Why so heavy on the GPU?

[The Mind Castle]

I have an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti. I play a lot of games at max details, and not even Cyberpunk 2077 with capped graphics and ray tracing is a big strain on my GPU, temperature rarely goes above 60°C.
Then I launch X4, and the temperature immediately skyrockets above 80°C. Like, not even getting into the game, just the menu is enough. I have to crank up the cooling fans to 100% and it's barely enough to keep the heat at an acceptable level. And I repeat, all this IN THE GAME'S MENU. I think it's absurd.

Anyone else having similar experiences? Is there a solution? Thanks!

[Sir Snuffles]

have you checked what the temp is in game and not just the menu? some game's menu's poorly use resources

[Zloth]

The menu? That does seem odd to me. Which menu are you seeing? There's one that can appear if you have the Kingdom's End DLC that's mostly red.

You see, the game gives you the option to turn on volumetric fog AND anti-aliasing. That's a framerate killer (but still nice to have if you want to do some screenshots). If that red fog is volumetric and you've got anti-aliasing turned on, I could see it blasting your video card right then and there.

The game should warn you about that particular setting combination. Try checking in the graphics options to see if that could be the issue.

P.S. Maxxed details are NOT created equal. Not even close. Even with a 4090, the max settings for Crysis will still cause problems.

[Schuetze_Klaus]

Prob vsync not syncing in the menue and your grx push 300+fps and so it gets hot.

[The Mind Castle]

It's not just in the menu, it's all the game, I was pointing out about the menu because I mean, it's not even the full game, just the menu's scenery, come on...

[Unregistered HyperCam 2]

Originally posted by The Mind Castle:

It's not just in the menu, it's all the game, I was pointing out about the menu because I mean, it's not even the full game, just the menu's scenery, come on...

If you maxed the settings, the menu screen is actually very GPU intensive because of all the volumetric stuff going on in the background.

[Schuetze_Klaus]

Have you maybe overclocked your gpu?

[Meemai]

I can confirm I have the same kind of issue since 6.xx versions/Kingdom's End DLC release.
In my case, the GPU is a GeForce RTX 2060, so kinda lower end than OP.

I could solve the menu issue by capping FPS to 60 in the GPU settings, not ingame, but system-wide (my monitor will not go over 60 anyway, so it makes sense for my situation). Seems like VSync option was not capping the FPS.

This solved the menu overheating issue, but I still experience this kind of situation in a few specific systems, with Sanctuary of Darkness being the worst-case scenario.

Before some people jump into the usual replies about cooling performance:
· All required maintenance has been done (cleaning, paste, etc)
· Current cooling solution is functional and never goes past 65ºC under normal conditions.
· Drivers are kept up to date
· No other applications running in the background (barring Steam, to be able to run the game, of course), startup programs and services are kept to an absolute minimum, I like and keep my system running clean.

Honestly, at this point, I just feel that the hardware requirements have simply ramped up considerably, and some hardware falls shorter than it used to in the past.

[Hairy Mouse]

I have a Strix OC 4090. My GPU will usually get up to 61, maybe 62 with games at 4k max settings, RTX, all the bells and whistles, and at around 50% fan speed.

On 7.00, I'm getting nearly single digit fps at 99% usage and drawing 460w on the GPU alone. I closed the game because watching temps, it quickly made it to 71, and was still climbing at 75% fan speed.

This is by FAR the most GPU intensive and difficult to run game I have ever played. Enough so that leaving the game up and running for more than a short period actually makes me concerned about what it's doing to my GPU. I mean, mid 70s for temp is fine, I'm still not liking the massive wattage draw going up to 460w+ and how quickly the temps raise. I could probably be fine if i set the fan to 100%, and it's not that loud, but im just concerned about hot spot temp.

Just for reference, I don't think I've ever seen my GPU get less than 60fps on a game, and that's at 4k ultra, ray tracing, and everything. I get like 14 to 21 fps in X4. My GPU is only a few months old, and the performance is outta this world on literally EVERY other game except X4. I really SHOULD be getting around 6x to 8x my current framerate in the game, at the LEAST.

I really was looking forward to playing the game on this PC. Ive played it before on my laptop, which has a 4090m GPU, but i had to turn down the settings and disable AA, because my laptop couldn't run the game at very good settings and framerate with its GPU, and it also made the CPU really hot. I figured with a 14900KS on open loop water cooling, and a factory OC 4090 which i also did some tuning of the V/F curve to increase the performance while reducing temps, I'd finally be able to max out the settings at a playable framerate. Yeah... I'm not even close. Can't even get anywhere NEAR 30fps.

What's also pretty weird is even though my fps is extremely low, it's also EXTREMELY consistenst. Like, actually getting down the the decimal point of consistent fps, and my 99% fps is the same as realtime fps. There is zero fluctuation. I start the game and my fps just tanks and never moves from that number. The game also causes my nvidia performance overlay to freak out, and the GPU usage %, temp, and frequency will be wrong. SOMETIMES it will be right, though. Sometimes it just doesn't even register. I have to look at the screen on my PSU or use sensor monitoring software like HWiNFO, or the screen on my CPU cooler to see true stats. Nvidia and Xbox performance software bug out with this game, and ive never seen that happen before. So, if you're using the Alt+R overlay to monitor your stats, I'd suggest using something else to make sure its accurate. Also, my game and menus will be laggy AF on 14 fps, but my mouse cursor in the game seems to be rendering at least at 60fps, and is relatively smooth, but still nowhere close to 144hz.

The game is pretty simple and dated looking to begin with, not much going on in the graphical department, and it looks quite bad at low settings and resolution. Since I'm not even in the realm of being playable without turning settings off/down on a 4090, I just gave up on the game. I'm not gonna play a game at 1080p medium settings or something on a 4090. A while back and on an older build of the game, my laptop was atleast able to get above 60fps with Mostly ultra settings, volumetric fog on medium. 2x MSAA, and FSR ultra quality at 1600p. Still had my system maxed out, though, and id get down into the low 50s, high 40s on foot in stations.

[AwR]

Why not just run it at 1080p Ultra settings? Like you say the game is pretty dated graphically, benefits in no way from maxed resolutions or running flat out at 6000fps, so just whack it down to 1080p, turn on adaptive VSync and give your 4090 the night off.

[Hairy Mouse]

Originally posted by AwR:

Why not just run it at 1080p Ultra settings? Like you say the game is pretty dated graphically, benefits in no way from maxed resolutions or running flat out at 6000fps, so just whack it down to 1080p, turn on adaptive VSync and give your 4090 the night off.

I have a 32 inch 4k monitor, and it sits about 2 feet from me on my desk. I could play at 1080p windowed, and it would just be a small window taking up a quarter of my screen, which is not ideal, but looks pretty crisp at least. If I play full screen it stretches that out by 400% to fit my screen, and looks super blurry and distorted without a proper upscaler. Like, the other settings don't even really matter at that point, cause you cant hardly make out any details when stretching a 1080p image by 4x on a 32" screen.

There is FSR 1.0 in the game, which essentially does render at a lower resolution and then upscale, but the ultra quality setting doesn't do much at all for performance. Even regular quality doesn't change the performance a whole lot, but still looks like ass since its FSR 1.0.

Need a proper DLSS implementation in the game, but even then, I think I'd probably have to drop clear to balanced mode to even get 60fps with DLSS.

As for why set the graphics that way, as I said, the game doesn't look super impressive visually, so it needs all the help it can get. Resolution and AA are the most important settings that have the most impact. 4k res allows for high clarity and visibility of fine details on a screen this size. AA stabilizes the image to prevent harsh lines and edges having that shimmering pixelation and jaggy look. Dropping from 4k ultra settings to 1440p high settings also only changes it by a few fps, from like 14 to 21. At 1080p medium i can get 90fps, with AA disabled. If i turn AA on i drop back down to like 28fps. There isn't another game I even know of that behaves like this. I can run cyberpunk max 4k and path tracing and still get over 60fps.

Also, I built this system specifically BECAUSE I didn't wanna worry about optimization, and system reqs, and if I could run something or get acceptable performance. Just start the game, settings default to max/click one button, and it just works. With what I spent on it, I feel that NOT utilizing it to its potential is a lot of money to waste. It would be like building a drag car to use just riding it from your front door to your mailbox, when you could have just bought a golf cart and achieved similar results.

My CPU stays at low utilization when playing, so has more than enough performance headroom, and isnt causing a bottleneck. The level of detail and visual fidelity of this game means my GPU should be able to get above 100fps without breaking a sweat. I mean, most of the time the game is literally rendering nothing. Like, its actually just empty space with a skybox, and a few ship/station models floating here and there. The min hardware spec is an i5-4590 and GTX 780, while the RECOMMENDED spec for the game lists an i7-6700 and GTX 1070. That's like 10 year old mid-range hardware. I have a 14900KS and 4090, so there is definitely an issue and its not just my hardware.

The fact that not EVERYONE is also complaining about performance, as well as the fact that performance seems unrelated to hardware spec, means something is wrong with a game setting, or a weird issue with some specific hardware and driver version. The way the game also seems to stay locked to that very consistent low framerate, with 99% fps being the same, no spikes or dips, and the framerate also weirdly always being a multiple of 7. messing with settings, Ive seen my fps exactly at... 14, 21, 28, and 91. Not between or ranging from those numbers, but only on those EXACT numbers.

[⛧]

Opted in for beta just to test this.

@ 4k ultra settings
no AA
no upscaling
71-93fps at station and outside
GPU default clocks, fans auto, 65-68c temp
cpu 14600kf
GPU 7900GRE
MEM 32GB @ 6400Mhz

[Treyen]

If your card is overheating, that's a physical issue. Could be fan curve is dumb so it isn't turning fans up, poor case design/layout, insufficient cooling for the case, dirty filters/fans/heatsinks, etc. Nvidia cards will happily run forever at around 80C. If the game is running like ♥♥♥♥, thats one thing, but complaining that your pc is having to...operate normally? I don't get it.

[Hairy Mouse]

Originally posted by Treyen:

If your card is overheating, that's a physical issue. Could be fan curve is dumb so it isn't turning fans up, poor case design/layout, insufficient cooling for the case, dirty filters/fans/heatsinks, etc. Nvidia cards will happily run forever at around 80C. If the game is running like ♥♥♥♥, thats one thing, but complaining that your pc is having to...operate normally? I don't get it.

Because it quickly gets higher than it does for any other game, when it is nearly pristine in terrms of being dust free, is in a large cause with multiple 140mm fans for intake and exhaust, as well as my radiator exhausting with 3 additional 120mm fans, i clean and dust my PC and filters about every 3 or 4 days, pretty much twice a week, and the GPU was set to a manual 75% fans before the game was even started. Yet it gets into the 70s extremely quickly. I never let it just keep going to see how high it would get, but its strange behavior, and the game had my GPU stuck pulling like 460w constantly. The GPU has failsafes and temp sensors, and I can't speak for OP, but theres no need to put any wear or excess heat on it for no reason. Why would I strain it for no reason, or have it degrade my paste, or pump out from the quick swings from hot/cold.

Even if its not gonna break my GPU, I'm not just gonna sit there and leave it running like that and go, "huh, weird. lets just let it go and see what happens." There is obviously something quite wrong with the game, and allowing it to continue to run isn't gonna help or fix it. That behavior is not normal for even for much newer and graphically intensive games, yet an older and much simpler game is demanding more from my GPU than maxed out 4k cyberpunk... and from simply sitting at the main menu screen. A 4090 isnt cheap, and I'm gonna do everything I can, no matter how small, to prolong its function and life span any way I can, and especially when something is making it exhibit extremely abnormal function.

[Schuetze_Klaus]

Originally posted by Hairy Mouse:

Originally posted by AwR:

Why not just run it at 1080p Ultra settings? Like you say the game is pretty dated graphically, benefits in no way from maxed resolutions or running flat out at 6000fps, so just whack it down to 1080p, turn on adaptive VSync and give your 4090 the night off.

I have a 32 inch 4k monitor, and it sits about 2 feet from me on my desk. I could play at 1080p windowed, and it would just be a small window taking up a quarter of my screen, which is not ideal, but looks pretty crisp at least. If I play full screen it stretches that out by 400% to fit my screen, and looks super blurry and distorted without a proper upscaler. Like, the other settings don't even really matter at that point, cause you cant hardly make out any details when stretching a 1080p image by 4x on a 32" screen.

There is FSR 1.0 in the game, which essentially does render at a lower resolution and then upscale, but the ultra quality setting doesn't do much at all for performance. Even regular quality doesn't change the performance a whole lot, but still looks like ass since its FSR 1.0.

Need a proper DLSS implementation in the game, but even then, I think I'd probably have to drop clear to balanced mode to even get 60fps with DLSS.

As for why set the graphics that way, as I said, the game doesn't look super impressive visually, so it needs all the help it can get. Resolution and AA are the most important settings that have the most impact. 4k res allows for high clarity and visibility of fine details on a screen this size. AA stabilizes the image to prevent harsh lines and edges having that shimmering pixelation and jaggy look. Dropping from 4k ultra settings to 1440p high settings also only changes it by a few fps, from like 14 to 21. At 1080p medium i can get 90fps, with AA disabled. If i turn AA on i drop back down to like 28fps. There isn't another game I even know of that behaves like this. I can run cyberpunk max 4k and path tracing and still get over 60fps.

Also, I built this system specifically BECAUSE I didn't wanna worry about optimization, and system reqs, and if I could run something or get acceptable performance. Just start the game, settings default to max/click one button, and it just works. With what I spent on it, I feel that NOT utilizing it to its potential is a lot of money to waste. It would be like building a drag car to use just riding it from your front door to your mailbox, when you could have just bought a golf cart and achieved similar results.

My CPU stays at low utilization when playing, so has more than enough performance headroom, and isnt causing a bottleneck. The level of detail and visual fidelity of this game means my GPU should be able to get above 100fps without breaking a sweat. I mean, most of the time the game is literally rendering nothing. Like, its actually just empty space with a skybox, and a few ship/station models floating here and there. The min hardware spec is an i5-4590 and GTX 780, while the RECOMMENDED spec for the game lists an i7-6700 and GTX 1070. That's like 10 year old mid-range hardware. I have a 14900KS and 4090, so there is definitely an issue and its not just my hardware.

The fact that not EVERYONE is also complaining about performance, as well as the fact that performance seems unrelated to hardware spec, means something is wrong with a game setting, or a weird issue with some specific hardware and driver version. The way the game also seems to stay locked to that very consistent low framerate, with 99% fps being the same, no spikes or dips, and the framerate also weirdly always being a multiple of 7. messing with settings, Ive seen my fps exactly at... 14, 21, 28, and 91. Not between or ranging from those numbers, but only on those EXACT numbers.

WOW what a Wot...

Somehow i think its User Error.

[AwR]

Originally posted by Hairy Mouse:

Originally posted by AwR:

Why not just run it at 1080p Ultra settings? Like you say the game is pretty dated graphically, benefits in no way from maxed resolutions or running flat out at 6000fps, so just whack it down to 1080p, turn on adaptive VSync and give your 4090 the night off.

I have a 32 inch 4k monitor, and it sits about 2 feet from me on my desk. I could play at 1080p windowed, and it would just be a small window taking up a quarter of my screen, which is not ideal, but looks pretty crisp at least. If I play full screen it stretches that out by 400% to fit my screen, and looks super blurry and distorted without a proper upscaler. Like, the other settings don't even really matter at that point, cause you cant hardly make out any details when stretching a 1080p image by 4x on a 32" screen.

There is FSR 1.0 in the game, which essentially does render at a lower resolution and then upscale, but the ultra quality setting doesn't do much at all for performance. Even regular quality doesn't change the performance a whole lot, but still looks like ass since its FSR 1.0.

Need a proper DLSS implementation in the game, but even then, I think I'd probably have to drop clear to balanced mode to even get 60fps with DLSS.

As for why set the graphics that way, as I said, the game doesn't look super impressive visually, so it needs all the help it can get. Resolution and AA are the most important settings that have the most impact. 4k res allows for high clarity and visibility of fine details on a screen this size. AA stabilizes the image to prevent harsh lines and edges having that shimmering pixelation and jaggy look. Dropping from 4k ultra settings to 1440p high settings also only changes it by a few fps, from like 14 to 21. At 1080p medium i can get 90fps, with AA disabled. If i turn AA on i drop back down to like 28fps. There isn't another game I even know of that behaves like this. I can run cyberpunk max 4k and path tracing and still get over 60fps.

Also, I built this system specifically BECAUSE I didn't wanna worry about optimization, and system reqs, and if I could run something or get acceptable performance. Just start the game, settings default to max/click one button, and it just works. With what I spent on it, I feel that NOT utilizing it to its potential is a lot of money to waste. It would be like building a drag car to use just riding it from your front door to your mailbox, when you could have just bought a golf cart and achieved similar results.

My CPU stays at low utilization when playing, so has more than enough performance headroom, and isnt causing a bottleneck. The level of detail and visual fidelity of this game means my GPU should be able to get above 100fps without breaking a sweat. I mean, most of the time the game is literally rendering nothing. Like, its actually just empty space with a skybox, and a few ship/station models floating here and there. The min hardware spec is an i5-4590 and GTX 780, while the RECOMMENDED spec for the game lists an i7-6700 and GTX 1070. That's like 10 year old mid-range hardware. I have a 14900KS and 4090, so there is definitely an issue and its not just my hardware.

The fact that not EVERYONE is also complaining about performance, as well as the fact that performance seems unrelated to hardware spec, means something is wrong with a game setting, or a weird issue with some specific hardware and driver version. The way the game also seems to stay locked to that very consistent low framerate, with 99% fps being the same, no spikes or dips, and the framerate also weirdly always being a multiple of 7. messing with settings, Ive seen my fps exactly at... 14, 21, 28, and 91. Not between or ranging from those numbers, but only on those EXACT numbers.

I'm running this at 1080p on a 28", Ultra settings with FRS Ultra Quality, TAA & Adaptive VSync and it's never even thought about dipping below 60fps. 5700XT also, so not exactly a top end card.

I'd say there's more going on with your setup than simply poor game optimisation.