Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
AMD Ryzen 5 5600H with 16 gb ram on a RTX3050M with 4gb ram
Just a lenovo gaming laptop, most anoying thing.... automaticly disconnecting wired controller.
Ofcourse some minor graphic glitching like flikering shadows but i never drop below 30FPS and also see 60FPS on various times and suroundings.
So im not sure why you run that badly, maybe its the 3440x1440 ?
and playing in 4k is only for few games. Better is 2560x1440p monitors for gaming.
R7 5800X3D would be best for your RTX3080 in 4k and 1440p at 1080p it will be arround 10% bottlenecked. NB! if you still have HDD or SSD swap those with M.2 drives.
Lush worlds and densely populated settlements tank framerate. However, if you look at the ground and check GPU busy, you can see it is barely working yet the CPU is struggling. The more progress in the world you have the worse it becomes. It's the Creation Engine and the myriad of (slow) scripts they added to run the world.
I have an i7 13700K, which is very powerful but very underutilized in the scenes above. Plus I have 64GB RAM at 4800MT. If I had 6000MT, that would get me another 20% framerate. Thus, my current setup gets me 40 fps on average in New Atlantis at 1080p low no upscaling. I get 20 fps on average in lush worlds. Both case, simply looking at the ground.
Start your tweaks with list list (you won't have to do all of it):
Borderless Fullscreen: Enable this option for better performance
Window Size: Set it to your display's native resolution
Dynamic Scaling: Turn this off
Render Resolution Scale: Optimal performance is achieved at 75%
Upscaling: Use FSR2
Sharpening: A setting of 70% strikes a balance between performance and visual quality
Graphics Preset: Select "Custom"
VRS: Keep it off
Motion Blur: Disable for improved clarity
Film Grain: Turn off for a cleaner image
Vsync: Enable it unless you have a Variable Refresh Rate (VRR) display
Shadow Quality: Set to Medium
Indirect Lighting: Medium
Reflections: Low (raise it if you have extra performance headroom)
Particle Quality: Set to Low as it significantly impacts performance
Volumetric Lighting: Choose Medium (lower for less powerful systems)
Crowd Density: Keep it on Low (CPU-dependent)
GTAO Quality: Medium
Grass Quality: Medium (lower for improved performance)
Contact Shadows: Low
Depth of Field: Turn it off
Source: https://www.ghacks.net/2023/09/08/starfield-performance-optimization-guide/
at first my game was using only 15GB of Ram but after 60 hours it showed me over 20GB of RAM usage
I've got the 12700K CPU, 32GB RAM and I'm using a Gigabyte 3060ti with 8GB VRAM. I get 60FPS in anything but the widest open-areas and then I'm only dropping to the mid-50s.
I don't do most of the changes I listed in my previous post in this thread.
Dynamic Resolution is ON
Render Resolution is 100%
Shadows are to Low.
Indirect Lighting is Ultra
Reflections are High
Particle quality is High
Volumetric lighting is Medium
Crowd density is High
Motion blur is OFF (It makes me motion sick, I have to turn it off)
GTAO quality is Medium
Grass quality is High
VSync is ON
Upscaling is FSR2
Sharpening is set at 80%
VRS is ON
Film Grain Intensity is 10%
Depth of Field is On.
The problem is likely that you think your GPU is good enough for your monitor. It isn't for anything but graphicily simplified games. It never was. People really don't understand how to match their GPU to their monitor.
It's kind of technical, but if you look at Skyrim's map, it's EIGHT SEPERATE AREAS deliberately constructed with visual barriers (mountains & forests) so you load very small areas. We're talking 4 or 5 square KM.
This game goes 100% the other way. And you're paying the price. I'm not because I'm old. And we old people, who grew up in the days of massive hardware limitations learned you have to balance everything.
YOU CAN NOT HAVE IT ALL. Get a 1080p monitor if you want high frame rates. Especially as there are human factors involved that make 4K kind of pointless for most people as the limiting factor is the visual acuity of the human eyeball:
Scaling up to large format displays such as televisions and even computer monitors, you may be surprised how quickly your eyes can no longer see the extra detail, especially if you don't have 20/20 vision. Even a 30-inch 4K desktop monitor does not offer the full benefit of its resolution if you sit more than two feet away.
The only benefit of 4K, if you're not sitting within two feet of your monitor, is a minor rendering benefit over lower resolutions, such as 1080p and 1440p, that are visible at any distance, even if you can't technically see extra pixel detail anymore. A 4K image will appear more stable with less "shimmering" as you move the camera around in-game.
That's it. That's all you get. The rest is negated because our eyes are not capable of really seeing 4K detail unless we're within just two feet. And even that gain is marginal.
Or you can pretend, like all the 4K fanboys, that you have special, magical eyes that can perceive this differences. Just like the frame-rate fanboys pretend they can tell the difference between 40FPS and 120FPS when you really can't. (And please don't bring up the MIT study, it didn't mean what the frame-rate boys said it meant. You see the flicker which can't really process as motion.)
The human brain and eyes are limited in their ability. Technology has outstripped them. Yet people kid themselves they're special and they can tell.
I have a 13700F, 32 RAM at 4000, and a 3060Ti. I play on a mix of high and ultra, render resolution 100, 1080p. Crowds set at medium, motion blur turned off. I don't even bother to check FPS.
The problem is that the game appears to be poorly optimised, so any performance is possible on any rig.
AMD Ryzen 9 3950X 16-Core Processor 3.50 GHz
64.0 GB RAM
NVIDIA GeForce TRX 4070 Ti
3840x2160 resolution.
Lies. I've got a better pc than you and the games performance is very hit and miss for how it looks at max. New Atlantis runs very poorly at times for the hardware I've got. I feel like the game is rendering parts of the map that it doesn't need to making the bits you're looking at run worse than they should.
The game is just badly optimised. Even more so for Nvidia hardware and needs to be rectified. Updates are taking way too much time for a AAA game.