Game Discussions Bethesda Softworks Starfield Space RPG

Northpin

Northpin
Morbad said:
Interesting. Gap between average and 1% lows are larger than what I've seen, while the 1080 Ti performance is quite a bit worse in GN's tests, especially at lower resolutions.

Probably the area, as I haven't been to new Atlantis yet. That apparent CPU limitation was also a bit surprising on the 12700KF.
Click to expand...

What i find interesting is 4090 neck to neck with 7900XTX at all resolutions.
If that's understandable at 1080p, i find it a bit baffling at 1440p and 4k

I remember you saying that SF is very GPU limited
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Robert Maynard
Tim from Hardware Unboxed has been tweaking graphics settings:
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40iwgUjBmoA
HUB Recommended performance presets:
image.png

image.png

Performance improvements (7800X 3D / 32GB DDR5 6000 CL30 / Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070)
image.png
 
Last edited:

CMDR Karrde Sun

CMDR Karrde Sun
I don't think i can run it.

Been busy with family stuff this weekend, but did get a few hours to tweak around. I really didn't expect it to be an fps.

Seems that i'm both cpu and gpu bottlenecked at the same time with this game, which probably means its in a close balance. I had to suffer downgrading to.. ugh... HIGH graphics settings with a few settings to ultra :( With that arrived at a mostly very smooth 30fps at 1080p. Better than odd, put it that way. Strangely though, the game doesn't seem to look that good to warrant the fps cost.

Also check this out.. for the 1080ti i can confirm it matches my results, so if you can get through the first half hour of waffling its probably a good measuring stick for your system. Having said... i suspect this is only valid for people running under the system requirements, i can't imagine the ceiling being too high for this game to provide what it needs.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JDbrWmlqMw


But anyway.. more! :)

Also i had to turn up the internal resolution to 80%, the iq was too bad with anything lower.. also... with all the film grain and the level design of the interiors, i got some very fond flashbacks to deus ex: invisible war, especially since my graphics at the time wasn't capable of running it well either :)
 
Last edited:

CMDR Karrde Sun

CMDR Karrde Sun
Okay following the recommendations the above video i was able to get a rock solid 30 fps at 90% internal res.

I take it back what i said about the graphics.. wow. Yeah i was just testing in the tree park in new atlantis..

Also looks like im playing a bonafide rpg... squeeeee.. haven't since w3... goodbye everything else.
 

Leadfoot

Leadfoot
Cosmo said:
Based on leaked info: we cannot seamlessly circumnavigate planets. We can only select a landing spot, the landing is scripted, and explore 1 landing zone. There are invisible walls at the limit of each landing zone. If we want to go to the next zone, we must use the ship again. So the engine can only load 1 planetary zone at a time. Each zone is about the size of 4x Skyrim (double the length from Riften to Markarth from the ship. It takes 40 minutes on foot.
Click to expand...
Actually, I sort of expected that, and I can certainly live with that much ground at one time.

Fast travel back to the ship, take off, select a new landing position, and repeat.

Regarding mods, I had quite a few for Morrowind, a few posing mods for Oblivion, and several for Skyrim, mainly for the fact that arrows through the head should kill that character. There were also a few concerning the house breeze home, as well as needing to eat sleep drink, and sleep once in awhile - it just made sense.

I can only guess that there will be a list of consoles codes for PC users, mainly so that we can see what's behind that wall we can't get past. There was also a console command to change the passage of time so that you could make it one to one. Since different planets would have different rotational periods, I don't think that'll be necessary.
 

Astaran

Astaran
Has anyone of you tried building an outpost yet? After looking through the options (ingame), it appears to me that I should probably build the first one on a Iron/Aluminium planet with both deposits within range of the extractors. I want to setup a production chain that makes construction of additional outposts easier
 

Morbad

Morbad
Mole HD said:
running out of ammo several times
Click to expand...

I use the mining laser as much as possible; it's actually proving to be pretty potent at lower levels. Ammunition is apparently weightless, so there are no downsides to saving it for when you think you need it, or just want to go on a killing spree.

Also, the game has that silly each shot from a semi auto weapon does three times the damage as one from a full auto weapon...so I'm using all semi auto weapons.

CMDR Karrde Sun said:
Okay following the recommendations the above video i was able to get a rock solid 30 fps at 90% internal res.
Click to expand...

If a certain setting seems to stand out with regards to performance impact, you can edit the preset ini files to tune things further.

Northpin said:
What i find interesting is 4090 neck to neck with 7900XTX at all resolutions.
If that's understandable at 1080p, i find it a bit baffling at 1440p and 4k

I remember you saying that SF is very GPU limited
Click to expand...

It's certainly GPU limited on my systems (5800X + 6800XT and 5800X3D + RTX 4090, both aggressively tuned) in the areas I've been so far, at the settings I've chosen to use (4k ultra, FSR w/65% render scale on the 6800 XT, DLLS w/80% on the RTX 4090), but that may not be the case in large cities, like the one used for GNs tests. I do come quite close to being CPU limited in certain settlement type areas and I suspect my 5800X3D will be at it's limit in Atlantis, if I don't shift the bottleneck back to the GPU by running a higher render scale.

Regardless, the 7900 XTX is not slow. It has more enabled ROPs and typically runs at similar clock speeds relative to the 4090. There is clearly more to performance, even effective fill rate, than pure clock speed vs. functional units, but when comparing GPUs of similar eras where all the tricks and optimizations roughly balance out, the theoretical figures explain a lot. AMD's D3D12 drivers are also lower overhead, which is why it's not uncommon to see AMD pull a head at lower resolutions or in otherwise CPU limited scenarios. It still loses, often by a decent margin, to the RTX 4090 in most titles, but there are numerous exceptions, especially among AMD sponsored titles (where devs are surely encouraged to do, or were already doing, things that show AMD's contemporary hardware in a positive light), and Starfield is one of them.

Starfield seems to be predominantly fillrate/fragment limited, and just looking at the power and temperature of my RTX 4090 while I'm playing reveals this. In GPU limited areas of shader heavy titles (like starport concourses in Elite: Dangerous Odyssey), my card, at the clocks and voltages I'm using above, will pull in excess of 600w and the GPU core/edge to hotspot temperature delta will push 20C. In Starfield, reported GPU utilization is also maxed out (every cycle is being used), but the card only pulls ~400w and the core/edge to hostpot delta is only about 12C...much of it's FP32 shader hardware is clearly underutilized.
 
Last edited:

Star Wanderer

Star Wanderer
Well this is an interesting loophole people found on Steam. Apperently game is not in official Early Access on Steam, so you can refund it until launch regradless of how many hours you have played.
At least that's what people claimed they have done.
P.S: Can confirm, this guy played 21 hours( as seen on his profile) but doesn't own the game anymore (not in his game list): https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198075931333

And another one: https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198196671174


So finish the game today or tomorrow and get your 100$ back :sneaky:
 
Last edited:

Star Wanderer

Star Wanderer
Cosmo said:
How do you measure the walking distance in a landing area (on a planet)?



I thought refunds had a time limit. I'm enjoying it too much and there's over 100 mods already. Gonna play this game on and off for years.
Click to expand...
Yep it does but only for Early Access or released games, since this game wasn't labeled as Early Access so it's basically F2P on Steam atm until September 6th.
Lots of people are playing, some finishing and refunding:
https://steamcommunity.com/app/1716740/discussions/0/3824173836657793240/


Looks like a major screw up by either Steam or Bethesda.

https://steamcommunity.com/app/1716740/discussions/0/3824173836658217595/

One more:
https://steamcommunity.com/app/1716740/discussions/0/3824173836658538745/
 
Last edited:

Arioch

Arioch
I’m about 8 hours in and really enjoying myself - for me, it’s the latest evolution of a very specific type of space game: Starflight (Sega Megadrive) > KoTOR (Xbox) > Mass Effect 1 (Xbox 360) > Starfield (PC).

Although I’m missing ground vehicles I’m sure modders will be on the case once the Creation Kit is released - but if Bethesda want to do a vehicle expansion like Hello Games did with NMS, I wouldn’t complain 😁

It’s cool to see proper airlocks on some buildings (as per Morbad’s video above) so not every area transition gets the brief loading screen - I’ve just experienced them after returning to the first mining planet on a follow-up mission.

The only complaint I’ve got so far is sometimes I don’t get the landing cutscene - instead of being on the planet in the pilot’s chair and allowing me to gear up before exiting the ship, it sometimes dumps me straight from the planet map in space to the surface - at which point my character starts making choking noises and taking damage 😅
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom