs had been revealed even before, but GD is still outdated, the same with RX 460.

10
Rep
2
Offline
19:36 Sep-06-2016

Nvidia or their AIB partners might be sponsoring Game Debate by sending them GPUs, which is why they could be updated faster. The RX 460 isn't really interesting because it's not even on par with a GTX 950.

0
Rep
216
Offline
admin approved badge
20:18 Sep-06-2016

If the RX 460 isn't "interesting" it doesn't mean they shouldn't test it or shouldn't be given one. They do receive AMD GPUs occasionally, hence this 480 review. I don't know why they don't use them for tests though.

1
Rep
41
Offline
21:48 Sep-06-2016

I didn't say they should test RX 460, I said they should at least update the spces and rank it correctly, the same with RX 470, they don't need to be supported by AMD for this.

2
Rep
27
Offline
11:55 Sep-07-2016

why do you want to know about AMD cards you use nvidia yourself?

0
Rep
41
Offline
21:16 Sep-07-2016

I'm a consumer, not a NVIDIA fanboy.

2
Rep
106
Offline
admin approved badge
12:35 Sep-06-2016

I called these req a week ago >.> but nein, people called BS on it! xD

5
Rep
87
Offline
17:42 Sep-06-2016

predict requirements they said
it would be fun they said

1
Rep
13
Offline
17:26 Sep-13-2016

those are not the minimum requirements, i was able to play it on ultra/50-60fps without overclocking. thats not what a minimum requirement should represent

0
Rep
51
Offline
11:49 Sep-06-2016

like seriously i can run the beta on high preset with aa turned off on 30-50 fps easily

0
Rep
-31
Offline
11:27 Sep-06-2016

what settings should I turn down to limit CPU bottlenecking?

1
Rep
41
Offline
15:29 Sep-06-2016

Most graphics setting has no effect over processor. You really need a new CPU, FX-4xxx is too weak for GTX 970.

2
Rep
-31
Offline
20:37 Sep-07-2016

yes, but I don't have money

0
Rep
41
Offline
21:16 Sep-07-2016

Try to OC your processor or save some money.

0
Rep
-31
Offline
11:00 Sep-11-2016

4+1 phase mobo-not gonna happen, it is unstable at 4.5ghz with a little voltage increase.

0
Rep
13
Offline
17:28 Sep-13-2016

what cooler do you got? if its a good one you can raise the voltage for like .1 volts, my standard setting is 1.3625volts but when setting it to 1.45 the temperatures dont rise that high (60-65°C with my CM hyper 212 evo)

0
Rep
15
Offline
admin approved badge
08:52 Sep-06-2016

lol strange minimum specs because i can run it on med/high 45/55 fps XFAA off. Its like Battlefront can run that easy on 1080P. Have play the beta BF1 also, yeay there are some FPS drops, but not dramatically. FX6300 powerfull enough to run it on low/med on 60 FPS.

3
Rep
41
Offline
15:30 Sep-06-2016

I guess that's for 1080p 60 FPS on low.

1
Rep
41
Offline
21:50 Sep-06-2016

What I said wrong? This site has too many haters, anything is a reason to downvote.

0
Rep
55
Offline
08:18 Sep-06-2016

The game looks really good but the sys req are just ridiculous!
The more puzzling thing is the insane CPU req instead of really high GPU req. And 8 GB RAM as minimum? We are in 2016 right not 2026?

0
Rep
27
Offline
10:38 Sep-06-2016

cpu demanding is because of dynamic weather and extreme destructibility

0
Rep
405
Offline
admin approved badge
10:42 Sep-06-2016

Though the game works fine with first gen i3. So it is quite odd to list 6600k as minimum req.

1
Rep
27
Offline
22:02 Sep-06-2016

i think it's for the best gaming experience i think, some people are very sensitive or it might be because of some very demanding maps we haven't seen yet but yes it is quite odd

0
Rep
60
Offline
admin approved badge
22:59 Sep-06-2016

8GB ram minimum is common these days.

1
Rep
19
Offline
08:09 Sep-06-2016

I am running this game at 75-95 FPS on ultra. No problems for me.

0
Rep
12
Offline
08:00 Sep-06-2016

was playing against a cheater today. he was just a flying pistol

0
Rep
8
Offline
17:38 Sep-06-2016

Yeah,people have already made cheats for the vulnerable beta. I have been shot by enermy snipers through rocks, buildings and even the freaking ground. When this happenes I just give up and get 35 kills in an op light tank. Once I shot a man several times at point blank with shrapnel shot and he would just refuse to do die. He ended up dieing by accidentally killing himself with an anti tank grenade he tried using on my tank.

0
Rep
29
Offline
07:29 Sep-06-2016

What?
FX-6350=i5 6600k???

7
Rep
2
Offline
14:50 Sep-06-2016

maybe bf1 have wonderful optimisation for AMD(able to properly work with amount of cores >4, hello ubisoft).

1
Rep
6
Offline
07:09 Sep-06-2016

I'm getting about 25 fps on 720p on my rig. it's very playable

0
Rep
70
Offline
06:17 Sep-06-2016

Well the cpu requirement is off by quite a bit. I can pull off 60 fps at tweaked ultra with my cpu! :D

0
Rep
46
Offline
06:35 Sep-06-2016

Same here, although I've OC'd mine to 4.2Ghz to get a bit more out of it. The system RAM requirements are probably correct, though... I don't know if I really need the 16GB I have, but for this game, as well as the new Deus Ex, I've noticed it going over 50% of my RAM, and I just upgraded to 16GB, so I guess it would have been bogged down in my pagefile before...

0
Rep
1
Offline
07:46 Sep-06-2016

Waaaay off. With my rig I'm getting fps ranging from 55-79 on ultra 1080p depending where I am on the map. Perhaps the 6600k is meant for faster map loading speeds or they have a spreadsheet and saw most people have a 6600k in their rig.

0
Rep
70
Offline
10:18 Sep-06-2016

Pretty much sums my experience up! Also nice to see your rig is very similar to mine! :P

0
Rep
19
Offline
06:15 Sep-06-2016

I'm getting around 75-85 FPS in this game on ultra settings and TAA on 1080p, enabling Vsync gives me stable 60FPS. I think the Intel CPU requirement is too high and you can definitely get away with something lower.

0
Rep
-2
Offline
06:00 Sep-06-2016

I have an i52500k @stock and 8Gb RAM,
If I upgrade to GTX1070 and 16gb RAM, Would it be bottlenecked due to my old processor??

0
Rep
2
Offline
10:12 Sep-06-2016

Yes, there would be a bottleneck. Any i5 pre-skylake would bottleneck above a GTX 1060. My advice would be to go for a Skylake i5 6600k-GTX 1060 combo. Have a look at the difference https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZ_5p9wd2dk.

0
Rep
94
Offline
11:12 Sep-06-2016

Damn, now I wish I would've spend 60 euro more for a 6th gen setup

0
Rep
2
Offline
12:34 Sep-06-2016

I would always say go with the best you can at the time. I bought a rig with a i5-4590 in 2014, and it couldn't even handle a 980ti without a noticeable bottleneck.

0
Rep
-2
Offline
05:59 Sep-06-2016

I currently have an i5 2500k,8Gb(1.6)RAM and HD 7850 OCed 2gb,
I want to get a new GPU,Which should I buy? RX480 or GTX1060 6gb AMP edition ??

0
Rep
70
Offline
06:16 Sep-06-2016

The 1060 has better performance overall :)

1
Rep
-2
Offline
06:27 Sep-06-2016

But some people say that 1060 is good only for current games,
Because it is not optimized with DirectX12,
480 is optimized with DirectX12 and will give good performance in the games coming out this year and a few next years!

0
Rep
1
Offline
07:49 Sep-06-2016

DirectX12 at the moment is actually degrading performance instead of helping it. You can see it with BF1. Both AMD and Nvidia have a loss of frames instead of a gain. I would say go for the gtx1060.

0
Rep
356
Offline
08:09 Sep-06-2016

its not true this is still based on dx 11 like other games which give you similar performance like dx 12... games has to be from goundup on dx12 then you can se more benefit from it... and the guy above is veryy correct for long term i would go defenetlly with rx 480 8gb its getting even better fps in bf1 also

1
Rep
405
Offline
admin approved badge
11:26 Sep-06-2016

Huh? 1060 is performing better on BF1 beta than 480.
If you can get 480 for cheaper go for it. But if they are same priced, i'd definitely take 1060.

0
Rep
356
Offline
13:31 Sep-06-2016
0
Rep
405
Offline
admin approved badge
16:20 Sep-06-2016
0
Rep
405
Offline
admin approved badge
16:22 Sep-06-2016

That is in DX11 though, and for some reason I failed that link, and cant edit the comment.

0

Can They Run... |

Core i7-11800H 8-Core 1.90GHz GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile 8GB
| 30FPS, Low, 720p
Core i5-6260U 1.8GHz UHD Graphics 620 12GB
| 60FPS, Ultra, 1080p
Core i3-9100F 4-Core 3.6GHz GeForce GTX 1070 Gigabyte Windforce OC 16GB
| 30FPS, Low, 1080p
Core i5-2500 3.3GHz GeForce GTX 750 8GB
| 30FPS, High, 1080p
Core i5-3470 3.2GHz GeForce GTX 1060 Inno3D Compact 3GB 12GB
100% Yes [1 votes]
| 30FPS, Ultra, 1080p
Core i7-10750H 6-Core 2.60GHz GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile 16GB
Core i7-10750H 6-Core 2.60GHz GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile 16GB
| 30FPS, Low, 1080p
Core i7-3770 4-Core 3.4GHz GeForce GTX 1650 MSI Ventus XS OC 4GB 16GB
100% Yes [1 votes]
| 60FPS, Medium, 1080p
Core i3-9100 4-Core 3.6GHz GeForce GTX 1050 Ti 4GB 8GB
| 60FPS, High, 1080p
Core i5-3470 3.2GHz Radeon RX 470 Sapphire Nitro+ 8GB 16GB
| 60FPS, High, 1080p
Core i5-10300H 4-Core 2.50GHz GeForce GTX 1050 Ti 4GB 16GB
100% Yes [1 votes]
| 60FPS, High, 1080p
Core i3-1005G1 2-Core 1.20GHz UHD Graphics 630 4GB
| 60FPS, Medium, 720p
Core i3-1005G1 2-Core 1.20GHz UHD Graphics 630 4GB
| 60FPS, High, 1080p
Ryzen 5 3500 6-Core 3.6GHz GeForce GTX 1660 Super Zotac Gaming AMP 6GB 16GB
50% Yes [6 votes]
| 30FPS, Low, 1080p
Core i5-7300HQ 4-Core 2.5GHz GeForce GTX 1050M Ti 4GB 12GB
Core i7-10750H 6-Core 2.60GHz GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile 16GB
| 60FPS, Medium, 720p
Core i5-4440 3.1GHz Radeon HD 6670 v2 Gigabyte OC 1GB Edition 16GB
| 30FPS, Low, 720p
Core i5-10400F 6-Core 2.90GHz Radeon RX 560 4GB 16GB
100% Yes [1 votes]
Ryzen 5 2600X 6-Core 3.6GHz Radeon RX 5600 XT Gigabyte Gaming OC 6GB 16GB
100% Yes [1 votes]
| 60FPS, High, 1080p
Core i7-10700 8-Core 2.90GHz GeForce RTX 2060 6GB 16GB