You DO have atleast a 4070 to play starfield at 1080p 60 fps right?
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
You DO have atleast a 4070 to play starfield at 1080p 60 fps right?
You DO have atleast a 4070 to play starfield at 1080p 60 fps right?
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
|
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
fsr3 fixes this on my 3070 based AMD
How do I download FSR3? They said it works on all cards not just AMD? Is it like a driver or something?
FSR3 is not out yet. And it has to be implemented by the developers of the game, just like FSR1&2 and DLSS2&3. It's not something the user can do on its own.
But, if you own an AMD card, you can enable a lower-quality version of FSR3 on any DX11 and DX12 game. From the drivers.
But as I said, it's not out yet. And no one tested it either, so we don't know how good (or shit) it is.
FSR3 is only going to help you get to 120, it doesn't even work below 60fps without stutter. You're not going to be using it to double your 30fps game ever.
bethesda is not on the FSR 3.0 list for supported developers sorry.
AMD announced FSR3 for some games and Starfield isn't on the list. Sorry anon.
got a 980 TI
going to play it at 720, 60 fps
don't care
>at 720, 60 fps
Make that 480p and you might do something
Based. That's how I played Cyberpunk 2077 on my 1050ti laptop.
hope you have a cpu thats faster than a 5600x or you wont be able to get to 60 fps even at 720p
Bros you said that even a 3060 is a 1080p60 god… this can’t be happening to me!
>3060 Ti can't crack 50fps average on 1080p
>can't crack 50fps average on 1080p
>my 2060's reaction when
>ultra settings no fsr
you'll be fine, just turn down volumetric lighting and shadows
t. 200 hours in fallout 4
It's still unimpressive, especially considering Starfield doesn't look noticeably different from Fallout 4.
Look I love Fallout 4 but Starfield night and day looks better than Fallout 4.
it barely looks any better
also everything looks fricking weird size wise
maybe it's the fov? or is it just everything fricked
If we're comparing vanilla to vanilla that is. Unless you've modded the frick out of your FO4 there just simply is no comparison.
FO4 looks downright nasty in places, not to mention quite possibly the worst LODs in any game ever.
>600+ dollar gpu required to hit 1080p 60
I'm starting to think that Starfield is a test to see how many people will spend their well-collected good goy points to buy the most expensive goycards to consume the epic goyslop
there are 2 other games that came out last month that have around the same requirements so.
all games this year are fricked with optimisation despite looking like they are from 2018s. It's an industry conspiracy.
more buzzwords next time chud. you will never have sex
ok israelite, oy vey
>Ultra
That's a fricking meme outside comparing GPUs
I have a 3080 but I won't be playing in a long while since it's a Bethesda game. Even pirating their games during release year is idiotic.
>ultra settings
Scale back to high and you'll double your framerate, as usual.
you get 10% back after scaling down to low and you WILL like it.
more like just turn the shadow settings down to good and it fixes everything
I have a 7900 XTX but I'm not going to buy starfield, I just bought it because it was the cheapest way to get 24GB of Vram.
>24gb ram
>can't use cuda so it's all for videogames
lol
lmao
>card causes crashes because Nvidia are israelites that gaslit everyone into thinking 8GB is fine in the 2020s
The reduction in the number of crashes saved me far more time than being able to use cuda in rendering, especially given I have a machine dedicated to that.
>all for videogames
Yes, and? We're on Ganker not Ganker.
ROCm and HIP.
Eat shit.
>ROCm and HIP.
nobody uses that broken mess
didnt you get starfield free with the gpu?
>Get Flopspoken as a free game offered with the GPU
AAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH SAVE ME MAMA SU
Can you show high?
i only have a 2060 super, hopefully i can just do 60 fps low settings. but probably won't buy it anyway
Dont even have a super but Im not worried, the 2060 has held up for me so far at 1080 over 60 for most games I want to play. Bg3 I was able to max out and still run over 70 most of the time. Between that and dlss mods well be good I think although I imagine Ill have to cave in the next year just hoping I can hold out for 50 series so I can grab a 30 when the prices come down a bit
I have a 4070 and want to play on my 4ktv and this graphic makes it seem like that ain’t gonna happen unless I make sacrifices
Jannies are deleting started threads now. It's over
i think i'm good
I have a 4090 and even I am appalled by this goyslop lmao disgusting.
>I have a 4090
sub 60 fps confirmed at 1440p even with FSR 2
does "fsr ultra" stand for ultra quality or ultra performance?
likely means ultra settings, fsr2 on
>1440p
>Furry shit two (2)
>4090
>Below 60fps
Time to boycot the industry. Also, first day patch and mods will fix it cope need not reply.
wtf its over
post yt link I need to spread this
Hold up this is 60 fps locked, its from the ign preformance review, not unlocked 4090 performance.
Why are people running FSR2 on NVIDIA HARDWARE? HOW FRICKING moronic ARE YOU?
AMD paid Bethesda to not include DLSS. They have a partnership.
>believing Ganker lies
LMFAO DO YOU SEE HOW BAD THOSE TEXTURES ARE???
Battlefield 1 from 2016 runs at 144 fps on a fricking 1060 and the textures are 10 times better holy shit.
cope poorgay just buy a 4090
I've already got a rtx3090 i12900 rig lmfao ur the poor brazillian c**t spending their time shilling badly made games. Im gonna stick playing my 2016 games at 4k 240 fps that look better than any game released so far this year.
>rtx 3090
lol i had that outdated shit a year ago, if your not poor just buy a 4090
>3000$ PC can't run it at 1440p with upscaling
Videogames are fricking over.
>Good thing it has dls-ACK
you can swap dlss into any game that has FSR. I played through tiny tina's borderlands with it
costs money now though
puredark mostly mods DLSS into games that don't have it, swapping FSR for DLSS is a much simpler process, don't need puredark to do it
He's a homosexual, and I hope he gets hacked and the mod gets spread around like herpes.
Imagine trying to get rich off mods. Fricking Black person.
>We've now reached the point where fricking mods have DRM
It's all so tiresome
2080 ti, why the frick do I need that.
>ultra settings
I PLAY videogames, I don't use them to take screenshots or run meme benchmarks
looks bad but I'll wait for HUB video
>playing on ultra
>ever
lol, just lmao even
t. poorgay latrinas who cant afford modern hardware
Most gamers that actually play vidya are poor. The ones that can afford top modern hardware do so to flex they don't even play vidya. They just do benchmarks jerkoff to the high fps and then close the game.
Yeah those are all the poorgay latin americans who play CSGO because it's free. They're not the target market for Starkino.
how does the steam hardware survey even work? sometimes i get it and then go a long time without it, one time i got it on my laptop and not my desktop, does that skew the results because i have two systems? is there a way to force it to run on my desktop so the stats represent what i game on most of the time instead of my laptop
It's random sampling, that's how statistics work.
>7/10
Why would I want to?
2080 ti
4690k devil's canyon chads.
I've got a 4790k, was running it at 90 degrees for a good year and it still works fine. Shits bomb proof.
>90 degrees
Old pic it has a 6950xt now but you really should get a better cooler
I already did, it had turned out my old cooler had essentially died. Got a big heat sink which seems to be cooling it fine, never really goes above 70 now.
I've got mine overclocked to 4.4ghz, which seems to run most stuff fine, only some very CPU heavy stuff like late game grand strategy games and total war games with more than two armies on the field ever really seems to test it to its limits.
weird I can run warhammer 3 fine, got a 2080 ti though not sure what you got. wh3 does run like shit but it got better.
Oh warhammer 3 runs fine, but if you have four full stacks on the same map then that's when it starts to get a bit laggy.
Shit runs games like a monster all these years later, even goes past 4.00 ghz which never knew it could really.
Who the frick needs anything more when your cpu is literally named the devil.
It is showing its age though but holy shit just don't fall for the 2k/4k meme I guess. never bought a 2k/4k monitor as all I have are billions of 1080p tvs and monitors.
>even goes past 4.00 ghz which never knew it could really.
I OCed mine to 4.6 ghz all cores.
nice didnt really ever feel the need too OC it plus it would've died a lot faster. been with this build for so long all I ever changed was a 980 too a 2080 ti and 16 gigs of ddr3 ram but I know sooner or later I gotta bite the bullet and do a full mobo and cpu upgrade.
You're not going to be needing a hardware upgrade soon if all you do is play 1080p. The GPU is more important, that 4790k is going to last you a few more years.
Its 4690k but yeah its still fine. the 2080 ti still plays most games on high-ultra.
>just don't fall for the 2k/4k meme I guess
resolution is irrelevant to CPU performance moronbro
>resolution is irrelevant to CPU performance
look it up, it does effect it. you are moronic.
no it doesn't. You fricking look it up dumb Black person
>cpu bound game
>No it doesnt
moron
>effect it
affect
90 is high unless its OC'd or not with a duel fan cpu cooler.
I'll be getting 7800XT anyways.
why is there no dlss though? FSR still looks awful.
you're gonna spend 500 bucks to play at 1080p?
Amd sponsorship blocked dlss
No it didn't.
doesn't look too hot sister. you can compare it to 6950 xt and shave of few %
Much lower power draw, much better RT and will work better with future FSR. 6000 series is outdated.
rt is a meme outside of 1080p with a 4090
Is this for real, the game looks ugly for it to require that much power.
My 6700XT + 5800X3D can probably handle 1440p 60fps high settings.
this but with FSR performance mode.
I'd rather lower graphics settings than use FSR.
>none of them reaching 100fps
pc gaming is depressing these past few years
1440p ultra + fsr
Yeah I'm thinking it's gaming time.
3060 bros... it's over
You can play at 1440p60fps, just you'll have to use high/low settings mix.
No. I have a 1650. How fricked am I?
If you don't mind playing a blurry game with FSR then you will probably be fine.
https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/starfield-pc-performance-best-settings-fsr-2/
https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/starfield-pc-performance-best-settings-fsr-2/
https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/starfield-pc-performance-best-settings-fsr-2/
>Starfield is clearly designed around FSR 2
>Starfield is clearly designed around FSR 2
>Starfield is clearly designed around FSR 2
>Render Resolution: 75%
FSR/DLSS is objectively better than TAA and I'm tired of pretending it's not.
Which is why FSR3 is getting the Native+ setting. No upscaling, slightly better quality and 5-10% fps gain.
DLSS might be, but dont lump FSR in with it. FSR is eye cancer.
spotted the cultist
Yeah, the cult of having eyesight.
Plenty of non biased videos on the matter
based
This shit should be available for EVERY GPU's
I've noticed the ghosting with moving characters shows the devs hadnt even adjusted for the correct settings for FSR, they just copy pasted settings from a simple config and didnt even test for motion.
These guys are frickin morons.
But it runs at 4K 60FPS on a 7900XTX, max settings. Actual 4K, no upscaling.
If this game is "designed for FSR", what the frick was Immortals of Aveum designed for.
>what the frick was Immortals of Aveum designed for
Beta testing UE5
>better than native
What are you trying to show here? Youtube compression?
>youtube compression
Those are scaling artifacts.
I push my fingers into my EYEEEEES
We've reached a point where people will unironically believe this.
Don't buy starfield, vote with your wallet, simple as.
but it looks so trash, what are these Black folk doing
4070 is worse than a 3080? oh noooo
I will be modding starfield to look like a ps1 game and then play it on my Steam Deck and pretend I'm a kid again.
>high textures
>med shadows
>post processing garbage like volumetric lighting and motion blur turned off entirely
There you, double the performance with the same if not better look because post processing effects look like dogshit.
The 4080 and 7900XTX can't reach 100fps at fricking native 1080p max settings, that's hilarious.
Could be cpu bound, hard to tell without the 4090 in the charts.
So anyone without a 13th gen intel or 7xxx series AMD chip are gonna be fricked.
If by fricked you mean not getting 100 fps, then sure.
At this rate, it looks like the vast majority of PC players will be struggling to get 1080p 60fps on medium settings. This wouldn't be too bad if the game look amazing, but it looks like fricking Fallout 4.
I fricking hate FSR and DLSS for existing, instead of it letting poorgays to play games it now exists as a crutch for developers, they don't even bother optimizing anymore.
It was always like this. Games look barely better than few years back but require 2x more powerful hardware.
At least you could play on native resolution before with new hardware, now you only get to play blurry games.
Happens literally every time with every performance increasing tech.
just wait for the rtx 5000 series. a 600 dollar 5050ti should be able to run this decently at 1080p
>just wait
Yeah wait until Taiwan conflict goes hot and prices go +300% LOL.
This year is the last time to buy new PC. AI and war with China is going to ruin everything 2024+.
Honestly, screencap this. Get ready to enjoy retro for a few years...
IT'S FRICKING OVER BROS HERE'S WITH A 7600X
It runs at 30 FPS on Series X (= 6700XT equivalent), what did you people expect.
What the frick c**t? This is moronic. How have they managed to optimise it this badly?
Bethesda let's modders fix and optimize their game for them.
mods will fix it
>AMD optimized game
>Performs bad
>AMD cards perform below equivalent Nvidia cards
Everything AMDrones touch turns into poo, I wonder why that is.
Reminder the best GPU drivers for AMD aren't even their own and not on windows, it's purely open source kek
>not blaming bethesda pajeet coded creation engine abomination
bruh
There's a trend of "AMD optimized games" having poor performance.
AMD specifically went in with software engineers to optimize for them?
>ultra
Frick that, I'm tired of blurry movie effects on my games
Turn off motion blur moron
>RX 6700 XT struggling to reach 60fps only on 1080p
How do you frick up a game's optimization this bad?
Especially when the game looks like FO76
The power of gamebryo engine 2.0.
datamining thread
>ultra
You can probably get like 10 fps just by turning off DoF lmao.
see
Just wait until modders optimize the textures like they always do. It will run much better, use less resources and look the same or better than Bethesda's bloated slop.
Also you WILL use upscaling to run all games.
>6700XT and a 3600X
Bros... how will I cope?
By locking your fps to 30
>game requires upscaling
>only adds the shittiest upscaling option
why? even remnant 2 and that immortals of aveum game added all upscalers
People bought 4K monitors or 144hz monitors and suddenly everyone is back to 1080/60.
>6700XT
>turn on fsr2 for upscaling
>turn up sharpening in adrenaline
>get over 60fps
>enjoy game regardless
>oh no it dipped under 60fps
>turn off "shitt effects setting 1-300"
>over 70fps
EZ
>using fsr for anything under 4k quality mode
>4k
post Graphics vagine + 4k monitoboob
>have to use fsr at 1080p to achieve 60fps with a 6700XT in a game that looks like Fallout 4.
>1080p
you mean 1440p
>you mean 1440p
Then enjoy dips below 60fps unless you're on performance fsr.
why go with that when you can just turn shitty visual effects that have no discernible difference down?
>game somehow looks worse than fallout 4
>needs 10 times better hardware
how did they do it?
.... Are we sure it's gonna get mods with such bad performance on vanilla?
I'm so glad I never bought into resolution memes. 1080p baby.
But 1440 looks so nice…
I’ve also had a 27” monitor for so long that going to a 24” feels like blasphemy
can this run on my 1050 ti/ryzen 5 1400?
You should upgrade to a 3000/5000 ryzen depending on your motherboard BIOS upgrade limit.
>wasting money
never mind then
You're an early adopter of Ryzen, that's a first gen CPU with an upgrade path of at least a 3000 CPU, you'd be a fool not to use it instead of buying yourself a completely new build.
inb4 it's a craptop
it is, but thanks for trying to help
Well damn, you have my sympathies.
love these little things
yes at 5 FRAMES LMAO GET FRICKED
yes, 720p low 30fps
Don't listen to the other anon. Forget 3000, 5000 is the only viable option. 5600 is great all around, 5700x if you need two extra cores, 5800x3d for the best possible gaming performance (on this platform).
Anon, he's on a laptop.
The CPU is probably soldered into the motherboard.
Some good news at least.
>it will run like shit on any vram configuration
yes good news.
The reviewer also said that dropping settings from Ultra to High significantly improves performance with no loss in visual quality.
you get 8 extra fps on a 6800xt at 1440p ultra to high. less on anything less powerful than that.
>thinking about buying a 3060
>see this thread
Holy shit, why games nowadays require so much and show so little, i bet even crisis 2006 has better graphics
>6700xt and 7600x
Can I hope for High 60fps?
Wait for modders to fix everything.
Maybe 1440p60fps low with your new $1300 PC, Enjoy from bethesda!
>You need the top card on the market to get 60fps with native resolution
So this is the future... use an upscaler or suffer.
it is so funny how Ganker always cries about the hardware requirements. certainly sucks if the allowance of your Mom isn't enough for up to date graphics card.
imagine having a comfy life and not giving a shit about spending 3k $ or not
not everyone's mom is a prostitute
We don't care about spoiled only children that get everything handed to them.
I have a 1060 but got a 2080 as a loaner from a friend who got a 3080 as a loaner from his brother. I also have an i5-11600K, will I be able to run this 1080/60fps med/high?
2080 is fine not 4.90 ghz is fine too for sure but play on 1080p. don't be moronic and play in 4k.
Man, as I said in my post, 1080p/60fps is my target. I couldn't care less about anything above that, nor Ray meme shit.
im ready
I assume you installed the latest chipset drivers that fixed microstutters on the 7950x right?
micro w-w-w-whatters?
Why even bother to build a new PC when a 6700 XT cannot even handle 1080p?
Because 4070/7800xt is the new bottom.
sorry israelite. not upgrading my 3060 ti for another 7 years.
if a graphics card with this much power cant deliver 60fps 1080p then your game is fricking SHIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIT.
YOU BETTER UPGRADE NOW, GOYIM!!!
just because you spend alot of money on it like an idiot doesnt mean the card is powerful lmao
pay up paypiggy, this is now the new normal.
Yes you WILL pay $700 to play 1440p60fps in artificially deoptimiz- I mean next gen games
>Yes you WILL pay $700 to play 1440p60fps
way too optimistic lmao
Probably costs closer to $1800 considering AM5, GPU prices and monitor prices
this conspiracy never made any sense. Game developers don't care about you buying new hardware, they're not owned by GPU manufacturers. They want as many people as possible to be able to play the game, anything else is losing sales.
>They want as many people as possible to be able to play the game
Immortals of Whatever failed in that regard then.
When the gaming industry space contracts we're going to see a massive shock not seen since E.T. filled dumpsters.
>Immortals of Whatever failed in that regard then.
yeah and it didn't sell well. you think they made a shitty game no one can play on purpose?
The conspiracy doesn't make sense because it's spouted by zoomers and younger millenials, the people who spent their formative years in the xbox 360 ps3 era and thought being able to run a 4C4T i5 and a 750Ti for 8 years straight without any performance issues they didn't play Crysis or anything but console ports was the norm for gaming.
its SO over
oy vey goyim just run below full res
Unfortunately this graph is for 4k as stated in the website.
>Looks like a game from 2015
>Requires space age hardware
Unironically crash this industry
The game looks worse than fallout 4, how the frick did this happen?
>Based on my benchmarks, it seems the Recommended specs are targeting 4K at 30 fps at the High preset, which renders the game at 62% of its resolution through FSR 2. You could also look at running the game at 1080p with 60 fps at the same graphics preset.
>The Minimum specs look as if they’re targeting 1080p at 30 fps, again with FSR 2 enabled. As mentioned, Starfield is clearly designed around FSR 2, and that’s factoring in the system requirements heavily. With the upscaling turned off, you need a much more powerful system to maintain a stable frame rate.
So it runs like dogshit and AMD blocked Bethesda from including DLSS to make the upscaling more bearable at least. Frick FSR, you might as well just lower the resolution scale for all the "good" it does.
AMD didn't block Bethesda from including DLSS.
Sure it didn't. It just took over a month for their PR rep to say something as anemic as "nothing is stopping bethesda from including DLSS" which actually means nothing. Don't pay attention to the pattern of AMD sponsored titles never coming with DLSS or the fact that AMD refused to answer such a simple question in a timely manner. They just had their legal team work on a statement that sounds good but means absolutely zero.
>modern games look and run like shit
>modern video cards are expensive and underpowered all in on the fake frames and fake resolution scam
what the frick is going on
WE GOTTA RENDER REAL TIME CGI
Why would any skilled programmer work in vidya when you will make triple the salary while working less hours in other programming fields?
which other programming field is hogging all the skilled programmers because its certainly not the operating system and video card driver development
Writing custom software for industry uses is a pretty popular well paying one.
what custom software
every company is just lifting gpl code off of github maintained by loony troons that subsist on onions and HRT
Banks, investment firms, wall street infrastructure. The financial field is fricking cutthroat.
thats completely infested by pajeets
No one can optimize anymore because programmers are pajeets. I bet you if Valve had an in-house optimization team they can lend to anyone they'd be making more bank than they are now.
I have a 3080 so I'm happy I'll be able to play it comfortably at 1440p without FSR. I hate that resolution scaling bullshit - makes everything look weird
>ultra settings
There's your problem, the game is eating away at your GPU with stupid shit like shadows and lighting.
>shit like shadows and lighting.
what shadow and what lighting
this turd doesn't even support raytracing
2070 super, 1080p. It should run but not on ultra...
We will be fine super bro, I don't play beth games on ultra anyways
1080p30fps low settings for you, hope you are happy!
What CPU did they use in the tests?
Starfield is heavily CPU-bound, I bet they used some piece of shit CPU.
13900k
If it was being CPU bound, the benchmarks wouldn't steadily improve with better GPUs.
>For instance, there’s the Crowd Density setting. My testing shows that Starfield is very taxing on the CPU, with some scenes driving even the 24-core Intel Core i9-13900K to 60% utilization. Turning down this setting vastly reduces the load on the CPU, so it’s a good place to cut if your CPU isn’t as powerful as your GPU. Crowds still look dense even at the lowest setting, but when it’s maxed out, you can see 50 or more people in an area at one time.
i'm counting on my deck
>verification not required
>benchmarks taken in the middle of New Atlantis
>biggest city with dozens of NPCs
>ultra settings cranked out
>rest of the graphs turned down to high settings
>Literally no difference in graphical fidelity
>20+ more fps even at 1440p
>probably a memory leak anyways know Bethesda
>ultra settings are for gigaBlack persontards with small penises
Is my 1080ti good enough or should i wait until the optimization mods?
You're fricked.
1080p30fps low settings for you, enjoy - Todd
if you're willing to wait why not just wait until they release the inevitable complete edition
I probably will. I bought Fallout 4 goty edition for $15 I'll probably do the same with this.
I would wait.
Only damn fools and homosexuals would buy a Bethesda game on release considering their release history.
Same goes for BG3 considering Larian's history with their games since Ego Draconis.
looks like I can get 60 fps on ultra with my 3080
> Ultra no FSR
Yes, you can only play games at max settings at some arbitrary fps target someone on the internet said is a must.
This game looks and plays great on a Series S.
>This game looks and plays great on a Series S.
for a 25fps consolesubhuman it sure does
No, just for a normal person who has a life and other responsibilities beyond dropping 80% of my income on toys. I also don't spend 10 hours a day playing.
>dropping 80% of my income on toys
so not only are you a consolesubhuman but also a poorsubhuman
Nice logic and obsessive repeated use of specific words. Autistic much?
The main point is that people played Skyrim at 720p 30fps on 360 and came away with a wonderful experience they will never forget. Now people act like 4k 30fps is unplayable.
Is 60 FPS nice and objectively better? Sure. But it doesn't ruin my experience if its 30 either. No one b***hes because movies aren't being shot in 60fps instead of 24 or whatever. The exact opposite usually happens there.
>noo you need to stare at the floor!
I guess based on these benchmarks I'll be stuck at 1440p60.
Thankfully I'm not dumb enough to play this game at launch.
>1440p60
medium settings
I have an AMD 7970 so I'll be doing great?
What does that mean? Also I have 3 GB of VRAM on my 7970, but if a guy on a 6950 can get 1440p60fps, then I should be good right? Also I've had this card since 2013, do I need to upgrade at all?
I'm still on windows 7 but all my hardware is modern, like last gen AMD CPU and GPU. Anon, you're going to need a GPU upgrade at the very least.
>Anon, you're going to need a GPU upgrade at the very least.
Huh? People are saying the 7970 can trade blows with the 4070 Ti...? Do they just have higher VRAM on their version of the 7970? Mine has 3, theirs has 32GB VRAM?
I can play Freelancer(the superior space exploration experience) at 4k, 60+fps with no problem. Why bother with Slopfield?
3070ti poorgay here
it's so over
3080ti bros... we feastin
but how do I get the unlock tonight, I have the special edition but steam still says unlocks September 6th
Imagine trying to judge a Bethesda game performance and it's not even out and hasn't had a year of patches, yet.
Fricking morons will shit on anything for attention. lol
> 6750xt
> R5 5600
I just wanted do play at 1080p 60 fps bros, it's so over
You can play on 1440p 60fps medium/low settings.
It will be interesting to see how much the ultra setting actually affects things and how you can match.
I feel like if you have at least 6700xt you'll still be able to get 60fps at 1440p. They wouldn't relegate a fricking $400 1440p budget card to 1080p.
probably 1080p 60fps at Medium, but i'll take what I can get, i guess
Pic rel are benchmarks at high settings from a brazillian youtuber
The frick, the RX 7600 is lower than the 6750xt?
Isn't 3060 ti meant to be more powerful than RX 7600?
the entire game was designed for AMD
HAHAHAHAHAH
Well, 2060 playable confirmed. That's good news
literally more demanding than cyberpunk with ray tracing enabled
i'm laughing
>ultra settings
Black person please
disable moronic graphical bloat for a 5% graphical downgrade for a minimum 50 fps boost.
ultra graphics are tard tier stupidity
see
The game's optimized like shit with settings that don't scale all that well, and anything below high looks awful.
another moron that didnt read the thread.
imagine me wasting time reading all your dumb shitposts.
I have things to do
ultra graphics are for when you boot up a 10 year old game with your new GPU
correct
If you actually read the thread you would have seen that going from ultra to low gives you 18fps.
I forgot we are talking about a bethesda game during launch week.
They invented horse armor and ruined everything everywhere forever
>5600x, rtx 3060
it's unironically over
>pets my gtx 1080
One last ride? Saddle up... 1080p here we come.
>ultra
show in real non-cashgrabs settings like high
>3090
i will just quickly finish my rimworld run and then lets go
Is Starfield coming out on Bone and PS4 or is it next gen only?
are we finally dropping eight gen consoles?
i mean todd told us to just play at 30fps
The fact that not even state-of-the-art PCs can run this game at stable 60 fps on Ultra 1440p with FSR enabled really shows how low Bethesda is willing to go. Then again after Fallout 76 it should be no surprise.
We can't see more than 24fps anyways
This is the reason GPU prices will drop even more.
If this is true, then that means Todd sacrificed himself to save the GPU industry
What justifies these power demands?
It barely looks better than Fallout 4 or 76.
incompetence
bethesda
the xbox series x basically has a 6700xt in it and it runs at 30 fps with FSR. what did people expect?
Lol current consoles aren't equivalent to 6700xt, stop dreaming tard
Yeah its more like a 6700 non xt
i dont get you dls fsr Black folk just dont use them they make the game look blurry anyway
such graphical prowess
I'll be genuinely heartbroken if modded Fallout 4 looks and performs better than Starfield. Imagine waiting almost 8 years for this.
why do morons think smearing 90% of the image with a super blurry depth of field looks good?
you don't have the a e s t h e t i c eye
They have 20/20 vision so they don't know what myopia is like so it feels "new" to them.
Or they could be movie game shitters. I think it's the 2nd.
cool for screenshots. absolute full-blown moron to play with the effect enabled
>frogposter
Because they're posing with their le epic waifu character and focusing on how her ass looks and not anything else.
Is 8GB of VRAM enough for Starfield?
VRAM concerns are prominent among modern games, but thankfully, Starfield doesn’t have a lot of issues. Even at native 4K with all the graphics turned up, the game never consumed above 8GB of VRAM. That was true for cards including the RTX 4090 with its massive array of 24GB of VRAM.
It’s not a big concern here. In addition, I didn’t notice any stuttering or hitching on GPUs with 8GB of VRAM, which has been a significant problem in games like Resident Evil 4, The Last of Us Part One, and Hogwarts Legacy.
Yes, its enough for starfield. the game runs like shit on any vram configuration so youre fine.
>Is 8GB of VRAM enough for Starfield?
it should be, like it should be for every other game out there if not for lazy fricking devs not optimizing their games because, truth be told, too many tech blind morons keep buying inferior work
i'm a 3080KING
How the frick is 4k 36fps and 1080p 70?
That makes absolutely no fricking sense, but Bethesda did it!
Jesus frick it's a single threaded game. No wonder performance is crap
WHAT
Post pic. Now.
?t=1172
>gets compared to No Man's Sky
TODD-SAMA HELP!
>designed for 30fps
it won't be review bombed on Steam, it will be review nuked
The Chinese certainly won't be impressed. They love science fiction.
they'll put up with it
>Ryzen 5 5600x capped at 45 FPS in the main city
Holy fricking shit.
>2023
>single threaded
amd bros I aint feeling too good
But it's not singlethreaded? Did you even watch your own video? The load is spread across all cores.
thats not how the API works.
The primary thread for rendering objects (drawcalls) to send data to the GPU is only done on 1 singular thread. the stronger your GPU the stronger your CPU single core performance needs to be as well to fuel it. the API and windows can schedule the thread to swap between 2 cores generally, so when one gets overloaded with work it will automatically swap to the next best performing thread and constantly swap back and forth.
The other threads are generally used for less important tasks, like backround processing of AI physics, pathing, and the like, but often times the work also gets thrown onto the main threads of the CPU that handle the GPU render work.
Devs rarely know how to address each thread specifically, usually leaving windows and the api or drivers to handle that work. And DX9-11 has always had this limitation of 1 render thread, dx12 and vulkan changes that, but devs still havent been able to fully utilize multiple threads to act as the render thread simultaneously.
And this will likely never change so long as mutts control the industry and the software.
The reason bethesda got the IDtech duys on board for optimization was more than likely specifically for CPU optimization, since you know, they are actually competent and (was )majority white male team.
>The Eternal Gamebryo Engine
optimization is dead
indie company please understand
any 1070TI sisters still out there?
GTX1070 non-ti
Steam reviews will bury Starfield and that Mostly Negative will come mainly from the shit performance
Tfw more than half of anons shilling Todd's newest Black folklop can't even run the game
>benchmarks leave out 3080Ti, 3090, 4080
The GTX 580 ran skyrim at 45 fps on 1080p.
I ran Skyrim 720p 40fps medium-high on a 540m laptop
Better than a 360
What do I do?
you're completely fine, you have the equivalent of the stated ryzen cpu, even better a bit
You cannot play the game legally
>4080
>i5
How did this happen?
It's completely fine. You are supposed to play in 4K with that graphics card, at that point you are more likely to be GPU limited anyway
There is absolutely no reason to play at 1080p with modern graphics cards. Even the cheapest smartphones have higher resolution screens now. Spending thousands on a PC only to have to look at a low resolution screen is so pointless
You'll be fine
Lower anything that increases drawcalls, so decrease geometry detail settings.
Also why were you moronic enough to not pair a 4080 with at least a 5800x3d?
Have an RX 480, how am i doing?
so ultra means raytracing right
Starfield doesn't have RT
That's the funny part. It doesn't even have ray-tracing, not even the AMD version.
TotK/Bloodborne runs faster on fricking Switch/PS4 than this slop does on xbox
I was considering upgrading, but I think i'll wait til black friday and try and get some deals then
So you are telling me that I can run Cyberpunk and even RDR2 at 1440p 60fps with high settings on a 6700xt, but can't with Starfield, a game that looks like a ps4 game?
The FRICK is this moronic bullshit
>me with my i5-11600k and 3060Ti hoping for 1080p 60fps high settings.
>You DO have atleast a 4070
Yes, I have 4080. Do I plan to play Goyfield? Absolutely not.
I have a 4090, but I don't think I'll waste it on Shitfield. Devs can frick off with their pronoun games.
>You DO have atleast a 4070 to play starfield
Yeah
>at 1080p 60 fps
No, I'll be playing at 1440p 55 with VRR.
Imagine getting brainwashed by the PC industry into thinking you NEED at least 60 fps
>buy another GPU, CONSOOOOM
45 FPS is fine. You'll survive. I'm playing Portal with RTX at 45-50 fps and it's had zero impact on my enjoyment of the game.
or they could, you know, optimize their shit
>bethesda
>optimize
imagine being so fricking moronic you cant turn real time shadows and tessellation to "low" and gain 200+fps for free in all modern slop games
>tessellation
I remember those threads where it tanked 970s and 980s but ran fine on R9 200s because tessellation was turned off.
see
and frick off
puzzle game vs actual shooter
sorry for having standards bro
consoles don't deserve the hardware they got with Series X and PS5
It is pretty brutal. Having to upscale from 720p to 4k using FSR of all things sucks ass. And 30fps is just an insult to injury.
>mfw I just bought parts for a 7800x3D/4090 build
.In addition, the game calls for a six-core CPU at minimum, but I wouldn’t recommend playing it with less than an eight-core chip. The game is very taxing on the CPU in heavily populated areas, and you’ll see a big dip in performance with only six cores.
oh no my 11400....
>The 6700 xt is already not enough for some games at 1080p.
Is over for me bros
I'm not up to date with gpu comparisons.
Can I get to high-ish on 1440p with 2080 and 60fps? :/
2080 is comparable to a 3060 ti.
>I'm not up to date with gpu comparisons.
Just search a video comparing your GPU with one from the list.
>Can I get to high-ish on 1440p with 2080 and 60fps? :/
Its so over bro
b-but starfield looks like fallout 4 with minor graphic tweaks...
Welcome to modern gaming. Just wait until those Covid online classes programmers start entering the industry, it will get so much worse.
>4070
IMAGINE buying a 12GB card in 2023.
If you want to master the art of PC gaming all you do is:
>Wait for console gen to start
>drop a fricking fat wad of cash on the best GPU/CPU on the market
>enjoy 7 years (MINIMUM) of headache free gaming at Ultra settings until the next consoles release
>rinse & repeat
Starfield isn't heavy on vram usage you fricking tard.
Who said anything about Starfield. I'm laughing at the moron that bought a card that's already obsolete.
amd drivers are up
You mean they actually tweaked their GPU drivers on windows for this day one?
yee but for 4k performance
I won't be playing.
ur poor lol. i have a 4090 and i will be enjoying the game at a locked 1440p 60 with fsr performance mode
Why the frick would you need FSR on a 4090 for 1440p lmfao.
>60fps
kek
>60 fps in 2023 on a $2 million dollar graphics card
>wanting to play starfield
Top kek
do it, just dont give todd money
Surely if I can run RE4 remake I can run Starfield.
You understimate the incompetence of western optimization
>linear shit for open universe
p-please, I only have a rx480...
Where's the 7900 XT?
Getting used to low shadows has been the most profitable thing for me.
I honestly dont even notice that shit, and it TANKS performance if you have it on ultra.
lego shadows look like ass
remember when Bethesda rendered skyrims shadows on the CPU.
Yeah good thing they stopped doing that kinda thing right.
>2060 Super
Its over.
>have to wait several years for mods to optimise it and add performance patches
I knew Todd would do this, I have seen it happen every time, in fact standards have steadily dropped since morrowind yet I still can't believe just how bad it's getting.
New drivers
This is going to look stupid when open source updates on mesa drivers put that 16% on every resolution.
>4k
its so OVER, AAA is so fricking trash. thankfully the only game i want to play this year is dragons dogma 2
>dragons dogma 2
Dragon's Dogma was 30 fps even when they ported it to PS4 and Xbone, so I wouldn't get my hopes up for solid performance.
Dragon's Dogma ran great on PC and every RE Engine game has been pretty well optimized.
Deathloop and Doom Eternal also ran great, didn't stop Starfield and Redfall from being made for 30 fps.
>Deathloop and Doom Eternal also ran great
Deathloop ran like shit, frick are you talking about?
And Doom Eternal ran on idtech and was made by id, while Deathloop ran on a shitty offshoot of idtech and Redfall was UEjunk.
DD2 runs on RE Engine and, again, every RE Engine game has been pretty well optimized.
>Deathloop ran like shit, frick are you talking about?
My 3600 and 2070S say otherwise, even without DLSS.
>DD2 runs on RE Engine and, again, every RE Engine game has been pretty well optimized.
So did MT Framework games, until Dragon's Dogma, and then it showed its limitations again with MHW.
>My 3600 and 2070S say otherwise, even without DLSS.
You're moronic, your shitty 2070S couldn't even run the game properly at launch without horrible stutter and texture issues because the game ate through VRAM like nobody's fricking business.
>So did MT Framework games, until Dragon's Dogma
Again, Dragon's Dogma ran great on PC, blame consoles for having shitty weak CPUs.
>because the game ate through VRAM like nobody's fricking business.
Or you can just follow the game's VRAM info?
>Again, Dragon's Dogma ran great on PC
It wasn't perfect stable 60 fps on my i5 3470 and HD7950, specifically on the CPU side, and it was a 7th gen game.
>Or you can just follow the game's VRAM info?
ie. Lower settings because the higher settings run like shit since they eat through all of your VRAM.
>It wasn't perfect stable 60 fps on my i5 3470 and HD7950
It was perfectly stable on my i7 4790 and R9 280x. Even ran it at 4k when I got an R9 Fury.
>ie. Lower settings because the higher settings run like shit since they eat through all of your VRAM.
If that's what you seriously think, then I have bad news for you, as the max texture settings of RE Engine are even more VRAM hungry, especially when you have option to set texture streaming budget alone to 8GB.
You self-owned yourself.
It's irrelevant because my GPU has 16 GB of VRAM because I didn't buy an overpriced $500+ 8-10 GB GPU like a moron.
I look forward to maxing out DD2's texture settings just like I did RE4R's.
Really curious how my inferior GPU had less issues with Deathloop than your "top of the line" 16GB one.
Well first of all, my current GPU wasn't even on the market when Deathloop came out.
Secondly I'm basing it on actual performance metrics from when the game came out, and no shit your GPU will have less issues when you just lower the settings that give you problems to begin with.
Absolute max settings are usually a placeboo. That especially applies to RE Engine, as 2GB or 3GB texture streaming budget is effectively the same as 8GB one.
Set settings to high, and it'll look near identical.
The problem is when you set the settings to medium or even low and still have poor performance. Starfield performs poorly because of CPU. The settings won't do much, even if you lower the graphics.
And there's a good chance it'll apply to Dragon's Dogma 2 as well. They already opted for 30 fps in the PS4 and Xbone ports, which came out after the PC version. The same happened with Skyrim SE, which is 30 fps on PS4 and Xbone, despite being 7th gen games. Starfield also ended up 30 fps on consoles.
>That especially applies to RE Engine, as 2GB or 3GB texture streaming budget is effectively the same as 8GB one.
That's actually not true, with the lower streaming budgets you'll see worse textures more often and the higher quality ones will take longer to load in since more textures need to be loaded in and out of memory.
And at launch it was even worse in RE4R since any GPU that didn't have at least 10-11 GB of VRAM would end up crashing with max textures, max shadows, and raytracing enabled.
>The problem is when you set the settings to medium or even low and still have poor performance. Starfield performs poorly because of CPU. The settings won't do much, even if you lower the graphics.
Oh I don't disagree there, but Bethesda is mildly incompetent and their engine isn't all that great.
>They already opted for 30 fps in the PS4 and Xbone ports, which came out after the PC version.
Again, that was because the PS4 and Xbone had terrible CPUs and MT Framework wasn't really designed with low clockspeed high threadcount CPUs in mind.
It's also worth mentioning that Capcom has yet to release a game exclusive to 9th gen and PC. Every new game they released on PS5 also launched on PS4. Including RE4.
The 9th gen exclusive games released within the past year all have performance issues, either CPU or GPU. Suddenly games start hitting 720p, probably the first time in history where the most powerful consoles actually went back with resolution when compared to earlier consoles. And I'm not talking about PS4 Pro and Xbone X as prev gen, I'm talking about base PS4.
Deathloop is a rare example of 9th gen only game, that runs at good framerate at above 1080p resolution in performance mode.
>The 9th gen exclusive games released within the past year all have performance issues, either CPU or GPU.
which ones?
All the ones in the picture.
>Notice that every single game in your image runs on Unreal Engine.
FF16 runs on their own engine.
>Probably because it basically looks like a PS4 game
So does Starfield, Jedi Survivor, Remnant 2 and Gotham Knights.
Notice that every single game in your image runs on Unreal Engine.
And frankly, we're going to be seeing more of this, because that entire engine's modus operandi is making game development easy for outsourced labor and unqualified people.
>Deathloop is a rare example of 9th gen only game, that runs at good framerate at above 1080p resolution in performance mode.
Probably because it basically looks like a PS4 game and was only a 9th gen exclusive because Sony paid for PS5 timed console-exclusivity.
if SF6's world tour mode is anything to go by for the RE engine's performance in open world games, DD2 should be alright
>check this year's purchases
AC6
Wonderful 101: After School Hero
Phantom Brigade
Hi-Fi Rush
Thinking of getting Bomb Rush Cyberfunk.
Better off playing Everspace 2 if you want your space fix.
How fricked am I?
You were fricked from the start.
FRICK YOU HEWLETT PACKARD
No but seriously
Bro at least buy an rx 580 they are like 14 dollars a dozen on amazon. YOu can probably have it on a playable state with moving some sliders that way.
wtf is this shit/10
enjoy 20 fps at low 800x600 powered by gamebyro with fallout 76 hacks edition
acceptable.
you are lucky that you have an ssd without it would be unplayable asset loading stutterfest
>this are the people who cry about "optimization".
nice projection bro
I don't cry about optimization moron.
>6700xt
>42 fps at 2k
DISFRICKINGGUSTGING HOLY SHIT
imagine spending 1k on a gpu which can't even hit 60fps in a game running at 4k
lolol
who the frick needs to play games on ultra
I have a 4090 but I'll be playing X4 with my hotas and head tracking on my triple monitor setup instead
4080 so yea I'll be fine. Nice work Todd, can't even get 4k60 on a $1000+ GPU.
>Rx 6800
I guess we'll see lads, at 1440p it will take some tinkering with settings. I might want to try 4k with a controller too.
When does the PS5 version release?
>no dlss
oh boy it's fricking OVER
does fsr3 have image quality upgrades or meme generation only?
Both, doesn't release for a few months no doubt
some homosexual will release dlss as a mod. you can get it for skyrim and fallout 4 toom
>to play starfield
What? Why would I do that?
>20 series not even on the list
its fricking over...
>7700X
>6800XT
I can get 60 FPS at 1440p using native resolution with this... right?
nope.avi
>play Shitfield
No thanks
The exact same engine that Skyrim was made on but with also somehow worse lighting asks a 4070 for 60 fps at 1080p.
Bethesda is a joke.
>76.9fps for me
damn hoped for at least 120, hope patches do some magic
>$400 card can't run fallout 4 with even more shit glued on at 1080p60fps
Huh, pretty impressive. What's with all these garbage tier performance titles lately?
>Starfield is built around FSR 3.0
>all the recent Unreal Engine games that have come out have been built around DLSS 3.5 just to get 30 fps
whaddya need 60 frames for? the human eye can't see over 24 frames per second.
There are no reasons for modern games to need so much hardware (and hard drive space, seriously get fricking real on this 120GB SSD clogging trashware). They are in cahoots with the software arm to push overpowered shitty engineered tech past 2016-2019. Other than AI uses of course.
1070 here.
I might buy a 7800XT
>I might buy a 7800XT
Good choice. It's either that, a 4090 if you're a richgay, or cheap 6700/6700 xt if you're a poorgay.
>only good gpu options are the obscenely overpriced 4090 which won't get any new dlss features once the 50 series gets released, 3 year old amd cards, or a card that isn't even out yet
dire
welcome to modern gaming the card you pick is meaningless unless you throw 2 grand at it
and even then most likely you're going to be playing at 720p
sure do!
>i5 12600k
>3060 12gb
How fricked and crack version when? I'm not paying Todd a dime.
doesn't matter, my cpu is bottlenecking me so hard right now
will my 7800x3d and 4090 be able to run it?
>will my state of the art hardware be able to run this
what do you think they're programming this on
Probably, but in case it doesnt just buy a series s to play it there
Damn I expected decent performance at 1080p with a 1080ti...
>1080ti is a 720p card now
It's 7 years old dude.
6
The problem is that games barely look better, why the FRICK do they run 3 times worse? This trend of devs using upscaling to avoid having to do actual optimization is dogshit too. A 4090 needs FSR to run at a stable-ish 60FPS at 1440p? Give me a break.
I'm glad I hate modern AAA slop. I'll keep playing old and indie/AA games in 4K at high FPS.
Can fricking talk like a normal person without using a buzzword every second?
The only buzzword I used there was "slop" and I used it appropriately.
No. The moment you use this buzzword, your post is immediately invalidated.
>I'm blind and judge visuals based on jpeg screenshots of heavily compressed youtube videos of unknown visual settings or console footage so there have been no improvements in x years
moron
Nah, he's right, games barely look better than something like Battlefield 1 from 7 years ago.
That looks way better than starfield
The best graphics in a game to this date are Battlefield 1 from 2016, The Order from 2016 again, and Last of Us Part 2 which is from 2020.
Graphics have only gotten worse since 7 years ago with the exception of Sony first party titles, meanwhile everything has gotten more expensive, and games are not even optimized at all anymore.
Thats because baked lighting is just superior. all those titles use that.
Ray Tracing is perhaps the most useless technology ever developed in mankind's history.
The ps5 has a GPU that's similar to a 2070. A 2070 is similar to a 1080ti.
You should be able to play Starfield at 1080p 30fps.
a ps5 runs starfield at 0 fps though
you're wrong stupid parasocial weeb.
Explain
you need a 6800 and a strong cpu to play 1080p 60 fps
In 2016, did you feel some form of pain or concern over the fact the 9800 GTX+ was no longer a high end competitor?
Graphics cards improved at a much faster rate back then across the whole product stack, now the new gen cards are barely better in the low end and mid range. Only the high end improves significantly at exorbitant prices.
>objectively incorrect statement
Spotted the brainlet who has zero experience with tech.
Stop lying.
You brainlets, tell me when we got cards as terrible as a 4060 or 7600 XT in the old days.
All the time.
You're genuinely moronic if you think that hasn't been obsoleted. The arm right next to the screen alone looks like shit compared to newer games.
>All the time.
No.
You're underage, otherwise you'd know the pain of spending money on a 560Ti and having it not be able to handle MSAA after a single year of use.
why would you expect that? it's a current gen title with bethesda behind it
by default the performance is going to be bad
at least 13 years ago graphics cards could only go so fast and the consoles were literal shit they had to optimize it
The lack of RT made me hope.
RT is always optional. if anything the lack of rt already said enough that it was too heavy to be even included.
>activate resizable bar
>activate auto overclock
>update *all* drivers
>update os
>settings: ultra
>shadows: medium
>gay tracing: off
>dlss2: quality
BRING IT ON TODD, YOU LITTLE INEPT b***h
Game doesn't even have RT and still runs like shit. At this point, RT will be a meme forever. $500 dollar cards can't even run games well with just rasterized graphics.
That was the joke. I will wait 2-3 years and play the Slop of the Year Edition when they ironed out the bugs. You can forget about playing Bethesda games on release.
: quality
anyone want to tell him?
Why is the 4070ti not on there?
What's the point in playing sub 100fps with powerful cards.
If things keep going on like this you might need a powerful card to play on 60 fps at 1080. With no improvement in graphics to really notice
>load up starfield on my 6750xt, set to ultra, set shadows to medium, now 100+ fps
wow that was hard
how cute you actually think adjusting the settings will change the performance for the better
oh how naive of you to think 9th gen games will run better because you change some settings
i know gamebryo
moron
stupid Black person
moron
homosexual
morons
okay trannoid in denial
nice shitbuild moron
okay
even worse shitbuild moron
enjoy your 52 fps at medium at 1080p moron
?feature=shared&t=236
lmao no one is going to be able to play this game at a decent performance
>barely any changes between settings on an 6800XT
lol
lmao even
good. let the shitshow begin.
This shit looks worse than Cyberpunk and Last of Us but requires a NASA mainframe.
Bethesda are inept morons, Complete morons.
Not to mention it looks like shit. No soul whatsoever.
>This shit looks worse than Cyberpunk
Almost everything looks worth than Cyberpunk moron.
It was one of the few games that was actually upgraded from the trailers.
No wonder morons started to cry about performance all the time.
You want graphical advances, but when advanced come you cry about not being able to run it on a 10 year old rig.
MY PC is 2 years old you c**t so STFU
Eat shit Nvidia shill.