Battlefield 1 System Specifications

Battlefield website now offers the official system requirements for Battlefield 1. These come along with a couple of videos highlighting the HUD-less interface in the upcoming World War I shooter. Here are the minimum and recommended system specifications:


  • OS: 64-bit Windows 7, Windows 8.1 and Windows 10
  • Processor (AMD): AMD FX-6350
  • Processor (Intel): Core i5 6600K
  • Memory: 8GB RAM
  • Graphics card (AMD): AMD Radeon™ HD 7850 2GB
  • Graphics card (NVIDIA): nVidia GeForce® GTX 660 2GB
  • DirectX: 11.0 Compatible video card or equivalent
  • Online Connection Requirements: 512 KBPS or faster Internet connection
  • Hard-drive space: 50GB


  • OS: 64-bit Windows 10 or later
  • Processor (AMD): AMD FX 8350 Wraith
  • Processor (Intel): Intel Core i7 4790 or equivalent
  • Memory: 16GB RAM
  • Graphics card (AMD): AMD Radeon™ RX 480 4GB
  • Graphics card (NVIDIA): NVIDIA GeForce® GTX 1060 3GB
  • DirectX: 11.1 Compatible video card or equivalent
  • Online Connection Requirements: 512 KBPS or faster Internet connection
  • Available Disk Space: 50GB

View : : :
Re: Battlefield 1 System Specifications
Sep 20, 2016, 12:34
Re: Battlefield 1 System Specifications Sep 20, 2016, 12:34
Sep 20, 2016, 12:34
Slick wrote on Sep 20, 2016, 02:32:
theglaze wrote on Sep 20, 2016, 02:11:
Slick wrote on Sep 19, 2016, 20:29:
Here's the GOOD hudless video incase you're lazy

Thank you for the link!

I'm still a fan of BF series because of the audio/video quality they bring to the FPS multiplayer table.

That said, they've dropped the ball with RUSH mode after Bad Company 2 and haven't picked it up since. IO thought the BF1 Rush experience in the public beta was WEAK.

I was hopeful that they would revitalize Rush with WW1 trench warfare and the desperation of holding the line or trying to storm through defenses. But my impression was, once again, a focus on making Conquest mode work first with maximum player and vehicle counts...and then attempts to 're-purpose' those maps for Rush mode. But the quality just isn't there, and at this point, pushes me away from buying it.

You're right, in BC2 (and BC for that matter) Rush was the primary game mode, that's what the maps were designed around. People wanted conquest to be the focus as it'd classically been, so they brought back the ultra big conq maps with BF3, BF4, and now BF1.

At least it's not as bad as their TDM/Domnination modes, which are, as i've said many times on here, just a scattering of shipping containers by a flag and presto chango! TDM.

Say what you will about Battlefront, they actually built the maps around the game modes, instead of just making the big map, and squeezing the small modes into the big map. That's the kind of production that will be required for rush to be great again.

Which is a lot of work, You can't just splice one mode's map into another mode. It doesn't really work. I think they do an alright job of it considering, but I really don't see why they think they should care.

What was the #1 complaint about Battlefront? No Maps.

What was the Reality of Battlefront? On launch 4 big maps, and 11 small ones, totalling 15 UNIQUE (non-shared) maps, and then releasing another 3 big ones and 5 small ones for free for around 23 total UNIQUE maps in the vanilla game.

What did everyone see? only 4 "big maps".

That's the reality of designing games for this retarded generation, if you actually deliver a map that's build from the ground up with that particular game mode in mind, then you'll get eaten alive by ignoramuses.

I'd be perfectly happy with 4 RUSH maps, 4 CONQ maps, and 6 TDM/DOM maps. 14 maps on launch, each built by design for that mode, custom catered gameplay experiences, not trying to squeeze every mode under the sun into the same physical map. Every Conq map is MADE for CONQ, they'd all be "good" CONQ maps. And I can see the headlines now: "BF6 HAZ ONLY 4 MAPS, EA IZ THE DEVIL"


Here is how Conquest matches generally breakdown in BF3/BF4/BF1:

A. New players have no idea what class to be, what point should be captured, or how to effectively change the momentum of the match. It looks like chaos to them, but they're having a decent time while getting slaughter because it's a pretty game.

B. A killer squad of uber-experienced players are hogging whatever vehicle is best suited for the map. No one can join their squad or spawn on them. The driver finishes the match with the fewest deaths and his teammates have the highest points in the server. Whether their team wins or loses does not impact their strategy or point totals.

C. Experienced players and left trying to fill in the gaps left by newbs doing nothing helpful and uber-players just helping themselves. But with the unfocused carnage of Conquest, plus the high turnover rate of a 32 player team...maintaining an effective squad is near impossible.

In contrast, Rush forces the situation on both teams with limited access points, limited vehicles and resources, and less time for objectives. All of that leads to teamwork, even in a squad of strangers, and it's possible for single play from a squad or even an individual player to make an impact on the match and change the momentum of battle.

I respect the casual, sandbox nature of Conquest...but disregarding the quality of gaming Rush provides is beyond unfortunate. It's game breaking to me, because I and you know how good Rush once was.
Sep 19, 2016Sep 19 2016
Sep 19, 2016Sep 19 2016
Sep 19, 2016Sep 19 2016
Sep 20, 2016Sep 20 2016
Sep 20, 2016Sep 20 2016
Sep 20, 2016Sep 20 2016
Sep 20, 2016Sep 20 2016
    Re: Battlefield 1 System Specifications
Sep 19, 2016Sep 19 2016
Sep 19, 2016Sep 19 2016
Sep 19, 2016Sep 19 2016
Sep 19, 2016Sep 19 2016
Sep 19, 2016Sep 19 2016
Sep 20, 2016Sep 20 2016
Sep 20, 2016Sep 20 2016
Sep 20, 2016Sep 20 2016
Sep 20, 2016Sep 20 2016