"Never trust a man with two first names."
this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2023
72 points (85.3% liked)
PCGaming
6484 readers
190 users here now
Rule 0: Be civil
Rule #1: No spam, porn, or facilitating piracy
Rule #2: No advertisements
Rule #3: No memes, PCMR language, or low-effort posts/comments
Rule #4: No tech support or game help questions
Rule #5: No questions about building/buying computers, hardware, peripherals, furniture, etc.
Rule #6: No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
Rule #7: No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts
Rule #8: No off-topic posts/comments
Rule #9: Use the original source, no editorialized titles, no duplicates
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Three is okay tho, right?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCGD9dT12C0
Get a new game engine, Todd. Bethesda owns id Software. id Tech is right where.
Engines for linear first person shooters aren't necessarily good for Skyrim-scale RPGs.
Other then the hourly crashes (that I assume the video driver update I did resolved) and what I deem some terrible game design choices like shit inventory limitations, runs fine for me. I9-9900 with 1080ti sc2.
Runs fine on my 5600x w/ 2070 super on High settings, 3440x1440. I did however install a DSLL 3.5 mod from the beginning.
Teach me please, sensei. This is exactly my setup, 5600x, 2070s, wqhd and dlss mod. However, I could definitely not crank it up to high, and it still runs at only like 45-50 FPS. Can you maybe screenshot your settings? Maybe I overlooked something that I need to turn off/on?
I honestly haven't done much tweaking. Really all I've done is set it to High and then decrease the Render Resolution Percentage from the default 62% on High down to 57% (which I believe is roughly similar to a DSLL "Balanced" vs "Quality"). I typically end up with around 50-60 FPS I believe, which is plenty for me in a game like this one (it about what I've typically aimed for with years of heavily modified Skyrim). Obviously, if it was a competitive FPS, I'd want higher like 120+, but I don't feel like that's needed for a single-player shooter/RPG like this one. That is of course personal preference though.
I'm running out on an i7 4090 with a low profile amd rx6400 (used office PC) at 1080p in high with scaling set to 60% and a solid 30-40 fps. It's an RPG, who cares as long as it's not a slideshow?
I cursed myself by buying a 170hz monitor. Now that I'm used to that, everything under, say, 120fps feels incredibly draining on the eyes
Has anyone tried it on RTX 3050 laptop?
SSD Usage In Starfield Is Causing Stuttering Issues: Report https://www.tomshardware.com/news/badly-optimized-ssd-usage-starfield-traversial-stutter#xenforo-comments-3819696
What upgrade to my pc would allow me to play that game at 1440p 144fps stable on high or ultra exactly?
Runs fine for me 5600X, RTX 3080 @1440p high ultra settings native.
"Runs fine on my high end rig"
Thanks for telling us.
Reason why I mentioned is because I'm finding people with better specs complaining.. If we just turned the FPS counter off and enjoyed the game without needing to check if it's dipping below 60 and turned it on if we really needed it, we'd all be a bit more appreciative.
Except it's literally not playable on my system, so I can't appreciate shit. I meet the minimum requirements, but the second I leave a building interior my fps goes from smooth as butter to unplayably choppy. This is with everything on low, and even the DLSS mod installed.
I'd accept my PC just isn't actually up to snuff if not for the fact other people with the exact same specs are saying they're playing at medium settings comfortably. The only way that makes sense is if Starfield IS, in fact, badly optimized.
At what framerate
Slideshow.
Dunno, it's running fine enough to not need to enable the FPS counter.
If you don't have an FPS counter enabled by default I'm inclined to believe it's not actually fine, and that you're just not used to any refreshrate above 60
No, with my specs I definitely am used to and know what 60fps looks like. New Atlantis may not be 60 but it's not anywhere near a slide how either. I'm still enjoying it personally but hey, don't let my contentment get in the way of a good whinge.
Anything below 60 on your specs should be considered unacceptable
I don't think you realise how good your specs are
Hell, I'd say the same about 120 tbh. Modern games are just unoptimised pieces of shit
I know my specs and i'm playing native, no FSR and haven't encountered any stuttering. What am I gonna do? Not play the game because it dips below 60 fps? I've been on FPS counter bandwagon and I prefer peace and simple enjoyment over FPS anxiety - for me the counter is only if/when required.