World in Conflict Hardware Performance Guide

World in Conflict running a little sluggish? We'll tell you what you need to upgrade to get the most out of the game.

World in Conflict relives the cold war in a very different way. Instead of closing the cold war with a gradual drawdown and anticlimactic whimper, Russia launches an all-out invasion of the United States. The developers went all out on the graphics to render the scope of these battles. Well-designed small towns and massive cities are common these days, but World in Conflict's skyline, smoke trails, and explosions will leave you breathless.

We used World in Conflict's built-in benchmark for our testing. The demo shows off numerous special effects that include the water, clouds, shadowing, and the now-infamous nuclear blast. We averaged the results of three separate runs to generate our final scores.

Game Settings
World in Conflict has a tremendous number of settings, so many that you'll have to enable or disable several of them to affect performance significantly. We toggle all of them to find out which settings will give you back the most performance.

Graphics
DirectX 10 support, a minimum requirement of Direct X9.0c, and deformable terrain all mean one thing: You're going to need a good video card. The minimum specs require at least a GeForce 6600 GT, but we'd recommend going a few notches higher. Check out the graphics section to find out how the game performs across a variety of video cards as well as in Windows Vista with DirectX 10.

CPU
World in Conflict loves CPU cores. If you're on an aging Pentium 4 or a single-core Athlon 64 you will really want to consider upgrading to a dual-core chip.

Memory
World in Conflict requires 512MB of memory in XP and 1GB of memory in Vista. We tested the game with 512MB, 1GB, 2GB, and 3GB of RAM to see how much memory the game really needs to function. The game barely loads with 512MB of system memory and actually automatically disables numerous graphics options.

Sample System Performance

We put together a few sample systems to show how the game performed using real-world computers. Our single-core Pentium 4 2.8GHz system with GeForce 6800 barely ran the game with low settings at 1024x768. The AMD Athlon 64 4000+ with Radeon X1650 XT put up decent performance at 1280x1024 with medium settings, although to get it playable we had to dial the resolution down to 1024x768. The dual-core Athlon 64 FX-60 paired with Radeon X1900 XT 256MB ran very well at 1280x1024 with medium settings. Both of our Intel Core 2 setups paired with GeForce 8800 series cards ran World in Conflict very well, but the GeForce 8800 GTX, 2.93GHz Intel Core 2 system tripled the frame rates of our GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB system.

System Setup: Intel Core 2 X6800, Intel Core 2 E6600, Intel 975XBX2, 2GB Corsair XMS Memory (1GB x 2), 160GB Seagate 7200.7 SATA Hard Disk Drive, Windows Vista. Graphics Cards: GeForce 8800 GTX 768MB, XFX GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB XXX Edition, beta Nvidia ForceWare 163.44.
Athlon 64 FX-60, Athlon 64 4000+, Asus A8R32 MVP Deluxe, 1GB Corsair XMS Memory (512MB x 2), 160GB Seagate 7200.7 SATA Hard Disk Drive, Windows XP Professional SP2. Graphics Cards: Radeon X1900 XT 256MB, Radeon X1650 XT 256MB, ATI Catalyst 7.9.
Intel Pentium 4 2.8GHz, Asus P4C800, 1GB Corsair XMS Memory (512MB x 2), 160GB Seagate 7200.7 SATA Hard Disk Drive, Windows XP Professional SP2. Graphics Card: GeForce 6800 128MB, beta Nvidia ForceWare 163.44.

Game Settings

World in Conflict has pages of tweakable settings. We found that most individual settings don't sap performance too much, but your frame rates will rapidly deteriorate once you start enabling all the settings. With settings like "windows on buildings," "flowers and bushes," and "grass," the game slices and dices your computer with the death of a thousand cuts. One setting here, another there, and suddenly those Russian tanks are approaching you in a slide show.

The game has a handful of grouped settings that automatically turn off five or more other settings when disabled. We have image-quality comparisons on the following pages that demonstrate how the game looks with the settings enabled and disabled.

The preset image quality settings vary quite a bit. The difference between medium and low is the most drastic and yields nearly triple the performance. You can easily free up some performance between very high quality and high quality by lowering the amount of antialiasing, because the very high quality setting has a preset of 4xAA.

System Setup: Intel Core 2 X6800, Intel 975XBX2, 2GB Corsair XMS Memory (1GBx2), 160GB Seagate 7200.7 SATA Hard Disk Drive, Windows XP Professional SP2. Graphics Card: GeForce 8600 GTS, Nvidia ForceWare 163.44

Image Quality Comparison

Mouse over the default screenshot to see the comparison image.

Very High Quality DirectX 10 vs. High Quality DirectX 10


Very High Quality DirectX 9 vs. High Quality DirectX 9


High Quality DirectX 9 vs. Medium Quality


Medium Quality vs. Low Quality


Low Quality vs. Very Low Quality


Image Quality Comparison Continued

Mouse over the default screenshot to see the comparison image.

Very High Quality DirectX 10 vs. Very High Quality DirectX 9


High Quality DirectX 10 vs. High Quality DirectX 9


Pixel Shaders High vs. Pixel Shaders Low – DirectX9


Post Processing Enabled vs. Post Processing Disabled – DirectX9


Clouds Enabled vs. Clouds Disabled – DirectX9


Image Quality Comparison Continued

Mouse over the default screenshot to see the comparison image.

High Quality Terrain Enabled vs. High Quality Terrain Disabled


Bloom Enabled vs. Bloom Disabled


Shadows Enabled vs. Shadows Disabled


Texture Quality High vs. Texture Quality Low


World Distance Detail Very High vs. World Distance Very Low


Z-Feather Enabled vs. Z-Feather Disabled


Video Cards

World in Conflict requires a video card that supports DirectX9.0c, which means you will need at the very minimum an Nvidia GeForce 6600 series, ATI Radeon X1300 series, or better card. World in Conflict is playable on the weaker DirectX 9.0c cards, but you're going to need a powerhouse to get the game looking its best.

Performance scaled as expected with single video-card solutions, but dual-card configurations gave us problems. The GeForce 8800 GTX SLI setup performed the same as our single GeForce 8800 GTX, and our CrossFire Radeon HD 2900 XT crashed the game on loading. The dual-card setups tend to offer spotty performance on new games before Nvidia and ATI rush out their patches.

The game looks great in DirectX 9, but World in Conflict might be the first game that will actually make you consider splurging on a DirectX 10-capable video card and Windows Vista. The DirectX 10 card and Vista give you access to two additional graphics options: DirectX 10 rendering and cloud shadows. Both add a tremendous amount of detail to the game's skyline.

System Setup: Intel Core 2 X6800, Intel 975XBX2, eVGA 680i SLI, 2GB Corsair XMS Memory (1GBx2), 160GB Seagate 7200.7 SATA Hard Disk Drive, Windows XP Professional SP2. Graphics Cards: GeForce 8800 GTX 768MB, GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB, XFX GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB XXX Edition, GeForce 8600 GTS 256MB, GeForce 8600 GT 256MB, GeForce 7900 GS 256MB, GeForce 7600 GT 256MB, GeForce 6800 128MB, GeForce 6600GT 128MB, Radeon HD 2900 XT 512MB, Radeon HD 2600 XT 256MB, Radeon HD 2600 Pro 256MB, Radeon HD 2400 XT 256MB, Radeon X1950 XTX 512MB, Radeon X1900 XTX 512MB, Radeon X1900 XT 256MB, Radeon X1950 Pro 256MB, Radeon X1650 XT 256MB, Radeon X1300 XT 256MB. Graphics Drivers: beta Nvidia ForceWare163.44, ATI Catalyst 7.9

CPU

Most of our Intel Core 2 CPUs performed well in World in Conflict, but the tests showed us that clock speeds actually matter again. Our 1.86GHz Core 2 E6300 was 30% slower than the 2.4GHz Core 2.

System Setup: Intel Core 2 X6800, Intel Core 2 Duo E6600, Intel Core 2 Duo E6300, Intel 975XBX2, AMD Athlon 64 FX-60, AMD Athlon 64 4000+, ASUS A8R32-MVP Deluxe, 2GB Corsair XMS Memory (1GBx2), 160GB Seagate 7200.7 SATA Hard Disk Drive, Windows XP Professional SP2. Graphics Card: GeForce 8800 GTX, beta Nvidia ForceWare 163.44.

Memory

World in Conflict requires 512MB of RAM in Windows XP, and 1GB when run in Vista. God help whoever actually tries to play the game with only 512MB of memory. The game is atrocious with only the minimum required memory. Load times were long, and the game stuttered far too much. The game even grays out all the preset settings higher than low quality, although you can still manually enable the settings one by one in the advanced menu.

Performance plateaued once we pushed both systems up to 2GB of RAM. Load times dropped considerably, and the frame rates increased by quite a bit in Windows XP.

System Setup: Intel Core 2 X6800, Intel 975XBX2, 2GB Corsair XMS Memory (1GB x 2), Corsair XMS Memory 1GB (512MB x 2), Corsair XMS Memory 512MB, 160GB Seagate 7200.7 SATA Hard Disk Drive, Windows XP Professional SP2, Windows Vista. Graphics Card: GeForce 8800 GTX 768MB, beta Nvidia ForceWare 163.44.

Written By

Want the latest news about World in Conflict?

World in Conflict

World in Conflict

Follow

Discussion

252 comments
Senaddd
Senaddd

2.2 GHz dual core 2 GB ddr2 800 mhz ram 8800 gt 512 XP service pack 2 35 fps on very high

JackHoleFace00
JackHoleFace00

Ha! I'm just glad I can get this game running at all! I have: -3.0 GHz Pentium 4 -2.5 GB DDR 400 MHz RAM -256 MB GeForce 7600 -Windows XP w/ Service Pack 2 (wouldn't be able to play if I had Vista!) It's not the best, but certainly playable, so I'm happy. Basically runs around 30 fps most of the time, though it can get real choppy during things like nukes or tons of onscreen action (esp. on the map "Typhoon"). I probably would've upgraded by now, but with Windows Vista being such a disaster (including being a major memory hog), I'm waiting for Windows 7 to be released... which will hopefully be next year, though I'm not holding my breath.

JackHoleFace00
JackHoleFace00

[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]

asian_man
asian_man

Help? my computer can only do 24fps in this game with all the setting put on high at 1440 by 900 I have a AMD phenom 2.2ghz quad, ATI 3870 512, 4GB and win vista ultimate, what do I do to get the frame rates up?

Pixy64
Pixy64

I think i need better CPU for great run AMD X2 5200+ is not very well with this game cause with GEFORCE 8800 GTX and 2GB Ram DDR800 and win vista x64 i still see low frame rate in some mission yeah unstable frame rate in this game with all PC

pinkyfull
pinkyfull

I must say that the next-gen cards and dual core zGPU's offer a great alternative to the old 8800's i recently upgraded form an 8800gt to a 9800 gtx and the performance (even though VRAM is the same) in almost all games is much better(ps3cooly21)

MgunHunter
MgunHunter

Quote: "I'm getting more into PC gaming. But the high-ass costs of GPUs and bi-anual need to upgrade them keeps me with consoles." -nate1222 Who the heck upgrades twice a year? Last upgrade I did was about a year ago, and that was just for RAM. I've been running my 7900GS for a long time now.

MajinBuXL
MajinBuXL

The bult-in benchmark really pushes your graphics card above and beyond what you'll need to actually play the game. I maxed everything out and got pretty bad framerates with my 8600GT, I was scared for a moment i couldn't play the game but i tried the campaign and finished it with those same settings and never went down on framerates, ran like a dream. The benchmark, i think, is really only for multiplayer. I think thats where all the mayhem is even though i havent tried that part of the game yet.

harrygordon1000
harrygordon1000

@ps3cooly21 The fact that you are trying to judge the 8400GS on the amount of VRAM it has worries me. I suspect that WiC will chew the 8400GS up and spit it out. I've seen this game giving the 8600GT a damn good run for it's money (20FPS on reasonably high settings). IMHO, anything other than an 8800GT isn't worth having around - particularly given current price points. :P

ps3cooly21
ps3cooly21

8400 gs i think that sould work too i hope cos its got 256mb which for most games is good or better

123456_1267
123456_1267

8800GT 512MB Pentium D820 2 X 2.8ghz 2gig 800mhz ram (xp) runs on 1680 x 1050 on high at around 30-40fps great game well worth buying.

jorgebm2
jorgebm2

Specs: AMD Athlon X2 6400+ 2GB Ram Nvidia 8600GT 512MB will it run on high settings not extreme

gah468
gah468

im getting a new comp: 2.4 pentium core im think and an 8800 single sli card is it any good?

Ski_Spastic
Ski_Spastic

I don't understand this, I have an E 6600, 4 GB RAM, a 8800 GTS 512 MB card, and a 150GB WD Raptor X, and I'm averaging 8 FPS in 1600x1200 high settings, and 1280x1024 high...what gives?

EdwardX2
EdwardX2

lol guys... i got a pc thats 7 years old, 2 ghz processor, nvidia 6200 and 756 mb ram and still running WiC smoothly on very low (whatever) with 30-37 fps ;P

nate1222
nate1222

I'm getting more into PC gaming. But the high-ass costs of GPUs and bi-anual need to upgrade them keeps me with consoles. I'm well aware that the best XBox360 games are often on PC. Hell, I own Oblivion on both platforms. I own Mass Effect on 360 and plan to buy the PC version in May. But I'm only buying PC games that have mucho replay value, as I CAN'T TRADE them in once they're finished. This also keeps me from investing too much in a GPU.

gurkhafromcuba
gurkhafromcuba

when i play the game shuts down in single player and multiplayer its only just started since i started using online and it comes up with world in conflict has stopped workin . it worked well all through single player an since playin multiplayer its keeps closin . anyone no y this might b

ima_lemming
ima_lemming

how does it measure the graphics cars performance? is it in frames per second?

beast____
beast____

i'm running dual 8500gt 1gb cards. anybody know if i can run on high?

kiddo1212
kiddo1212

ShadeofChaoS, i have exactly the same results but 2gb of ram and e2140 2.3ghz(oc). Its true you can get max everything at 800x600 res at a fps of 25....If you add in the nuke it drops to about 11fps. I have 2 PCs by the way. My first is with a e2140,2gb ddr2 p5k pro and a 7600gt 512. My the other is a P5N 32 E Sli with q6600 oc to 3.0ghz, 2gb ram and a MSI NX8800Gt 512.... The second run all at max at 1440x900 max is 57fps and lowest is 19fps(nuke part)... I have a spares of 3 n6600 128gddr3 and 1 6800 ultra... Yes i am a PC freak...

hassam7
hassam7

DirectX 10 is slightly better in detail and lighting.

ShadeofChaoS
ShadeofChaoS

This game have bad rendering. Dunno why so many play it, probably cuz america have the " being-attacked " phobia.

rathalos
rathalos

My computer specs are: Windows XP SP2 AMD athlon 64 X2 4200 dual core processor 2GB RAM Nividia GeForce 8800GT 512MB What settings can I run in with screen resolution of 1024 X 768 ?

i_exodus
i_exodus

Forget about use intel video card to run game.

horsman123
horsman123

to Vivian_the_slut (lol nice name btw) u seem to have an excellent graphics card as it ishowever you are still experiencing problems. the only answer which i can think of is that the game is not running well on your pc because you DO NOT have dedicated memory on your graphics cards which most modern games such as world in conflict require! hoped i helped with your problem!

APerryman
APerryman

Will this setup work with this game and Call Of Duty 4? Windows Vista, Direct X 10, 2048mb Ram, Intel Core 2 Duo CPU T7500 @2.20 GHz and Mobile Intel(R) 965 Express Chipset Family. Its a upgraded Dell Inspiron 1520. Can you message me if it will.

Vivian_the_slut
Vivian_the_slut

can someone tell me why my computer doesn't seem to run that well, i have an amd 6000 3.02 ghz, 4gb of ram, a geforce 8800gts, directx 10, running vista home premium 64 bit, but i struggle getting it to run that fast even on low quality settings

rokkuman09
rokkuman09

intel-gamer, you don't need to get a new processor, yours is quite fast. Most games show little benifet from having a quad over a dual core currently. I would suggest you go with the 8800GTS G92, it has about the same performance as a 8800 GTX and in some benchmarks I have seen actually beats it by a little. Although it is not much faster than the 8800GT it has a MUCH better cooler, the cooler on the GT is not the greatest. But don't get me wrong.. the GT is a great card, I just think you should spend a little extra and get the GTS G92.

intel-gamer
intel-gamer

I have a Intel E6600 at 2.4 Ghz Oced to 3.0Ghz, 8800 GTS 320Mb, 2 GB ram, Xp and Vista dual boot, 7200 rpm 250GB hd. On XP, World in conflict at 16xAA,16xAF, 1400x900 res, everything else on Maximum, In the benchmark I got an Average of 27fps. On Vista, at 16xAA, 16xAF, 1400x900 res, everything else on max with DX10, I got an Average of 8 FPS. On Vista, at 16xAA, 16xAF, 1400x900 res, everthing on max without DX10, I got an Average of 11 FPS. When I Overclocked my 8800 GTS 320 MB, it increased The Average FPS on Vista and XP up by 2 FPS on all Configurations. PS. should i get a 8800GTX, 8800GT, 8800 GTS (G92 verson with 512MB), or upgrade my processer. Thanks.

belfador
belfador

QuadCore Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600, 2400 MHz (9 x 267) Asus P5B 2048 MB (DDR2-800 DDR2 SDRAM) NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT (512 MB) Microsoft Windows XP Professional On very high at 1440x900 = 47fps+ great game!

Sam_Fisher_932
Sam_Fisher_932

@proplaya07 You say that you can run WiC on a Radeon 9250 on High Settings perfectly? I wonder what perfect is to you, lol.

Iffy350
Iffy350

@Kerosine18 I run with a similar setup and the game runs on very high. Its an awesome game by the way.

Kerosine18
Kerosine18

I play this game on: - AMD Athlon 5200+ Dual Core - Nvidia 8800GTS 320MB - 250GB Hard Disc - 2GB TakeMS RAM Runs very well, without glitches and High or Very High graphics, not sure which one exactly. ---- Also ran, albeit with MUCH LOWER graphics on my cousin's computer with merely a GeForce FX5200 (Pre-dates the GeForce 6 Series)..So, if you have a very low spec graphics card but you have an FX-Series GeForce you might be able to run the game at 800x600 at acceptable Frame Rates - but don't expect anything like the above pics ;)

Speedyme
Speedyme

To all that are wondering wether their system could hold up World in Conflict i suggest they check www.nzone.com. its a nividia website that checks your system and tells you wether you make the minimum requirements as well as the recommended requirements. It also has the choices of other games such as crysis, supreme commander, ect. Besides that gamespot always offers demo's for the games that it can. check the downloads tab and youll see a demo for this game. i was about to buy a new videocard to play world in conflict until i saw that i met the requirements. =D saved me 100 dollars

Joe-Mamma-13
Joe-Mamma-13

Processor type AMD Turion™ 64 X2 Mobile Technology TL-58 • , Level 2 cache 512 KB + 512 KB, Up to 1600 MHz system bus running at AC/DC mode 35 Watt Operating system installed Genuine Windows Vista® Home Premium 32-bit Standard memory 2048 MB Maximum memory Supports up to 2 GB DDR2 memory Memory layout (2 x 1024 MB) Internal drives Internal hard disk drive 160 GB Hard disk controller SATA Hard Disk Drive Hard disk drive speed 5400 rpm Optical drive type Lightscribe Super Multi DVD Writer (+/-R +/-RW) with Double Layer support Video adapter NVIDIA® GeForce™ 7150M Video RAM Up to 559 MB total available graphics memory Remote control HP Mobile Remote Control Internal audio 3D Sound Blaster Pro compatible sound 16 bit integrated Do you think is hould buy WiC for this laptop? Will it work?

proplaya07
proplaya07

I've got an ATI radeon 9250 and it runs perfect on the high settings, but these tips like turn the shadowing off and turn the long distance detail off make a big difference to people with older graphics cards like my-self.

sure2not
sure2not

i have this game on low specs, but its still awesome, you guys need to get this game!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

rokkuman09
rokkuman09

Iffy350 is it a 320MB or 640MB GTS, or is it the new G92 based 512MB ones? Anyway I think you should be able to play it with most settings on high (But some on low so it stays smooth in battles and everything).

Iffy350
Iffy350

I wanna be a ruskie and nook some neocons! Regan Smash!

BraveArc
BraveArc

I get a pretty good but simetimes sluggish framerate.My comp. specs: Penium 4 3.4Ghz ATi radeon x550 256MB 2GB ram Vista business 32-bit

rx7neon
rx7neon

Umm, this isn't Crysis.

Iffy350
Iffy350

I have an AMD Athlon 64 FX-60 Dual Core and one Nvidia GeForce 8800 GTS! How well would this set up run Crisis? Also: 2.61 GHz and 2.95 GB of RAM + 500 Gig HD

haz13
haz13

I run this on medium/high at 1024x768 with: Pentium 4 (3GHz) 1GB DDR RAM 7950 GT 512mb Getting an extra 2GB of RAM soon!

kd_kash
kd_kash

vista 64-bit 8gb ram 2x 8800 ultra Intel Q6600.Runs with all setting on and very high setting with 1600 x 1050 res.

Colonel-sidewin
Colonel-sidewin

7600GT xxx. AMD athlon X2 4200+ 2GB 600.mhz. Runns great at 1440x900 (HD 16:10). Without the Antialiasing on,

BorkaBonum
BorkaBonum

2900XT 788/900, AMD Athlon X2 6000+ 3266mhz, 2GB CL4 800mhz kicking at a average 30FPS at high(est) with 2xAF and 2xAA.