World of Warcraft: Battle for Azeroth System Requirements Revealed

Written by Jon Sutton on Wed, Jan 31, 2018 10:00 AM
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

The unstoppable juggernaut that is World of Warcraft is hurtling towards its 7th expansion pack with Battle for Azeroth, raising the level cap to 120, adding the Kul Tiras and Zandalar continents, three new races, multiple dungeons, raids, and the 20-player PvE Warfront mode. There'll be heaps for long-time WoW players to get busy with then, and a major graphical upgrade means it's never looked better. This comes at a price, naturally, and World of Warcraft: Battle for Azeroth's PC system specs are significantly more demanding than Legion

World of Warcraft: Battle for Azeroth Minimum System Requirements - 1024 x 768 Resolution

  • OS: Windows 7 64-bit
  • CPU: Intel Core i5-760 2.8GHz or AMD FX-8100 2.8 GHz
  • RAM: 4 GB System Memory
  • GPU RAM: 1GB Video Memory
  • GPU: GeForce GTX 560 or Radeon HD 7850
  • HDD: 70GB Available Hard Drive Space (7200 RPM)
  • DX: DirectX 11

World of Warcraft: Battle for Azeroth Recommended System Requirements

  • OS: Windows 7 64-bit
  • CPU: Intel Core i7-4770 3.4GHz or AMD FX-8300 3.3GHz
  • RAM: 8 GB System Memory
  • GPU RAM: 2GB Video Memory
  • GPU: Nvidia GeForce GTX 960 or AMD Radeon R9 280
  • HDD: 70GB Available SSD Space
  • DX: DirectX 11

If you're a World of Warcraft stalwart still plugging away on an aging laptop or PC, these system requirements may be a cause for concern. Battle for Azeroth features yet another graphical makeover and it's meant a significant bump in system requirements compared to WoW: Legion. Fortunately, the system requirements are still comparatively low for a modern AAA title, yet it's still considerably more demanding than the previous WoW expansion.

Beginning with the minimum requirements, players will now need a 1st-gen Core i5 as a minimum, up from a Core 2 Duo 3.1GHz. AMD users are suggested the FX-8100 vs the previous Phenom II X3 720. That's a sizeable difference in performance, so World of Warcraft players with ancient processors are going to have to spec up.

On the GPU front, both the minimum and recommended requirements take a generational leap. As a minimum you'll need a low-end GeForce GTX 560 or Radeon HD 7850, while recommended is the mid-range Geforce GTX 960 or Radeon R9 280. We would imagine the previously recommended GTX 750 Ti and R7 260X should still be able to run WoW: BFA without a hitch.

Last but not least, and expansion's worth of content plus revamped visuals can mean only one thing - an increased install size. You'll now need a whopping 70GB available space, and Blizzard recommends you cram this onto an SSD if you can.

Remember, you can always check out how well your PC can run the World of Warcraft: Battle for Azeroth System Requirements here, where you can check benchmarking and performance from other users. Compare your graphics card to the WoW: Battle for Azeroth benchmark chart.

Login or Register to join the debate

Rep
17
Offline
admin approved badge
06:18 Feb-01-2018

Its about time they started really upping the requirements. These requirements are more than reasonable. If they will truly upgrade the graphics on WoW, I will be very happy.
Requiring a nearly 5 year old(but still capable) CPU and a 3 year old budget(using the term loosely as this was the low end of the trio of 960, 970, 980) gaming cards is a good thing as it will hopefully start to push the game out of the dark ages. DX12 would be nice but I'll be patient!

0
Rep
11
Offline
11:38 Feb-01-2018

In my opinion it is never good when devs up the requirements, it's better if they work on making the game look better and run better (which is much more important than "fancy" looks) while retaining identical or near similar system requirements, a good example is Witcher 3 which ran better whit every patch. Both HD7850 and GTX560 were upper mid range to high end cards, same goes for GTX960 and R9 280.

-3
Rep
383
Offline
senior admin badge
11:52 Feb-01-2018

It's been over a decade though, it can't stand still forever. Look how ugly Everquest looks now. There's only so much you can do without raising the requirements, and believe it or not The Witcher 3 will look ugly in 2030 when it's as old as WoW is now.

2
Rep
17
Offline
admin approved badge
06:54 Feb-02-2018

Right Jon, the game can't stand still forever when everything is changing around it. The 960 was a mid range card upon release and would be considered on the lower end of the spectrum today, especially with it's lackluster memory bandwidth/bus. In any case, they are giving people options. The minimum reqs are super lenient with an ancient i5 etc. Tech moves forward. WoW has constantly evolved(I've been playing since TBC) and it looks better every Xpac. A major graphical overhaul was long overdue

0
Rep
23
Offline
01:45 Feb-01-2018

I don't like to pay for the subscription. All I think I want is the music. The last soundtrack was to my liking and the trailer music for "Battle for Azeroth" seems to hark back to "Wrath of the Lich King," at least in my opinion.

0
Rep
108
Offline
07:23 Feb-03-2018

If play enough you don't have too. A single max level toon can easily farm enough gold to pay the sub with every 2-3 weeks. With a couple months back I've gotten to where I can make enough in a week to pay for the sub, I play about 4-5 hours a day.

0
Rep
37
Offline
23:47 Feb-03-2018

Depends on the token price
It used to be around 30k-70k


Now its 300k on my servers and thazs a sum i cant farm without auctionshouse usage
So i dont generate gold i steal it from others with garbage they are to lazy to farm themselfes

0
Rep
37
Offline
12:26 Jan-31-2018

Legion runs just fine if i put settings to 5/10


Not sure if cpu or gpu is the problem


It still runs on igpu but that is not that much fun.


I had no internet for the past 10 days at home and my old internet was unstable. Gonna switch from cable to dsl which will be an improvement although is will be slower.

0
Rep
386
Offline
admin approved badge
10:43 Jan-31-2018

I really doubt it will require such GPUs as they will barely have improved the graphics over legion, also why would they recommend a fx 8300, when WoW is poorly threaded? Unless they've finally properly optimized it for multi-core CPUs, quite hyped for the game and the way it will run now.

0
Rep
55
Offline
10:52 Jan-31-2018

For the GPU requirements, the game has a lot of super sampling options and given an open world / mass population in one place + countless shiny spell effects, it really taxes up the GPU - and not just it's VRAM capacity, but the speed at which all this is processed (and considering all of this, it is strange why they would recommend a relatively performing card but with such low VRAM...)

0
Rep
37
Offline
12:31 Jan-31-2018

R9 380x gets only 5/10 in the presets if i go higher in legion there will be framedrops if crowded some citys are a pain in da bach... if actually uses 4 cores here but it is still op to use something over 4,5ghz. I3 8100 gets the job done very well and its only 3.6ghz


Nvidia gpu is always better my gpu has a hard time against a 1050ti4gb :(

0
Rep
11
Offline
12:52 Jan-31-2018

Nvidia ain't better (when on the same level, not looking at those 500$+ GPU's that 2% of the world buy's, but even then AMD is on par with brute performance) they were never better they just have games optimized for them. An R9 380 non X is 15% faster than a gtx1050ti (info taken from userbench they are more accurate) something might be wrong with your system.

0
Rep
37
Offline
16:29 Jan-31-2018

Sorry man i meant just in wow


But there really seems to be something wrong with the system. Everything works well but not as well as it should.


I wanted to upgrade last year and almost got a pentium g4560 which is about on paar with the i5. I waited to long and i am a cheap idiot

0
Rep
386
Offline
admin approved badge
16:40 Jan-31-2018

the CPU and RAM speed is usually the limiting factor of WoW and mainly because it's mainly CPU demanding due to it being an MMO and a lot of the settings "effects" are done on the CPU instead of the GPU, since the engine Blizzard are using for it is from 2001, back when it was quite common to do a lot of things nowadays the GPU does.

0
Rep
11
Offline
21:06 Jan-31-2018

No need to say sorry mate no offence taken :) . I think something in your system might be overheating and limiting your performance. Was same for me, my board kept pushing -1.425volts to my CPU so of course the motherboard was overheating to 70c+, so I did a little bit of "magic" in bios and got my CPU to run even faster 4.1GHz on -1.125volts. You could even have a GPU problem, just a very bad sample, or even a failing GPU. But my bet is CPU is overheating and downclocking most common problem.

0
Rep
37
Offline
02:17 Feb-01-2018

Well i had that once and it was awfull. A cable stopped the cpu fan. But nowadays its usually below 70 celsius all time. Even gpu temps are not that much but its the sapphire nitro with most oc that was aviable if i oc even more i get lower results in benchmarks which is weird to me. Maybe i should try reference settings lower the clocks a little bit.

0
Rep
72
Offline
admin approved badge
12:38 Feb-05-2018

Tmario98 that site as well only tests out stock cards never really branded cards because my MSI GTX 1050 Ti is 4% better than the stock 1050 Ti.
Also after going on "your favorite site" for game benchmarks there is only a few that the 380 pulls ahead while everything else it the 1050 ti or it is even oh and it says 14% better not 15% better which it is better to be more accurate.

1
Rep
11
Offline
13:49 Feb-10-2018

Ok ok no need to get angry. I wont touch your "precious" 1050ti. The stock numbers are THE MOST IMPORTANT. If we take overclock in to account what then? You can clock HD7970 or r9 380 or gtx960 to be much faster than a 1050ti. And that site is real world performance and it is based on user experience and i find it mostly right. Oh and btw CHECK YOUR FACTS R9 380 4GB is a bit faster on average than a GTX1050Ti. Prof: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Lw23bB5Zi0 also you can read up a little bit on the subject gtx1050ti vs r9 380.

0
Rep
37
Offline
14:14 Feb-05-2018

I reinstalled wow and played yesterday.was maxed out without SS and run perfektly fine. Cant tell what used to be the problem but it seems to be gone

0
Rep
11
Offline
10:40 Jan-31-2018

Umm HD7850 minimum which is faster, then you type 6750 which is weaker than a gtx560? OP you made a mistake, you mean 7750 or 7770?

0
Rep
55
Offline
10:57 Jan-31-2018

Yee, if they really meant the HD7850 as minimum, then the NVIDIA counterpart would be the GTX660 (or the GTX570). Usually its the other way around: recommend an old AMD card and a little stronger NVIDIA, from the same time as the AMD card, due to the AMD card aging a lot better, than the NVIDIA one

0
Rep
102
Offline
admin approved badge
11:27 Jan-31-2018

Nope, it is also same in blizzard's website. (Link)[https://us.battle.net/support/en/article/137431]

0
Rep
11
Offline
12:35 Jan-31-2018

Ohh ok...then.. say's Intel HD530 hahahahah, of course it is fast as my HD7850, yea sure it is XD. If an HD530 can run the game then anything better than a "potato" GT730 or HD6570 can run it.

0
Rep
102
Offline
admin approved badge
13:56 Jan-31-2018

I totally agree with you, rly idk why they added HD 530 as minimum, ofc it is way weaker but it could be that they optimized so even low intel iGPU would be able to run it as min requirements.

0
Rep
11
Offline
14:43 Jan-31-2018

Could be

0
Rep
9
Offline
10:20 Jan-31-2018

"major graphical upgrade" and WOW
These words just dont go together :DDDD

3
Rep
55
Offline
10:54 Jan-31-2018

well, advanced graphical fidelity has never been the goal of Blizzard - the main goal is to let everyone with any PC hardware to manage to run the game - and cmoon, the game doesn't look that bad

3
Rep
383
Offline
senior admin badge
11:28 Jan-31-2018

Yeah I think it looks quite nice. People must forget how it used to look lol

1
Rep
11
Offline
12:41 Jan-31-2018

The thing is people that actually buy WOW and pay 15$ monthly have money, they ain't gonna play on toasters.

0
Rep
383
Offline
senior admin badge
13:10 Jan-31-2018

I doubt paying $15 a month has any bearing on what PC most people have, it's pretty inconsequential if that's all they're playing

0
Rep
11
Offline
13:48 Jan-31-2018

Yeah you are probably right but I still stay by my point.

0
Rep
108
Offline
15:21 Jan-31-2018

There is also the fact that you can buy game time with in game currency. If you play enough, and are good at making gold, you never have to pay for game time. You could have even bought the expansion the same way.

0
Rep
37
Offline
16:35 Jan-31-2018

15 bucks a month is nothing compared to what i spent on games per month if i dont play wow in fulltime. Sometimes i Buy 150euros ps4 games per month and play them too. If i would go back to only wow since it can easiely consume all your time it would actually be cheaper . And you can play wow on a toaster. Yet with 8xsupersampling and ultra 4k settings it runs on 1070 smooth and looks better than newer games to me. But i remember the beta very well. That would be ugly nowadays

0

Can They Run... |

| 60FPS, Low, 1080p
Core i5-4460 3.2GHz Radeon R9 280 Gigabyte WindForce 3X OC 3GB Edition 16GB
100% Yes [1 votes]
| 60FPS, High, 4k
Core i9-10900K 10-Core 3.7GHz GeForce RTX 3070 Gigabyte Vision OC 8GB 64GB
Core i5-3210M 2.5GHz Radeon HD 7500G 8GB
| 30FPS, High, 1080p
Ryzen 5 2600X 6-Core 3.6GHz Radeon RX 5600 XT Sapphire Pulse 6GB 16GB
0% No [1 votes]
| 60FPS, Medium, 720p
Core i3-4030U 1.9GHz Intel HD Graphics 4400 Mobile 2GB
0% No [1 votes]
| 60FPS, Low, 1080p
Ryzen 5 2600X 6-Core 3.6GHz Radeon RX 570 4GB 16GB
100% Yes [5 votes]