Todd Howard is a silly guy. "you might need to upgrade your PC"

[Grill]

Today on Bloomsberg Technology, The audience asked Todd Howard "why isn't Starfield optimized for the PC. The silly guy that Todd Howard is says this - "uuhh we did, its running great, It is a next gen pc game. We really do push the technology so you may need to upgrade your pc for this game but it's got a lot of great stuff going on in it and the fans are responding awesome." I can't believe he had the audacity to say this when the 3000 series cards are barely hitting 60fps on all resolutions and the 4000 cards can't get above 90-100fps. This probably means no patch or optimization any time soon bc you know, it runs soooo well.

Here is the clip of him saying this: https://twitter.com/tomwarren/status/1699703814209548630?s=19

after seeing these comments It's insane to me that people cannot grasp the idea that just bc it runs great on your rig doesn't mean its running well for every one else. Like its really not that hard to understand and then you guys will also sit there and defend Bethesda for releasing a poorly optimized game that took 8+ years to make. like i truly don't get it man.

[Ultrabot]

Originally posted by enderbeta:

Originally posted by AlphaVictorKilo:

Are you serious right now dude? What, are we going to start wondering how the new intel processors split everything up between efficiency cores and power cores? Stop this ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥

A twelve core CPU aligned with a near top of the line GPU shouldn't be struggling

And chances are this person has DOCP/XMP enabled, just...stop this drivel

First off when you game for best results on Intel 12th and 13th gen you turn e cores off. That has exactly nothing to do with your processor.

You're obviously not getting my point and really rude while knowing nothing about your system. You don't have a 12 core cpu. You have two six core ccus on one socket connected by what AMD calls a fabric. Your fabric is the limiting factor. I'm going to assume based on your response that you probably don't have a 1:1 ratio and the fabric binding your ccus is super slow. You might get better performance by using process lasso to limit your game to your first 12 threads so it is only playing on one ccu. The second ccu can handle other things running in the background.

I'm guessing you probably also have a 90ns+ latency when your processor has to use memory. I'm not going to help you fix that because I don't want a beginner trying to adjust their memory and bricking their system because I don't think you would be able to troubleshoot. But I would strongly suggest reading up on the subject and educating yourself so you can get your machine straightened out.

Are you being serious?
He's trying to play a game, not land on the real-life moon, mate. Lol.

The game advertised min/recommend hardware.
The guy in charge says "upgrade your pc".

So we drop 5k on a pc, and we'll be getting "next gen graphics", right?

Rdr2 from near six years ago looks better, plays better.

[r3aktor]

He also said the truth. 30fps is alright for Starfield.
I guess what he meant is there is a lot of stuff going on inside of the engine.
People will still dig out these secrets in years like people did in skyrim.
I guess there are people, who really enjoy bringing these secrets to daylight.
And there are people who just want some pew pew action and don't care about the technical aspects of the game.

[RedStarSingularity]

wow 30 fps WITH FSR2 is alright in 2023 while paying thousends of dollars for a pc where the gpu alone eats as much wattage as a entire pc a few years ago. doesnt seam insane to me ... (sarcasm)

[StarNate]

Originally posted by Grill:

Today on Bloomsberg Technology, The audience asked Todd Howard "why isn't Starfield optimized for the PC. The silly guy that Todd Howard is says this - "uuhh we did, its running great, It is a next gen pc game. We really do push the technology so you may need to upgrade your pc for this game but it's got a lot of great stuff going on in it and the fans are responding awesome." I can't believe he had the audacity to say this when the 3000 series cards are barely hitting 60fps on all resolutions and the 4000 cards can't get above 90-100fps. This probably means no patch or optimization any time soon bc you know, it runs soooo well.

Here is the clip of him saying this: https://twitter.com/tomwarren/status/1699703814209548630?s=19

after seeing these comments It's insane to me that people cannot grasp the idea that just bc it runs great on your rig doesn't mean its running well for every one else. Like its really not that hard to understand and then you guys will also sit there and defend Bethesda for releasing a poorly optimized game that took 8+ years to make. like i truly don't get it man.

yeah, people needed to read it needs an SSD, as most new games will require. Very few people are having bugs or issues, and all of those who do it can be easily traced to wrong ear or conflicting programs, not, go away and take all your other buddies who don't own the game, and maybe find a life?

[Klutch]

regularly the discussions for new games are bombed by people who have poor performance. i think people are pretty numb to seeing people struggle with their pc's, since so many things can be broken by the user and if the user knew what he had done beforehand he might be able to fix it.

secondly, many computers are built by people who just want a paycheck and good for them, but can you really trust them? cheap components are the bane of many pre-builts.

[sentry]

iirc Creation Engine games have traditionally been CPU heavy at release, usually due to the massive amount of RP logic being run in the background. If they are still using Papyrus under the hood this is probably moreso the case.

TES games were also never really considered fully optimized at any stage; it's not Bethesda's strong point. This isn't an excuse for recommended specs getting sub-60 FPS, just context. Considering how widespread this criticism is I'd expect at least one patch addressing worst case performance.

[Whitebeard]

have you updated your drivers? thats where i look first when having comp probs.. js.

[forester]

the problem of many folks is that they think DLSS/FSR is optional. its not, welcome to new reality. "everyone and their mom" will tune their game settings to resolution scaling nowadays. purists who want "NATIVE RESOLUTION OR GTFO" go to shop and get 4090, problem solved.

[RedStarSingularity]

Originally posted by forester:

the problem of many folks is that they think DLSS/FSR is optional. its not, welcome to new reality. "everyone and their mom" will tune their game settings to resolution scaling. purists who want "NATIVE RESOLUTION OR GTFO" go to shop and get 4090, problem solved.

a 4090 solves nothing this game is extremly demanding on the cpu AND the gpu and even then a 13900k and a 4090 still sometimes struggle nativly.
so if somebody want to know if the cpu is bottlenecking a 4090 get presentmon at look up the gpu busy graphs. the more the cpu and gpu graph inside it are moving away from each other the longer the gpu has to wait for the cpu indicating a cpu bottleneck

[Skrubmeister]

Originally posted by forester:

the problem of many folks is that they think DLSS/FSR is optional. its not, welcome to new reality. "everyone and their mom" will tune their game settings to resolution scaling nowadays. purists who want "NATIVE RESOLUTION OR GTFO" go to shop and get 4090, problem solved.

DLSS/FSR was a great solution to a problem. Now it's becoming a problem because it's the solution for everything.

[GunDoneCheg]

Originally posted by ⓀⒾⓦⒾ‰:

nobody could run witcher 3 on max without brand new hardware when it first came out either.

how did that age?

gtx 770 ran witcher perfectly fine

[SiXX]

Originally posted by Slatepaws:

blame fsr and dlss. it gave companies an excuse to not spend a dime on code optimization or graphics optimization.

This is my opinion. Not referring specifically to beth but most developers actually rely on dlss too much, putting the game's optimization in second place

[Slatepaws]

Originally posted by SiXX:

Originally posted by Slatepaws:

blame fsr and dlss. it gave companies an excuse to not spend a dime on code optimization or graphics optimization.

This is my opinion. Not referring specifically to beth but most developers actually rely on dlss too much, putting the game's optimization in second place

Yup. *old person moment*
back in the day, dev houses would devote months to stuff like 'how many polygons can re remove from X object, and still keep at least 90% of the detail.' or 'how many functions are actually needed in this piece of code to do the same thing.

Now it's 'don't spend a second on it, we'll just tell them to use dlss/fsr or 'buy a better pc'.

case in point the ssd requirement in this game. it's only there to cover for the fact the creation/netimerse engine can't do modern large open environments that even unreal engine 4 could. If you have spinning rust in any setup that can saturate the sata bus like a sata ssd. it'll run fine. no m2 ssd needed and you especially don't need to buy a useless pcie gen 5 m2 ssd like some people on this forum try to push on you.

[Krudtugle]

Can't wait to shell out a fortune for that 4090 so I can look at ugly NPCs all day.

In 30fps.

Thanks Todd!

[SiXX]

Never going to buy a 4090.especially at those prices.. Its madness.. I could but i won't.