Will the new Odyssey engine require Graphics upgrades for some?

[thistle]

See, people here say "my old card runs it at 1080p with little problem". But that's a subjective term. What is little problem? 30 fps? 60?

We should be comparing objective numbers in threads like these. List your specs, your resolution (cuz that's huge), and your FPS during most of your time playing (also huge).

Some people will say 20fps is fine for them, others will say 60 is too low - subjective opinions aside, let's get some number crunching going

No, we shouldn't be comparing objective numbers and listing specs.

What we should do is wait until we know what the game specs are.

 

[CNC drill press]

It was a 2 gig 660Ti and the only time I ever had noticeable slowdown was in ice rings and in stations with all the mist. I had most of the graphics setting cranked up too. I have a 2060 now and it's smooth like silk.

Unless they're planning to drop console support, last-gen consoles are the benchmark for what will be acceptable and as you said, that puts a 1070 squarely in the 'OK' camp.

(I should probably say that the PC it was in was an i7 3770 with 16 gigs of RAM, I wasn't running a 486 or something lol)

660Ti! Lucky You! Thats rich, i used to play having a gtx 660 until april or sth. Honestly dont remember what settings i had but as fair as i remember they were very similar to everyhing maxed out.

Upgraded only because of quarantine i got 2 extra monitors from office and that required to reduce quality + accept 30gps.

That being said, after upgrading to gtx2060, I have 80-130 fps in space afair, BUT it drops down to 40 at crystalline site.

I find this astonishing that few spikes can hurt that much. I feel like they didnt give a flying f*** about optimisation cause there wasnt much to render in space so now they have to change engine/do any kind of optimisation to make kinda-atmospheric planets playable on somehing else than rtx titan.

I mean, gtx660 could run crysis which looked beautiful, right?

 

[Jibroni Gibironi]

See, people here say "my old card runs it at 1080p with little problem". But that's a subjective term. What is little problem? 30 fps? 60?

We should be comparing objective numbers in threads like these. List your specs, your resolution (cuz that's huge), and your FPS during most of your time playing (also huge).

Some people will say 20fps is fine for them, others will say 60 is too low - subjective opinions aside, let's get some number crunching going

My Specs:

Gigabyte X570 Auros Master
AMD RX 470
Ryzen 7 3700X,
G.Skill 1250 Watt power supply
G.Skill Ripjaws Ram 32 gbs
Samsung 860 QVO 2TB

As of right now, I can run this game at 1440P and get a steady 60 fps. The fact that it can maintain 60 fps with such relative ease has to be due to both the games age, and the fact that there isn't much that happens that would stress out my lowly GPU that much, with it being mostly a black void and barren planets. But that might change with odyssey. I'll have a brand new GPU well beforehand regardless though.

 

[Staarlord]

What about my 1070 mate? I'm not going to quote you, it just seems that you know more about this than I do lol! Cheers

1070 is loads faster than an Xbox X. I'm sure that will be fine for 1080-1440p.

 

[Bottom Hat]

1070 is loads faster than an Xbox X. I'm sure that will be fine for 1080-1440p.

Thanks mate, appreciate it

 

[Bran Tse Mallory]

I doubt there will be much change in the requirements to play. Frontier know the income generated via the current consoles - No company would cut off a revenue stream just to please a few high end PC users.

Not seen anything in the glimpses so far to make me think a more powerful rig will be needed.

 

[Staarlord]

I doubt there will be much change in the requirements to play. Frontier know the income generated via the current consoles - No company would cut off a revenue stream just to please a few high end PC users.

Not seen anything in the glimpses so far to make me think a more powerful rig will be needed.

I'm massively ashamed, myself. I bought Elite on Xbox, back when my rig was out of date and out of commission. So shorlt after I build a new ITX gamer, complete with MSI RX 285 6Gb, but have no way to get Elite transferred to PC. By consequence I had to look at an ugly rust color dashboard for years lol

 

[CmdrKafka]

I think the CPU is less and less of a concern these days compared to the GPU, whose importance is going up.

My six year old I7-4790K is still rarely even working more than at 50%, no matter what I do/play. Meanwhile, depending on graphics settings, the NVidia 1070 will almost certain be the bottleneck.

As for a 4K monitor, that's down to personal preference I'd suggest. I upgraded my monitor from basically 1080p to 1440p, and in games noticed little visual improvement. So I'd imagine 1440p to 4K would be even less of an improvement. Given the cost/performance hit of 4K over 1440p, is it then worth it?

Just for fun one night I hooked up my PC to my 75” 4K TV and was pleased to find my 1070ti was able to run 60fps in full 4K resolution on high settings.... until I entered a busy station anyway, then I think it struggled. But it was really stunning for exploration, with the lights off in the room and about 6ft from the screen it was very immersive, almost like VR (and I use an EDtracker too). So if you have a large 4K screen and are an explorer I’d absolutely recommend it.

 

[Steyla]

I have a 1070 for quite some time. With my 6 year old i7-4770K and a 60 Hz monitor I had 60 fps. Then I bought a 21:9 Agon 120 Hz monitor with G-Sync and I had 120 fps. Recently I updated to a i7-9700, still with the 1070, and my fps went up to 150 fps. That was all in SC. On planets and in stations my fps gets to about 70-80 fps. Yes, the 1070 is a great graphics card.

 

[Hvalreki]

I had to upgrade the graphics card in my PC when Horizons was released as it just couldn't handle planetary surfaces. This got me thinking if the new graphics engine Frontier are developing for Odyssey will also require a lot of graphics power. If some of us will have to upgrade our graphics cards, it would be great if we could have a bit of notice. I know it's early days for the dev diaries, but I hope Frontier say something about minimum hardware requirements

So I was mucking about in the control settings the other day and noticed I only had average graphics settings enabled (for literally years ). Cranked all of them to the max and restarted. Wow is this game beautiful. I can only imagine VR.

Spoiler

 

[Qualityoflife]

What is elite doing behind the curtain. I don't see anything that stresses anything...everything looks just good enough. Elite looks like it can be done on the first xbox. The galaxy is server side its heavily instanced. Cockpit looks like an overlay...or the est of the GPU is needed to get that elite orange in perfect hue? What gives please fill out my ignorance..I need/would like more clarity?

 

[ebbrell]

yes it may well do, we need to progress and not be held back by people with really low budget cards.
people with lower performing cards will need to turn the settings down.

i suspect there will be a few people complaining when it arrives that their GPU cannot run high FPS at ultra settings. i already play ED at 4k, I'm expecting to maybe turn down a setting or two when the update arrives. lets hope not, but those planets sure look detailed and maybe the cobra engine is efficient

 

[Rubbernuke]

yes it may well do, we need to progress and not be held back by people with really low budget cards.
people with lower performing cards will need to turn the settings down.

i suspect there will be a few people complaining when it arrives that their GPU cannot run high FPS at ultra settings. i already play ED at 4k, I'm expecting to maybe turn down a setting or two when the update arrives. lets hope not, but those planets sure look detailed and maybe the cobra engine is efficient

I will be interested regarding if FDs new rendering will be as well optimised as the current engine is- v 1.0 was fidelity city but was dialed down a lot until late 2.x and ever since has been tweaked to run very well on potato cards like mine. I wonder how long (if at all) the 4.X (i.e EDO) will take to claw back that performance?

 

[ebbrell]

it sure will be. i hope at some point on the dairies they mention what they have tested things on and what FPS they have reached. maybe i have too much faith, they probably wont tell us

 

[Unlimited Bagels]

I currently have a GTX 980 paired with a Ryzen 5 2600 and it runs really well on Ultra at 1080p. I have just read the Odyssey article in PC Gamer and some of the screenshots there look really good. I haven't seen any official updates yet about graphics, but I would assume going by the media released so far that it clearly looks better. Of course this will probably be on PC at Ultra settings. So I would say it's extremely likely an upgrade will be needed to play at Ultra, if you want all the cool new visual updates.

I'll get a new card eventually so I'd predict maybe the new minimum for the game at 1080p 60FPS on high/ultra settings - would be a GTX 1060/1070 and above.

And in my opinion let's be honest - that's going to be the best way to play and see all that hard work. Or even in 4k for those who have the system for it.

 

[Grace McClain]

Your 1070 is fine for this game. They aren't going to upgrade graphics to be that extreme. A 1070 is a great card.

My 1070 would beg to differ. I play at 2560x1080, with everything up full, because who wants to stare at mud? Doing so when I'm mining asteroids nets me around 30-40FPS. That's not great at all. The same experience occurs on planets. Also, not remotely great. If the upgrade is anywhere near as good as they claim, I'll absolutely be needing to upgrade.

 

[Bob McBobblehead]

Shame the RTX 3080 are so rare and there will be only around 1,200 RX 6000 series cards in the UK for tomorrows launch. It's like finding a Thargoid probe in Elite.

 

[Unlimited Bagels]

My 1070 would beg to differ. I play at 2560x1080, with everything up full, because who wants to stare at mud? Doing so when I'm mining asteroids nets me around 30-40FPS. That's not great at all. The same experience occurs on planets. Also, not remotely great. If the upgrade is anywhere near as good as they claim, I'll absolutely be needing to upgrade.

Yeah fair point, I guess at resolutions above 1080p of course will be a different story.

 

[Zieman]

My 1070 would beg to differ. I play at 2560x1080, with everything up full, because who wants to stare at mud? Doing so when I'm mining asteroids nets me around 30-40FPS. That's not great at all. The same experience occurs on planets. Also, not remotely great. If the upgrade is anywhere near as good as they claim, I'll absolutely be needing to upgrade.

Wow?
Do you incidentally have supersampling higher than 1.0?
Also, ambient occlusion is a resource hog, for pretty little gain (IMO).

Haven't checked if higher AA settings eat much FPS in ages, as SMAA is good enough for 4K on my lowly 980ti.

 

[Unlimited Bagels]

Wow?
Do you incidentally have supersampling higher than 1.0?
Also, ambient occlusion is a resource hog, for pretty little gain (IMO).

Haven't checked if higher AA settings eat much FPS in ages, as SMAA is good enough for 4K on my lowly 980ti.

Oh your 980ti does 4k? What graphics settings is that on and what cpu do you have? My 980 might last longer lol...