Cyberpunk 2077 System Requirements: Ray Tracing Recs Revealed

Cyberpunk 2077 system requirements
(Image credit: Cyberpunk 2077)

12/7/2020 Update: We have now tested Cyberpunk 2077 benchmarks on a collection of GPUs, using a preview build. Based on our initial testing results, it looks like the official Cyberpunk 2077 system requirements target performance of 30-40 fps.

The official Cyberpunk 2077 system requirements have been updated with recommendations for ultra quality as well as ray tracing. As we expected, running at higher settings and resolutions will need a fair amount of hardware, at least on the graphics card front. After pushing the launch back to December 10 (from November 19), here's the sort of PC hardware you'll need to run the game in all its glory.

We've known that Cyberpunk 2077 will support ray tracing and DLSS 2.x for a while. It's no surprise then that if you want the full fidelity experience, you'll need one of the best graphics cards, something from the top of our GPU benchmarks — and by that, we mean you'll want at least a GeForce RTX GPU. Cyberpunk also requires DirectX 12, though Windows 7 is supported as DX12 has been ported to it.

Jarred Walton
Senior Editor

Jarred Walton is a senior editor at Tom's Hardware focusing on everything GPU. He has been working as a tech journalist since 2004, writing for AnandTech, Maximum PC, and PC Gamer. From the first S3 Virge '3D decelerators' to today's GPUs, Jarred keeps up with all the latest graphics trends and is the one to ask about game performance.

  • hotaru.hino
    The required/recommended hardware listings are kinda of pointless anyway since they don't tell me what I can expect.

    For all I know the required hardware is to run the game at low settings at 1024x768 to get 30FPS.
    Reply
  • King_V
    What sort of experience will this deck get you? CDPR doesn't say, so it might be 720p minimum quality at 30 fps, or it might be 1080p low quality at 60 fps. If we were to hazard a guess, it's closer to the former than the latter.

    and

    hotaru.hino said:
    The required/recommended hardware listings are kinda of pointless anyway since they don't tell me what I can expect.

    For all I know the required hardware is to run the game at low settings at 1024x768 to get 30FPS.

    These are the things that drive me nuts about minimum and recommended requirements - at what resolution and frame rate? It may be pretty egregious here, but it seems like most games don't specify.

    Absolutely maddening!
    Reply
  • maxamillionfeettall
    Ah yes, nothing like trusting your brand new shiny ryzen 3600, b550 board, and rtx 2060 to a apevia branded, andyson built unit with no verification on quality. What can go wrong lol.
    Reply
  • JarredWaltonGPU
    maxamillionfeettall said:
    Ah yes, nothing like trusting your brand new shiny ryzen 3600, b550 board, and rtx 2060 to a apevia branded, andyson built unit with no verification on quality. What can go wrong lol.
    There's a certain level of quality that has to be reached to hit 80 Plus Gold. Plus, the PSU I originally selected is no longer available without spending $100. The reality is that the 'minimum for ray tracing' build will pull about 300W peak from the PSU. For that level of power, any 80 Plus Bronze or higher PSU will suffice. If you want to try loading up 800W on the Apevia? Yeah, that's likely asking for trouble. But basic efficiency and power requirements for a modest PC mean anything should work.

    Let me look around a bit more and see if I can find a better alternative. The PSU price spikes are painful, though! I just want a 550W or higher 80 Plus Bronze PSU for $50. They were readily available a year ago, but not now.

    Ah, here's a Thermaltake 600W Gold for $70. I don't know if it's really better than the Apevia (might even be the same ODM), but the 600W rating is much more believable. https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16817153395
    Reply
  • maxamillionfeettall
    JarredWaltonGPU said:
    Ah, here's a Thermaltake 600W Gold for $70.
    IIRC, that thermaltake is a slightly cut down, if not the exact same as the GX1. At the very least it's been tested and uses a known cwt platform. I'd personally rate it more trustworthy.
    Reply
  • Chung Leong
    The obvious question is how well did Witcher 3 perform under minimum specs. The minimum GPU is GeForce GTX 660 or Radeon HD 7870. Here're some numbers from a Polish site. The cards are all at or below minimum as far as I can tell.


    At lower resolution:

    Reply
  • NP
    Worst article I have read in ages from TH.

    Suggesting you need and Nvidia gpu for the game to look good.
    Saying we have no idea about the fps these setups would yield, and then pulling literally from thin air ideas about what fps these setups would yield.
    Trying to sell new hardware, even with prices listed.
    No actual new information about absolutely anything.
    Don't even get me started with "processors from 2012"... Like, its about a decade since we lived in an era where 8 years of processor technology actually meant something in GPU intensive games (especially ones to be gamed at high resolutions).
    Just a load of crap that may only make sense if you care about tech as such. If you focused on how much your tech investment brings you gaming performance, then you'd realize that you constantly get less and less for the same money. A decade ago a top notch gpu was max 600e, now 1000e or more (and no, its not about inflation, inflation would make that 600e card in 2010 be equivalent of 690e in 2020).

    So. Stop saying some recommended specs are wrong if you have nothing concrete to back your claims up with. Stop suggesting you need an nvidia RTX card to enjoy games. Stop blowing hot air in new tech, when purchasing new tech gives you increasingly diminishing returns with every passing year. Thanks.
    Reply
  • JarredWaltonGPU
    NP said:
    Worst article I have read in ages from TH.

    Suggesting you need and Nvidia gpu for the game to look good.
    Saying we have no idea about the fps these setups would yield, and then pulling literally from thin air ideas about what fps these setups would yield.
    Trying to sell new hardware, even with prices listed.
    No actual new information about absolutely anything.
    Don't even get me started with "processors from 2012"... Like, its about a decade since we lived in an era where 8 years of processor technology actually meant something in GPU intensive games (especially ones to be gamed at high resolutions).Just a load of crap that may only make sense if you care about tech as such. If you focused on how much your tech investment brings you gaming performance, then you'd realize that you constantly get less and less for the same money. A decade ago a top notch gpu was max 600e, now 1000e or more (and no, its not about inflation, inflation would make that 600e card in 2010 be equivalent of 690e in 2020).

    So. Stop saying some recommended specs are wrong if you have nothing concrete to back your claims up with. Stop suggesting you need an nvidia RTX card to enjoy games. Stop blowing hot air in new tech, when purchasing new tech gives you increasingly diminishing returns with every passing year. Thanks.
    I've been testing and reviewing games for a long time. I am confident that a lot of people are excited to play Cyberpunk 2077 on PC, and many people are even excited to have a chance to put their RTX cards to good use for a change. Having a "recommended" PC that can't enable ray tracing effects in a game where they'll actually matter? That's pretty bad.

    The minimum spec hardware listed for Cyberpunk 2077 would have issues at times maintaining 60 fps with The Witcher 3 (especially in large cities) -- mostly because of the older CPUs listed. 30-45 fps, though, sure -- no problem! But there's no way Cyberpunk 2077 is less demanding than The Witcher 3, so no, I don't trust the specs from CD Projekt Red at all.

    I've seen good system requirements from other companies. Doom Eternal gave specs, settings, and performance targets for both min and recommended hardware. The Division 2 gave low, medium, high, 1440p, and 4K recommendations in its system requirements, including fps targets as well (30 for low, 60 for the others). So, when CDPR gives no details other than min and recommended, and the recommended specs look appropriate for medium quality? Yup, I call bunk. Check back in two months and we'll have benchmarks, and you'll discover exactly the level of performance you get from a variety of GPUs and CPUs.

    As far as Nvidia, they're the only ray tracing game in town right now. I mention AMD's upcoming Big Navi multiple times and suggest waiting to see how it performs. But it won't support DLSS -- that's Nvidia exclusive tech, and as much as AMD likes to pretend it doesn't really matter, the fact is that it actually does matter quite a bit for anyone wanting smooth framerates at 4K on modest hardware.

    FWIW, the original title was "Cyberpunk 2077 System Requirements: I Don't Trust CD Projekt Red" -- but that didn't fit the Google headline length requirements so it got tweaked.
    Reply
  • ryanlionrah
    I guess the author clearly didn't see this blog post in which CDPR clarifies what minimum and recommended is supposed to get you: https://support.cdprojektred.com/en/cyberpunk/pc/sp-technical/issue/1556/cyberpunk-2077-system-requirements
    Reply
  • Murissokah
    JarredWaltonGPU said:
    I've been testing and reviewing games for a long time. I am confident that a lot of people are excited to play Cyberpunk 2077 on PC, and many people are even excited to have a chance to put their RTX cards to good use for a change. Having a "recommended" PC that can't enable ray tracing effect in a game where they'll actually matter? That's pretty bad.

    The minimum spec hardware listed for Cyberpunk 2077 would have issues at times maintaining 60 fps with The Witcher 3 (especially in large cities) -- mostly because of the older CPUs listed. 30-45 fps, though, sure -- no problem! But there's no way Cyberpunk 2077 is less demanding than The Witcher 3, so no, I don't trust the specs from CD Projekt Red at all.

    As far as Nvidia, they're the only ray tracing game in town right now. I mention AMD's upcoming Big Navi multiple times and suggest waiting to see how it performance.

    Hi Jarred. The article didn't read like trying to sell me hardware, but it did come off a bit strong. I guess you probably knew the words "don't trust CDPR" would cause some recoil.

    I got the point that the recommended hardware still doesn't include some interesting features that people may care about, but it seems at least strange to call the recommendation bunk and subsequently acknowledge that we can't possibly know what their vision for the game is. It's kinda their call here.

    Thanks for the thorough analysis on the features that we might be missing on the game, though, that was a good read and maybe something CDPR could've mentioned in their requirements. Not that we needed any more reason to want a new GPU after what NVidia has thrown at us, but it might just tip the scale on a guilty purchase.
    Reply