StarField on i7 4790k + rx 6800 1080p BENCHMARKS!
-
So after 40+ hours in the game and a promise made in the "Will It Run?!" video it was finally time to make it happen. A benchmark on the sub par system (but only because of the processor).
Cities are the issue for all systems it seems so that is where I started. I picked Akila because it was a relatively straight shot to the rock (HQ for the Rangers) so a quick comparison could be made between the outside and inside FPS. What I found was very interesting. No matter where the sliders were OR the FSR2 settings the FPS was within a few FPS of each other. Like within the margin of error. So you might as well continue to play on Ultra (especially since FSR2 is a hot mess, especially when upscaling 50%).
I threw in some space flight, exploration and firefight video as well for good measure just to show that the game only runs like hot garbage in the city. Also bear in mind that the system gets a few FPS more when playing normally, screen recording doesn't take much resources but it does cost a few FPS. You'll still see the occasional dip into the 20s when the processor chokes on everything that surrounds you.
All and all there is nothing more to say than I am enjoying StarField regardless of the low fps PC gamers by in large seem to not accept. Just the fact it runs that well on an old rig brings a smile to my face. Would I love a solid 60? Absolutely. But playing Crysis running in the 20s most of the way gives me great mental fortitude. So much so that I'll simply gloss over those instances where FPS just dips.
Anyway, back into the StarField!
2005 Mustang GT 5MT // 2018 Passat GT 6DSG
-
The odd CPU+GPU combo makes for an interesting fringe case. We've spent so many years focusing on GPU performance, that we've forgotten that there is a second half to the equation!
There was someone out there that made a video of "Control" using super low resolution, but cranked up DLSS upscaling to see how it would work. I wonder if it is possible to do the same here by turning down the native resolution even further to something like 720p and using FSR to upscale in order to leverage the GPU more (assuming that FSR is working as intended).
2018 BRZ, 2011 Mazda3, 2015 Rogue, [Former - 2002 Miata], 4090 Enthusiast.
-
@Jarrett said in StarField on i7 4790k + rx 6800 1080p BENCHMARKS!:
The odd CPU+GPU combo makes for an interesting fringe case. We've spent so many years focusing on GPU performance, that we've forgotten that there is a second half to the equation!
There was someone out there that made a video of "Control" using super low resolution, but cranked up DLSS upscaling to see how it would work. I wonder if it is possible to do the same here by turning down the native resolution even further to something like 720p and using FSR to upscale in order to leverage the GPU more (assuming that FSR is working as intended).
FSR2 looks like absolute garbage to be honest for little to no gain at all. FSR3 is supposed to come out and support frame generation although I got no clue how that would translate in the same benchmark. I am intending to try when it comes out next year. I wrote down the save game I used for this city run so that stays at least roughly the same.
And yes, it is an odd combo. I was originally wanting to use the GPU for my new PC build but it never happened. In part because the GPU gave the system such an uplift I couldn't justify buying something else. Until StarField it ran everything at 60fps on the med-high or even ultra settings. The R9 390 I had before it had half the performance. One thing is for sure though, the 4790k is 100% bottle-necking the GPU.
2023 really is the first year, in earnest, where the 4790k is showing it's age. I am running it till 2024 for sure. Especially with the cooling I just installed, the system just runs like it was new... Actually, better than new! I still suppress the memories of the boot time on the spinning platters... What a travesty that was!
2005 Mustang GT 5MT // 2018 Passat GT 6DSG
-
@TheDutchTexan dya reckon itll run on not hideous graphics and an acceptable fps on my i7 4770,gtx 1650 and 16 gigs of ram?
i am interested but think i may need to upgrade first
que sera sera
-
@farscythe said in StarField on i7 4790k + rx 6800 1080p BENCHMARKS!:
@TheDutchTexan dya reckon itll run on not hideous graphics and an acceptable fps on my i7 4770,gtx 1650 and 16 gigs of ram?
i am interested but think i may need to upgrade first
If you are planning to build a PC anyway just get the game and try to run it. That is essentially what I ended up doing. I wanted to build a new rig before the game came out, stuff ended up happening that made me not want to spend 2,5K on a new rig and I just yolo'd. Was COMPLETELY going to run to microcenter if it didn't run by the way...
It ran fine, and then I ended up dropping about $100 on new case fans and a new CPU cooler. It runs cooler now than it ever did. And it smoothed out the gaming experience some since the CPU now holds the boost clock indefinitely because it isn't running at 100C anymore (running between 50 and 60C now)
You can always get it, run it and return it. You should be able to rush through the beginning portion inside the 2 hour return window and it gives you a solid indicator on how the game will run. Although, full disclosure: The moment you hit New Atlantis it's going to run like garbage at times.
2005 Mustang GT 5MT // 2018 Passat GT 6DSG
-
@TheDutchTexan i wasnt planning to build a pc just yet....but my current one is nearing the end of its useful life
i was just wondering if i should get it now at full price...or hold off till i do upgrade
my little beasty is 10 years old now....i consider that a fairly good run for a pc
que sera sera
-
@farscythe mine is at 9 years and will turn 10 next summer. It has been upgraded so much though. I honestly shouldn't have even spent the money to overhaul the cooling but it was something fun to do and it was practice for when I have to piece together a full rig.
This old one has seen the following:
2 GPU changes (280X -> 390 -> 6800)
1 PSU change after the first one blew after 2 years (DON'T buy a thermaltake)
HDD windows 7 to SSD windows 10
Cooler changeTotal cost is probably $3,500 including the system that at the time cost $1,500. Also highlights the need to be able to do your own hardware / software stuff. If you can't you're spending twice that on upgrades at least... Labor rates are stupid...
I can only hope my next rig will allow the same amount of run time. Definitely building a 14th gen system and not waiting on 15th gen. It will be too bad since I'll likely max out CPU with no upgrade path there. But if you buy a god tier you seem to be solid for a good while anyway. The people who bought a 12th gen system have a conceivable upgrade path to a 14th gen because intel decided to run the LGA1700 socket for 3 generations. Would be cool if they kept doing that for the next generations too. Imagine building a 15th gen system and be able to upgrade to a 17th gen when the 18th gen comes out? Page out of AMDs book right there. Sucky for the MOBO manufacturers but a massive win for PC gamers.
2005 Mustang GT 5MT // 2018 Passat GT 6DSG
-
@TheDutchTexan when my end of year bonus comes i may upgrade to something a little beefier....maybe..i may also choose to keep this one till it really cant keep up anymore
anyways... cheers for the feedback mate....liked and subbed
que sera sera
-
@TheDutchTexan said in StarField on i7 4790k + rx 6800 1080p BENCHMARKS!:
especially since FSR2 is a hot mess
To be honest, I left it at the default, setting (which for me was I think 75%) and have zero complaints. Things look good, and text looks sharp (always a pet peeve of mine when people are showing off DLSS or FSR and then given screen shots of it looking good on repetitive textures instead of things that are harder to reconstruct). I'm at 4k though, so even with a downscaled render resolution it has a lot of detail to work with.
This is my first game supporting FSR2 I think, and it seems vastly better than FSR1 which seemed to need to be at max quality settings to not be completely unacceptable.
Do you have the dynamic scaling turned on? Wondering if it scaling down down even beyond your 50% in order to hit its framerate target?
In any event, aside from some very rare pop-in (and the game being too dark with a crappy flashlight) the only graphical issue I've seen is a weird thing where characters walking at long distance (think viewing someone on the pad at Neon from Ebbside) get a sort of shadow (I think supposed to be motion blur) that's bigger than they are which looks odd.
-
@TheDutchTexan said in StarField on i7 4790k + rx 6800 1080p BENCHMARKS!:
FSR3 is supposed to come out and support frame generation although I got no clue how that would translate in the same benchmark.
Everything I've read says frame generation is completely worthless if you aren't getting at least 60fps without it, and basically worthless above that, aside from making benchmark numbers go up.
Seems like a different situation than with upscaling, where there is real benefit if done well.
-
@TheDutchTexan No help for @farscythe but Microcenter is still running some great bundles right now, 12900k or 7700X with decent motherboards and 32GB DDR5 for $400 (or with 12700k for $350).
-
@farscythe said in StarField on i7 4790k + rx 6800 1080p BENCHMARKS!:
@TheDutchTexan when my end of year bonus comes i may upgrade to something a little beefier....maybe..i may also choose to keep this one till it really cant keep up anymore
anyways... cheers for the feedback mate....liked and subbed
I am running it till I can't no more. Even though I am planning to upgrade things are always fluid in that regard.
And thank you, I just do this thing for fun. Rarely get massive views out of the stuff I post but if it helps one person out or even entertains one person it's a win for me.
-
@facw said in StarField on i7 4790k + rx 6800 1080p BENCHMARKS!:
@TheDutchTexan said in StarField on i7 4790k + rx 6800 1080p BENCHMARKS!:
especially since FSR2 is a hot mess
To be honest, I left it at the default, setting (which for me was I think 75%) and have zero complaints. Things look good, and text looks sharp (always a pet peeve of mine when people are showing off DLSS or FSR and then given screen shots of it looking good on repetitive textures instead of things that are harder to reconstruct). I'm at 4k though, so even with a downscaled render resolution it has a lot of detail to work with.
This is my first game supporting FSR2 I think, and it seems vastly better than FSR1 which seemed to need to be at max quality settings to not be completely unacceptable.
Do you have the dynamic scaling turned on? Wondering if it scaling down down even beyond your 50% in order to hit its framerate target?
In any event, aside from some very rare pop-in (and the game being too dark with a crappy flashlight) the only graphical issue I've seen is a weird thing where characters walking at long distance (think viewing someone on the pad at Neon from Ebbside) get a sort of shadow (I think supposed to be motion blur) that's bigger than they are which looks odd.
Yeah, the stock level was 75% I think. That was actually what it was running when I did the "Will it Run" video and it looked fine. It turns to a hot mess when set at 50% but that is to be expected. 720p to 1080p looks fine, but half the resolution? That's going to be difficult.
Regardless, it isn't doing much for me in cities. It smooths stuff out in canned "dungeons" but that's it. I wonder if it is the dynamic stuff loading in or path finding of NPCs... Who knows...
-
@facw said in StarField on i7 4790k + rx 6800 1080p BENCHMARKS!:
@TheDutchTexan No help for @farscythe but Microcenter is still running some great bundles right now, 12900k or 7700X with decent motherboards and 32GB DDR5 for $400 (or with 12700k for $350).
They are solid bundles... Definitely tempted... But man, it runs fine and I am not hard to please. Just thank the maker I am not one of those FPS boys you see everywhere. If it doesn't run a solid 60 they got something to moan about. I am good as long as the FPS drop jank some games (including starfield) do doesn't become intrusive. And I am glad to say that it doesn't bother me in the slightest.
-
Hey!
I found your youtube video as i am struggling to get this game running about 26 - 30 FPS with as far as i can see a similar rig.
I have a 4790k (i have not overclocked it) and a 6700 XT
The game does not run well even at the very start in the caves. I have been testing indoors in the area that the miners would change clothes (very start of the game) and i get 30 FPS standing still and 23 if i turn my head, i can only imagine in a city it would be 5-10.
Turning the settings down to low with motion blur off etc and 50% render scale means i get 39fps looking at the floor, anything else drops dramatically.
Have you got any tips for how maybe i can get a solid 30-40+ so i can actually play the game?
Thanks!
-
@pabschabs said in StarField on i7 4790k + rx 6800 1080p BENCHMARKS!:
Hey!
I found your youtube video as i am struggling to get this game running about 26 - 30 FPS with as far as i can see a similar rig.
I have a 4790k (i have not overclocked it) and a 6700 XT
The game does not run well even at the very start in the caves. I have been testing indoors in the area that the miners would change clothes (very start of the game) and i get 30 FPS standing still and 23 if i turn my head, i can only imagine in a city it would be 5-10.
Turning the settings down to low with motion blur off etc and 50% render scale means i get 39fps looking at the floor, anything else drops dramatically.
Have you got any tips for how maybe i can get a solid 30-40+ so i can actually play the game?
Thanks!
Are you running SSDs too? The game is heavily dependent on CPU vs GPU it seems. Perhaps try MSI afterburner to see what is happening, is your CPU maxed out / running hot or is your GPU not keeping up? You are above the minimum spec with the GPU just like I am so I am puzzled.
Also assuming you are running 1080p? The game doesn't do much when you move the quality sliders around, at least for me personally.
-
@TheDutchTexan said in StarField on i7 4790k + rx 6800 1080p BENCHMARKS!:
Are you running SSDs too? The game is heavily dependent on CPU vs GPU it seems. Perhaps try MSI afterburner to see what is happening, is your CPU maxed out / running hot or is your GPU not keeping up? You are above the minimum spec with the GPU just like I am so I am puzzled
Thanks for replying.
So the CPU is running around 35-40% load which is why i simply cannot understand the lag.
I think you might be onto something with the SSD comment, it is running on an SSD but i could pursue that direction and maybe find something, if its running slow / has outdata controller drivers this could be an issue.
Ill run some SSD speed tests and play with some drivers see what i find and report back, thanks man.
-
@TheDutchTexan Quick update, SSD running to full manufacturer specs of around 540 read (Crucial 1tb SSD sata)
Tried a few settings and looks like resolution scaling or FSR makes zero difference.
One thing to note, my GPU goes to 99% utilization on the startup menu with just a planet in the background? Really? 99% to render that? What do you get on the menu on the 6800?
GPU usage drops in game to 5% when i open the settings menu.
-
@TheDutchTexan Starfield is the first game for me where I’m really noticing my computer struggling on the preset “high” settings - Dipping from my 60fps target to the low-30s whenever things get busy. AMD 3600 + AMD 5700XT targeting 1440p on a 21:9 ultrawide. I haven’t looked into my stats enough to determine which component is acting as my bottle neck yet but it should be interesting. Hopefully the game gets more optimized as time goes on and updates come out.
-
@pabschabs said in StarField on i7 4790k + rx 6800 1080p BENCHMARKS!:
@TheDutchTexan Quick update, SSD running to full manufacturer specs of around 540 read (Crucial 1tb SSD sata)
Tried a few settings and looks like resolution scaling or FSR makes zero difference.
One thing to note, my GPU goes to 99% utilization on the startup menu with just a planet in the background? Really? 99% to render that? What do you get on the menu on the 6800?
GPU usage drops in game to 5% when i open the settings menu.
Set the game to cap the frames at 60 if it isn't already. You will run way more FPS in the base menu and as such the card just runs it's heart out. If you check my video my processor is running north of 90% most of the time. I can't fathom why yours isn't getting capped too.
