Those system specs...

[SheevPalps]

Jesus, learn to optimise...

[Kafaroos]

Originally posted by SHREDDER:

6900xt 90 fps maxed 1440p?
then on my rx 6700xt red devil that is factory overclocked to 6800 it will also run high 1440p 60 fps without fst but also ultra 1440p 60 fps without fsr when iplay it.

No chance. I have roughly 50-60fps in jungle on my 6700xt pulse version. medium settings.

[Plex]

Originally posted by Kafaroos:

Originally posted by SHREDDER:

6900xt 90 fps maxed 1440p?
then on my rx 6700xt red devil that is factory overclocked to 6800 it will also run high 1440p 60 fps without fst but also ultra 1440p 60 fps without fsr when iplay it.

No chance. I have roughly 50-60fps in jungle on my 6700xt pulse version. medium settings.

lol what? I get full 60fps on my 7600XT 1080P at Giga Settings 1080p

[TimmyP]

This game only has half of a memory management system. It has hard cuts on 8gb of ram, that are directly influenced by Nvidia.

If you have 8gb of vram you will not be playing at Ultra Ultra High Max, you will only be playing at Ultra High Max because there will literally be a constant 98 percent fps drop off by one "hairline setting" from the title screen onwards. Turn that down one hair? Back up to 70+fps constant.

Imo this is the worst pc game ever released, because this stands for something so terrible. PC IS about scalability. This game does not scale, at all. Cant argue with this one either.

If this game is the future pc is about to become a tiered experience like console upgrades.

[maldyus_grm]

Hi folks, what can we predict for intel B580 compatibility and performance?

Please share your knowledge.

[tfa]

Originally posted by TimmyP:

This game only has half of a memory management system. It has hard cuts on 8gb of ram, that are directly influenced by Nvidia.

If you have 8gb of vram you will not be playing at Ultra Ultra High Max, you will only be playing at Ultra High Max because there will literally be a constant 98 percent fps drop off by one "hairline setting" from the title screen onwards. Turn that down one hair? Back up to 70+fps constant.

Imo this is the worst pc game ever released, because this stands for something so terrible. PC IS about scalability. This game does not scale, at all. Cant argue with this one either.

If this game is the future pc is about to become a tiered experience like console upgrades.

This game is not even remotely close to being as demanding as PC games used to be. A 6 year old mid range gpu for 60 fps is not a big ask.

[Columbus]

Originally posted by MancSoulja:

Originally posted by Columbus:

It's literally the same engine as this game. Can you not read? ID Tech 7

What has that got to do with anything? Do you even know what a game engine is?

Starfield uses the same game engine as oblivion, try running Starfield on the recommended specs for Oblivion. lol

CPU: Pentium 4 or Athlon XP or better.
CPU SPEED: 3 GHz.
RAM: 1 GB.
VIDEO CARD: 128MB Direct3D compatible video card (NVIDIA GeForce 6800+ / ATI Radeon X800+)
TOTAL VIDEO RAM: 128 MB.
PIXEL SHADER: 2.0.
VERTEX SHADER: 2.0.

No, that's not the same. Starfield is on Creation Engine 2.
Oblivion uses Gamebryo. People are wrong when they say those two engines are the exact same.

[longjohn119]

Originally posted by Find the Door:

4090 / 9800x3D here. Look forward to testing it out on the 5090 next month as well.

You'll probably have to wait until February for the 5090 since they won't even start producing the chips at TSMC until next month. Currently Nvidia is too busy producing the much more profitable B100 Blackwell chips for their HGX AI commercial lines which are in extremely high demand even though they have been cranking them out since October 1. Demand for consumer GPUs is still pretty low so Nvidia is in no hurry to release them when demand for thier commercial products are still very high.

[TimmyP]

Originally posted by tfa:

This game is not even remotely close to being as demanding as PC games used to be. A 6 year old mid range gpu for 60 fps is not a big ask.

This is wrong man. I get it though.

If this isn't the most demanding pc game ever, bar NONE, then why the hard cut (constant 99% fps drop) with that texture POOL setting? Even Cyberpunk and Alan Wake 2 pathtraced dont do that, and can work fine maxed on 8gb gpus if you know what you are doing.

It isnt the most demanding, if you confine within THEIR rules. If you treat is as a traditional pc game, turning on and off settings how you please? Sacrificing fps for visuals? Its the most demanding pc game ever, bar none. More demanding than Crysis.

All that matters is that texture pool setting, that is the pivot setting. That is what Nvidia is doing, to try and sell you gpus now. Keep on praising!

PS: I know this is all futile btw. This game was optimized, so that it could be gated.

[tfa]

Originally posted by TimmyP:

Originally posted by tfa:

This game is not even remotely close to being as demanding as PC games used to be. A 6 year old mid range gpu for 60 fps is not a big ask.

This is wrong man. I get it though.

If this isn't the most demanding pc game ever, bar NONE, then why the hard cut (constant 99% fps drop) with that texture POOL setting? Even Cyberpunk and Alan Wake 2 pathtraced dont do that, and can work fine maxed on 8gb gpus if you know what you are doing.

It isnt the most demanding, if you confine within THEIR rules. If you treat is as a traditional pc game, turning on and off settings how you please? Sacrificing fps for visuals? Its the most demanding pc game ever, bar none. More demanding than Crysis.

All that matters is that texture pool setting, that is the pivot setting. That is what Nvidia is doing, to try and sell you gpus now. Keep on praising!

Well I'm talking about the 90's and 2000's when you could buy a top of the line pc and then 3 years later your below min req.

Do you have a texture comparison between Alan Wake 2 and this game?

[TimmyP]

Originally posted by tfa:

Originally posted by TimmyP:

This is wrong man. I get it though.

If this isn't the most demanding pc game ever, bar NONE, then why the hard cut (constant 99% fps drop) with that texture POOL setting? Even Cyberpunk and Alan Wake 2 pathtraced dont do that, and can work fine maxed on 8gb gpus if you know what you are doing.

It isnt the most demanding, if you confine within THEIR rules. If you treat is as a traditional pc game, turning on and off settings how you please? Sacrificing fps for visuals? Its the most demanding pc game ever, bar none. More demanding than Crysis.

All that matters is that texture pool setting, that is the pivot setting. That is what Nvidia is doing, to try and sell you gpus now. Keep on praising!

Well I'm talking about the 90's and 2000's when you could buy a top of the line pc and then 3 years later your below min req.

Do you have a texture comparison between Alan Wake 2 and this game?

Everything technical about Alan Wake 2 blows this game out of the water. That game has variance and much more logic going on. I dont want to do a texture comparison between a game and a walking sim with some open areas to try and fool you.

If this is the future you want by all means keep praising it. You will never be able to try high settings unless you drop some serious cash at some point. PC will become a tiered experience like Xbox.

If you want a real future, as much as PAID people and their sycophants are trying to convince you otherwise, you need to understand why comparing this engine to UE5 is very, very stupid.

[SHREDDER]

Originally posted by Plex:

Originally posted by Kafaroos:

No chance. I have roughly 50-60fps in jungle on my 6700xt pulse version. medium settings.

lol what? I get full 60fps on my 7600XT 1080P at Giga Settings 1080p

then i will use fsr and play it ultra graphics an ultra ray tracing 1440p 60 fps like ido with all games that have ray tracing!! Giga settings is max settings?

[tfa]

Originally posted by TimmyP:

Originally posted by tfa:

Well I'm talking about the 90's and 2000's when you could buy a top of the line pc and then 3 years later your below min req.

Do you have a texture comparison between Alan Wake 2 and this game?

Everything technical about Alan Wake 2 blows this game out of the water. That game has variance and much more logic going on. I dont want to do a texture comparison between a game and a walking sim with some open areas to try and fool you.

If this is the future you want by all means keep praising it. You will never be able to try high settings unless you drop some serious cash at some point. PC will become a tiered experience like Xbox.

If you want a real future, as much as PAID people and their sycophants are trying to convince you otherwise, you need to understand why comparing this engine to UE5 is very, very stupid.

When Alan Wake 2 launched it couldn't even run on a 1080ti. If Alan Wake 2 has better textures with less or same vram usage then you might have a point.

[Kafaroos]

Originally posted by SHREDDER:

Originally posted by Plex:

lol what? I get full 60fps on my 7600XT 1080P at Giga Settings 1080p

then i will use fsr and play it ultra graphics an ultra ray tracing 1440p 60 fps like ido with all games that have ray tracing!! Giga settings is max settings?

Still nope. Game have only DLSS upscaler. There is no FSR Option. Poor performance on rx 6700 xt is coz of RT. U can't disable it. That's why.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0KhvmrPIa8

[Kafaroos]

Originally posted by Kafaroos:

Originally posted by SHREDDER:

then i will use fsr and play it ultra graphics an ultra ray tracing 1440p 60 fps like ido with all games that have ray tracing!! Giga settings is max settings?

Still nope. Game have only DLSS upscaler. There is no FSR Option. Poor performance on rx 6700 xt is coz of RT. U can't disable it. That's why.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0KhvmrPIa8

2k settings - https://youtu.be/z-4OReiBQWQ?t=2

[TimmyP]

Originally posted by tfa:

Originally posted by TimmyP:

Everything technical about Alan Wake 2 blows this game out of the water. That game has variance and much more logic going on. I dont want to do a texture comparison between a game and a walking sim with some open areas to try and fool you.

If this is the future you want by all means keep praising it. You will never be able to try high settings unless you drop some serious cash at some point. PC will become a tiered experience like Xbox.

If you want a real future, as much as PAID people and their sycophants are trying to convince you otherwise, you need to understand why comparing this engine to UE5 is very, very stupid.

When Alan Wake 2 launched it couldn't even run on a 1080ti. If Alan Wake 2 has better textures with less or same vram usage then you might have a point.

AW2 is soooo much more robust graphically. This is leaves and stone. They are just jamming those textures into vram without management, fallback, or consideration.