Sections

Mafia II system requirements announced

Friday, 9th July 2010 16:37 GMT By Stephany Nunneley

mafia II

2K announced the PC specs for Mafia II yesterday on the game’s official site, and we’ve posted the information for you below the break.

Minimum Requirements

  • OS: Microsoft Windows XP (SP2 or later) / Windows Vista / Windows 7
  • Processor: Pentium D 3Ghz or AMD Athlon 64 X2 3600+ (Dual core) or higher
  • RAM: 1.5 GB
  • Video Card: nVidia GeForce 8600 / ATI HD2600 Pro or better
  • Hard Disc Space: 8 GB
  • Sound Card: 100% DirectX 9.0c compatible sound card
  • Peripherals: Keyboard and mouse or Windows compatible gamepad

Recommenced System Requirements

  • OS: Microsoft Windows XP (SP2 or later) / Windows Vista / Windows 7
  • Processor: 2.4 GHz Quad Core processor
  • RAM: 2 GB
  • Video Card: nVidia GeForce 9800 GTX / ATI Radeon HD 3870 or better
  • Hard Disc: 10 GB
  • Sound Card: 100% DirectX 9.0c compliant card
  • Peripherals: Keyboard and mouse or Windows compatible gamepad

PhysX/APEX Enhancement System Requirements

  • OS: Microsoft Windows XP (SP2 or later) / Windows Vista / Windows 7
  • Minimum Processor: 2.4 GHz Quad Core processor
  • Recommended Processor: 2.66 GHz Core i7-920 RAM: 2 GB
  • Video Cards and resolution: APEX medium settings
  • Minimum: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 (or better) for Graphics and a dedicated NVIDIA 9800GTX (or better) for PhysX
  • Recommended: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 (or better)

Video Cards and resolution: APEX High settings

  • Minimum: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470 (or better) and a dedicated NVIDIA 9800GTX (or better) for PhysX
  • Recommended: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 for Graphics and a dedicated NVIDIA GTX 285 (or better) for PhysX NVIDIA GPU driver: 197.13 or later.
  • NVIDIA PhysX driver: 10.04.02_9.10.0522. Included and automatically installed with the game.

Mafia II releases on August 24 and 27 in the US and UK for PS3, 360 and PC.

Check out the latest developer diary for it here, starring Empire City.

Breaking news

23 Comments

Sign in to post a comment.

  1. GitForceGemini

    It can run on a 360, yet they “recommend” PC users have quad core?

    #1 4 years ago
  2. DeSpiritusBellum

    @1 Somehow I doubt that they’re optimized exactly alike. Plus your computer uses a lot more power for other processes than a console does.

    I’ll wait and see if it’s a crappy port. It’s useless to have a highpowered rig if the game itself handles like a spastic.

    #2 4 years ago
  3. Moonwalker1982

    It’s probably gonna run quite well on my laptop then. I got Core i3 330M, 2,13ghz, 4GB RAM, Radeon HD 5470.

    But i’m a real console gamer so i’m getting it for my 360 or PS3. Probably 360, cause i got all my friends on 360 so i talk with them in parties.

    #3 4 years ago
  4. Happy Hardon Harry

    @1

    Yeah, but the 360/PS3 versions will be sub-HD, have no V-Sync, and little (if any) Anti-aliasing, etc.

    You’ll get the baseline version on consoles, on the PC the title is the best it can be.

    #4 4 years ago
  5. Maximum Unreal

    Recommenced System Requirements are for: using all detail and textures on high,antialiasing on maximum and full HD resolution

    #5 4 years ago
  6. fdelfino

    I got the recommended systems specs, but for this game I should really buy a GeForce 260 GTX for graphics.
    There goes my savings.

    #6 4 years ago
  7. loki

    @4 just LOL, Nvidia say, you believe

    #7 4 years ago
  8. Filofax

    @4 Have you met BDH, I think you two will get on great.

    “You’ll get the baseline version on consoles, on the PC the title is the best it can be” What your forgetting with that statement is that it may look the best on pc but it may still play like a dog.

    #8 4 years ago
  9. theevilaires

    Screw all that shit…just give me CELL and RSX version. Hate PC gaming man. All that mumbo jumbo about make sure you have this and don’t run this program with that.

    What 12-15 yr old knows all that. PC gaming is a pain that’s what I’m trying to say in my obvious rant :D

    #9 4 years ago
  10. endgame

    n1 theevilaires. u’r the console gamer at it’s best.

    #10 4 years ago
  11. Happy Hardon Harry

    @7

    loki, away and take yer face for a shite, it’s all it’s good for.

    @8

    Play like a dog? Your just kidding yourself on there mate…

    @9

    So, what you’re saying is console owners are too stupid to understand PC gaming…you may have a point there judging by 7 and 8′s reply.

    #11 4 years ago
  12. fdelfino

    It is so easy to configure your pc right so that you can play the games with the best resolution possible.
    You don’t have to be a specialist to know how to set you pc rig accordinly, installing all drivers and etc.
    There are forums on the internet dedicated to that specific subject. It’s really easy to do so, and it’s kinda fun to know how your platform works and the possibility to upgrade it as you wish.

    Nothing agaisnt you,theevilaires… after all, taste differs from person to person. It’s just that pc gaming is not the mumbo jumbo you mentioned and it’s a fact when it is said that it is the platform where you can reach the top graphic quality.

    #12 4 years ago
  13. Happy Hardon Harry

    Play a console version of a triple-A title and then compare it to the PC version, the difference is astounding. Particularly with games designed to draw you in with their ambiance, PC games win out.

    It’s getting embarrassing how far behind visually the current generation of consoles has become. PCs are already next-gen, and will continue to get even lovelier in their visual capabilities.

    Every month that goes by makes the consoles trail farther behind, while PC components become more affordable. While console games continue to claim HD visuals and instead quietly render their visuals to be well below the capacity of HDTVs, PC monitors continue to blow away anything even the best TVs can deliver, with ridiculously crisp, anti-aliased visuals on top of the subtle lighting effects one can only get on the PC.

    #13 4 years ago
  14. Hunam

    I like this guy :)

    #14 4 years ago
  15. Aimless

    I’ve never understood the whole console-versus-PC thing. Theoretically multi-format games should always look better on PC, because comparisons are drawn using a high spec machine. It’s not something to get superior about, it’s just common sense.

    #15 4 years ago
  16. DeSpiritusBellum

    Consoles might be limited hardware wise, but with a growing number of games being designed on consoles first and then ported, I’d say the PC is losing some value – and I play about 80% of my games on a PC.

    Which cost me a fricken fortune.

    I think that’s the main reason why PC gaming is having a hard time, when a reasonably good rig costs a thousand euro and you can get a perfectly good console for 2-300 euro, playing most of the very same games, while enjoying the original controls, I don’t see why you wouldn’t choose that.

    I still think wasting time on which platform is the best is like kids argueing over whose dad can take whose. It’s not like you’re gonna end up with a deathmatch to resolve the fricken argument. I’ve been down that road, dads are very reluctant to participate in deathmatches.

    #16 4 years ago
  17. Bulk Slash

    Multi-platform games on the PC often don’t look much better than the console versions, purely because the developers just re-use the console models and texture assets on the PC. It’s a lot cheaper for them to create lower detail console assets than to create high detail ones that can only be used on the PC version.

    Obviously the PC can render those console assets at a higher resolution with more AA and hopefully with a better frame rate, but it doesn’t always result in a huge difference.

    As an example of what I mean, scroll down to the end of Digital Foundry’s comparison of Mass Effect 2: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-tech-analysis-mass-effect-2-article?page=2

    Compare the upscaled 1080p Xbox 360 shots with the PC version running native 1080p and there’s very little between them, presumably because all of Mass Effect 2′s assets have been optimised to look good at 720p, so any extra resolution is essentially unneeded.

    Obviously the PC version of ME2 should run at a much better framerate, but the differences aren’t as great as they could be.

    I remember the same thing happened with the last generation of consoles. The PS2 in particular with its horrid sub-480i graphics was really holding the PC back in terms of multi-platform games.

    All that said, it’s worth remembering that PC ports don’t always run better. You can have a really high end PC and still see shit performance if the PC version has been ported by a bunch of chimps.

    #17 4 years ago
  18. Happy Hardon Harry

    @17

    Never judge a game by screen-shots as they never do a game (any game) justice when you actually see it in first person.

    Also This:

    Compare the upscaled 1080p Xbox 360 shots with the PC version running native 1080p and there’s very little between them, presumably because all of Mass Effect 2’s assets have been optimised to look good at 720p, so any extra resolution is essentially unneeded.

    is complete and utter bullshit, try playing a game at 720p, then again 1080p native and you won’t be saying extra resolution is essentially unneeded. Such a rant is made by someone who generally hasn’t got a clue.

    All your doing above is looking at screen-shots then making gobshite generalisations.

    Also, you didn’t point out that Mass Effect 1 and 2 are superior games on the PC due to the mouse and keyboard interface. The same goes for Dragon Age: Origins, shite on console, the definitve version on PC due to the GUI (graphical user interface) revamp.

    Try playing games like The Orange Box, Grid, Dirt 2, Bioshock, Batman AA, on PC then go back to the consoles versions…you wont! Batman AA is sloth-like on consoles and would be like playing VF 5 at 30FPS.

    http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/face-off-batman-arkham-asylum-face-off?page=3

    http://www.pcgamer.com/2010/06/29/how-the-xbox-sucked-the-life-out-of-dragon-age/

    #18 4 years ago
  19. Bulk Slash

    Did you even read what I said or is the kneejerk PC fanboism too strong for you to resist?

    I clearly said the frame rate and AA would be better on the PC. I was merely pointing out that the PC is being held back by console level assets. ME2′s textures and models are designed for the Xbox 360, running the game at a higher resolution does not reveal any extra detail in the textures, smoother surfaces on the models or better shader effects because that detail hasn’t been added. All the assets are designed for and ported from a system with only 512MB of shared RAM.

    Certainly you’ll see some better detail on textures in the distance thanks to the extra resolution and anisotropic filtering levels, but up close e.g. that shot of Miranda’s face, there just isn’t any extra detail to see.

    I don’t need to go and play Arkham, Bioshock, Grid, etc, I play them all the time (on my 4GHz i7 with water cooled 5970). I know the resolution and frame rate is much better than any console version, but they’re still using console level assets.

    While it is a shock to the system going back to 720p30 on consoles, it’s nowhere as bad as it could be because PC ports just aren’t given higher detail assets and that’s not going to change until the next generation of consoles.

    I saw no point in mentioning controls. Joypad or keyboard/mouse is entirely down the personal preference of the player and the type of game being played. Although if you want to claim using a keyboard to play Grid is better I’m sure I can find the humour to laugh at your “gobshite generalisations”.

    #19 4 years ago
  20. Happy Hardon Harry

    @19

    There’s no point in talking to you as you’re like the mental patient that doesn’t know he’s mental…

    #20 4 years ago
  21. spiderLAW

    I agree with Bulk.
    Hey Bulk, we basically have the same PC setup (well, motherboard/processor anyways)

    @ Happy Hardon Harry
    With my all powerful PC playing any game at MAX everything, i’d still rather play on conoles? Why???
    Simplicity buddy.
    Yes, go on talking about how easy it is blah blah blah…in the long run, it is far more work on the PC than just sticking the disc in the console and pressing A/X to play.

    Also, the general community of online PC players seem to have this attitude of “Im a PC player and mine is better than yours and so i shit on you.”

    #21 4 years ago
  22. DeSpiritusBellum

    @21 I wouldn’t really use that argument, because you can put up a lot of parameters for what’s more convenient. I don’t think using a gamepad for a shooter is very convenient for example.

    Personally I haven’t installed a single driver since Windows Vista, and I haven’t installed a single patch that wasn’t offered to me just as easily as on Xbox Live (I don’t know if PSN does the same?) using Steam.

    I think what you should focus on is the fact that you paid a lot less for your console, and you’re still getting the same value in terms gameplay.

    I mostly agree with Bulk too, like I said I’m a non-fascist PC player, but I will say that Mass Effect 2 hasn’t looked up to scratch compared to what I got out of my PC version in any of the gameplay movies I’ve seen off the Xbox 360. I can’t recognize those Eurogamer results.

    Although it certainly is true that multiplatform games are far more likely to accomodate the consoles first. Bigger audience, more investment.

    #22 4 years ago
  23. Yoshi

    Yes! It doesn’t need SP3, get in ! :D

    #23 4 years ago