So,ps5 confirmed 30fps,glad I'm pc

[Soul]

All I'll say,rumors were true,IGN confirmed it (said they had 24-31 fps),Itsuno confirmed it (said console is uncapped around 30fps and pc depend on the specs)

[JackTheReaper]

Автор сообщения: Sel Und Irae

Автор сообщения: Soul

All I'll say,rumors were true,IGN confirmed it (said they had 24-31 fps),Itsuno confirmed it (said console is uncapped around 30fps and pc depend on the specs)

If you don't got above Recommended you'll have 30 fps too on PC

:dxmevileye::dxmevileye:

Console will get optimization to run, PC will get nothing as is the usual with Capcom.

The recommended are for 30 FPS in 4K😉.

[Kocayine]

Автор сообщения: JackTheReaper

Автор сообщения: Sel Und Irae

If you don't got above Recommended you'll have 30 fps too on PC

:dxmevileye::dxmevileye:

Console will get optimization to run, PC will get nothing as is the usual with Capcom.

The recommended are for 30 FPS in 4K😉.

They really hink their console can surpass pc gaming {': amusing.

[Amon]

Автор сообщения: Kocayine

Автор сообщения: JackTheReaper

The recommended are for 30 FPS in 4K😉.

They really hink their console can surpass pc gaming {': amusing.

I mean nothing is impossible, tho would take a very very long time for it shud it happen lol

[Lathanx]

The recommended specs isn't just for 4k 30, it's for 4k 30 with RAY TRACING. People are freaking out over nothing.

Literally turn that feature off and watch your frames probably triple.

[[-iD-]]

Автор сообщения: Certified_Weeb

The recommended specs isn't just for 4k 30, it's for 4k 30 with RAY TRACING. People are freaking out over nothing.

Literally turn that feature off and watch your frames probably triple.

no its not, the rec specs for RT is a 2080ti as opposed to a 2080 without it.

[königplatzen]

I wonder, why they don't publish requirements for 60FPS? Most people on PC won't do 30FPS 4K and rather turn down the resolution to 1440p or activate DLSS/FSR

Seems like the requirements are based on PS5 equivalent hardware.

I would guess&hope, that it's mainly a CPU limit.

[FeilDOW]

Автор сообщения: Certified_Weeb

Lotta console fanboys in this thread. Disgusting.

Why is it disgusting that people have options where to play games?

[Zer0Sn1per]

Im guessing my 13700KF and 4080 will get me 100+FPS? So glad I moved away from consoles.
Starfield at 30FPS on console while I ran it at 100+ before the updates came out with DLSS.
I think this game will run fine.

[tfa]

Автор сообщения: Zer0Sn1per

Im guessing my 13700KF and 4080 will get me 100+FPS? So glad I moved away from consoles.
Starfield at 30FPS on console while I ran it at 100+ before the updates came out with DLSS.
I think this game will run fine.

What res?

[Zer0Sn1per]

Автор сообщения: sd

Автор сообщения: Zer0Sn1per

Im guessing my 13700KF and 4080 will get me 100+FPS? So glad I moved away from consoles.
Starfield at 30FPS on console while I ran it at 100+ before the updates came out with DLSS.
I think this game will run fine.

What res?

I play in 1440p mostly but have a 2nd monitor for 4k (movies and certain cinematic type games). I don't really see a huge difference between 1440p and 4k. But I will say when I played CP2077 I did in 4k at there ultra max settings and was getting around 120fps

[tfa]

Автор сообщения: Zer0Sn1per

Автор сообщения: sd

What res?

I play in 1440p mostly but have a 2nd monitor for 4k (movies and certain cinematic type games). I don't really see a huge difference between 1440p and 4k. But I will say when I played CP2077 I did in 4k at there ultra max settings and was getting around 120fps

I was seeing people running Starfield at 75 fps in outdoor areas at 1440 on a 4080.

[königplatzen]

Автор сообщения: Zer0Sn1per

Автор сообщения: sd

What res?

I play in 1440p mostly but have a 2nd monitor for 4k (movies and certain cinematic type games). I don't really see a huge difference between 1440p and 4k. But I will say when I played CP2077 I did in 4k at there ultra max settings and was getting around 120fps

It's a huge difference for the performance at least. 2K(1440p) only has like 44.44% amount of pixels than 4K(2160p). But 1440p is still quite comfortable. I think, native resolution of the monitor( + upscaling if necessary) is always preferable

[Zer0Sn1per]

Автор сообщения: sd

Автор сообщения: Zer0Sn1per

I play in 1440p mostly but have a 2nd monitor for 4k (movies and certain cinematic type games). I don't really see a huge difference between 1440p and 4k. But I will say when I played CP2077 I did in 4k at there ultra max settings and was getting around 120fps

I was seeing people running Starfield at 75 fps in outdoor areas at 1440 on a 4080.

Be curious the rest of there specs because I was over 100 at almost all times. There was a weird issue where when I zoomed in with a scope I would drop to 80-90fps but once I got outa zoom back up to 100+.

Автор сообщения: königplatzen

Автор сообщения: Zer0Sn1per

I play in 1440p mostly but have a 2nd monitor for 4k (movies and certain cinematic type games). I don't really see a huge difference between 1440p and 4k. But I will say when I played CP2077 I did in 4k at there ultra max settings and was getting around 120fps

It's a huge difference for the performance at least. 2K(1440p) only has like 44.44% amount of pixels than 4K(2160p). But 1440p is still quite comfortable. I think, native resolution of the monitor( + upscaling if necessary) is always preferable

Yes thats why I play in 1440p more than 4k, I like the performance better.
Reason I bought a native 1440p and native 4k monitor, I like choices.

[tfa]

Автор сообщения: Zer0Sn1per

Автор сообщения: sd

I was seeing people running Starfield at 75 fps in outdoor areas at 1440 on a 4080.

Be curious the rest of there specs because I was over 100 at almost all times. There was a weird issue where when I zoomed in with a scope I would drop to 80-90fps but once I got outa zoom back up to 100+.

Автор сообщения: königplatzen

It's a huge difference for the performance at least. 2K(1440p) only has like 44.44% amount of pixels than 4K(2160p). But 1440p is still quite comfortable. I think, native resolution of the monitor( + upscaling if necessary) is always preferable

Yes thats why I play in 1440p more than 4k, I like the performance better.
Reason I bought a native 1440p and native 4k monitor, I like choices.

!3600k. It actually drops below 60 at 1440p with 99% gpu usage. Meaning no cpu bottleneck.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZASmv1a8s4&t=103s

[Zer0Sn1per]

Автор сообщения: sd

Автор сообщения: Zer0Sn1per

Be curious the rest of there specs because I was over 100 at almost all times. There was a weird issue where when I zoomed in with a scope I would drop to 80-90fps but once I got outa zoom back up to 100+.





Yes thats why I play in 1440p more than 4k, I like the performance better.
Reason I bought a native 1440p and native 4k monitor, I like choices.

!3600k. It actually drops below 60 at 1440p with 99% gpu usage. Meaning no cpu bottleneck.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZASmv1a8s4&t=103s

And? I know what I play at and I don't let some random on youtube tell me what my performance is, as I know what it is.

I don't look to others, I play the game and see what I get as simple as that. Ill do the same with DD2. Play the game and adjust settings as needed.