Can i Run Elite at 4K / Ultra ?

[Tom Jacobs]

My pc is now:
Gigabyte Z97P-D3
I5 4670K @ 4.2GHZ
8GB Ram
ASUS RX480 8GB


Im now running the game at ultra 1080P and the pc is barely being used with fans at idle ...

Would love a 4K display but could the pc run it smoothly ?

 

[VR Jay Le Chardon]

I usually play in VR, but since my GTX1080Ti is away for repair, I've hooked everything up to my laptop which has a GTX1080, while my desktop temporarily has a GTX970 in it just now. But since the GTX970 that I'm using temporarily is roughly similar to the RX480 in performance terms, I'll move the joysticks across and fire the game up in desktop mode on the 970, set the resolution to 3840x2160 and post back here on how it performs at 4k with a comment on FPS and how it feels, ie is it laggier than the FPS denotes, or does it feel buttery smooth even though the FPS number might suggest otherwise.

 

[Runnybabbit]

My pc is now:
Gigabyte Z97P-D3
I5 4670K @ 4.2GHZ
8GB Ram
ASUS RX480 8GB


Im now running the game at ultra 1080P and the pc is barely being used with fans at idle ...

Would love a 4K display but could the pc run it smoothly ?

Not sure of your graphic card capabilities, but I've been running the game for 2 years at 4k, with no problems, with a nvidia 980Ti card, with no problems whatsoever..

 

[cmdrrdmc]

My pc is now:
Gigabyte Z97P-D3
I5 4670K @ 4.2GHZ
8GB Ram
ASUS RX480 8GB


Im now running the game at ultra 1080P and the pc is barely being used with fans at idle ...

Would love a 4K display but could the pc run it smoothly ?

Enable virtual super resolution in your drivers. Then you can run the game at 4K and see for yourself.

 

[VR Jay Le Chardon]

The idea immediately above this one of using supersampling to test it makes sense, but true to my word I did play elite on my i7-4770k/16gb/gtx970 setup at 3840*2160@60hz in ultra to test it for you. Basically you are going to be right on the limit of your rig, it ran at 60 FPS most of the time except the usual hogs or resources such as planetsides and stations, and strangely enough, getting really close to something. On planets and stations FPS dropped to around 30, but strangely getting close and personal with a ship I was fighting brought FPS down to 18-25 when ramming a Type 9, back off to 500m and fps went up to 45.

Having ran that test, on ultra at 4k my similarly specced pc struggled at times, however I suspect you'd be fine with running 4k resolution at a lower quality setting like medium.

 

[Broon]

I too run an RX 480 (Gigabyte Gaming G1 8GB RX 480) paired with an i5-4460 3.4Ghz and 16GB DDR3 RAM so this question piqued my interest.

A quick internet search found this article over at 4k.com from shortly after the RX 480 was released. I learned a bit more about my card today.

http://4k.com/gaming/amd-radeon-rx-480-4k1440p-gpu-review-plenty-of-power-at-a-superb-price/

For the TLDR folks, the meat and potatoes of the article IMO is the following......

Finally, for 4K UHD gaming, the RX 480 serves as a tow dipping sort of GPU, meaning that you can definitely use it to play around with light 4K gaming on less intensive games at decent frame rates. However, trying to use the 480 for serious 2160p gameplay in more heavy-duty games like Metro Last Light Redux or Total War: Rome 2 is not going to yield acceptable frame rates. Even playing at 4K with the games we’ve tested below (Hitman 2016 and The Rise of Tomb Raider) strains the card’s capacity for frame rates into the 20’s and low 30’s at 2160p graphic settings. If you want serious 4K gaming, go for the GTX 1080 or possibly even the older Titan X GPU to a lesser extent.

Maybe this will help answer the OP's question.

 

[Kaltern]

Turn off Ambient Occlusion. It slurps video ram and will very likely cause black textures if you push other settings too high in 4k. Reducing to low or off means you're more likely to be able to push other settings up, making ED look pretty.

 

[JonSnowman]

On Ultra? Zero chance. Zero.

I have a R5 1600 and Vega 64 Liquid and only just get 75+ FPS on 3840x1600.

 

[Morbad]

ASUS RX480 8GB

Horizons? No.

In space? Maybe, but you'll see ~30 fps in starports.

Honestly, I consider the 1080 Ti to be the comfortable minimum for 4k resolution at the ultra preset if we are talking about worst case scenario content.

 

[Nightshade]

I use a 4K display with a 290X, which is roughly equivalent to your 480. It runs well, Elite is quite well optimized and I can maintain 60 fps almost everywhere. The Maia nebula in the galaxy map does slow it down, but that's rare enough. I only use 2x FXAA, but other than that I've left pretty much everything I can think of at maximum. If Elite has motion blur or depth of field, I run with those disabled since they annoy me, but I can't remember right now whether those options are actually in elite. You might be able to eke out a few more frames by dropping a few settings down here or there.

Edit: Just read some other replies in the thread, and it looks like my experience isn't shared. There may be an option I have disabled that others enable? That said, I think that you should be able to get good graphical quality at a good frame rate on that card, even if you have to drop a few settings.

 

[Tom Jacobs]

So should be possible but not with all detail, i'd just love a bigger screen and better resolution. i'll try the virtual resolution thing tonight. thank for the reply's.

I know ED is not the most demanding game as it runs in my old q6600 with gt 1030 at 1080p and even on 720p on my dual core and gtx550ti
But 4K seems a huge step up.

 

[cmdrrdmc]

So should be possible but not with all detail, i'd just love a bigger screen and better resolution. i'll try the virtual resolution thing tonight. thank for the reply's.

I know ED is not the most demanding game as it runs in my old q6600 with gt 1030 at 1080p and even on 720p on my dual core and gtx550ti
But 4K seems a huge step up.

4K monitors have 4 times as many pixels as a 1080p monitor. So the card basically has to render 4 1080p screens worth of pixels...very demanding.

 

[VR Jay Le Chardon]

After posting my reply with the results of running it on my 970 I put it down to medium quality on 3840*2160@60hz, Immediately went from 28fps on planets surface to 51fps, and a rock solid 60fps in space, but by that time I was too tired to pick a fight, so called it a night (and I'm like a half shut knife this morning).

TL;DR - its doable at lower quality settings but the full 3840*2160 resiolution, but with that graphics card you'll be forced to trade off quality settings for frame rate to keep the game smooth at that resolution. That trade off isnt all that bad as it is still a very high level of visual acuity owing to the high resolution.

 

[Sir Ares]

I run ED with a GT1070 8GB on a 4K BDM4037U with Ultra Settings, looks fantastic and run fine.

 

[Zelos1983]

If you want to try, use DSR. That way you can see whether it runs acceptable before you buy a display.

I'm also playing in 4k. Just keep in mind that the Cobra Engine does not provide a very good performance, and thus you might get frame drops in some scenes.

 

[NecasekO]

That really depends on what you consider smooth. I tried running 2x supersampling 1080p (equivalent to UHD resolution) on a RX 480 and was not happy with the performance.

Currently I have a Vega 56 and that still drops to 50 FPS range in stations and around planets at the same quality settings. That is acceptable to me and would probably be perfectly fine with a FreeSync display, but on a standard 60 Hz refresh it causes some visible stuttering.