@@pochy305 imagine how bad this has to be, 1000 plantes to "discover", but actually its a loading screen marathon, and etc.I have a 4070, and this pile of garbage barely runs at 50fps 1440p at ultra
gotta make the most with what you got this is more than playable however i remember playing fallout on older consoles and it ran like poop but i still managed to have a good time obviously dipping below 30 is not ideal and when xbox cloud goes live for this on the 6th people will have the option to play it at around xbox series x fidelity and perf
for ppl who are coming in on this later, i have a GTX 1650 and i run starfield on low settings just fine. occasionally there are frame rate drops but they are rare. i pretty consistently get like 30-40 fps with no slowdown on ship landings and stuff on a Lenovo ideapad gaming 3, 2 years old now and clearly not great hardware. if u dont mind low settings the game is incredibly playable. the only modification i've made to my laptop is adding an extra 16 gigabytes of RAM for a total of 24. other than that im just running with listed specs at low just fine.
i modded the game to run at 3840x1080 and it was great until i went to akila city. where i got a cpu overheat crash lol. you gotta remember these big huge cities are still surrounded by the planet. you can hop the fence at new atlantis and go survey just like any other landing spot. i love this game
i have a 6600xt and even cyberpunk didnt drop below 60 fps, im runing starfield at 40 - 50 fps average, and in some cities drop to 30 :( are they going to optimize this or is it going to stay like this?
Rumor has it that Nvidia's game ready drivers were not up to snuff because resources were moved to work on AI. Apparently, Bethesda is angry because they are being blamed for what they see as Nvidia's failure here. Anyway, we'll see if in the coming weeks Nvidia puts out a driver that greatly improves performance for this game. The 6800 XT is apparently beating the 3080 by a +40% margin, that's ridiculous.
The frame gen / DLSS mod was a life saver, and I'm on a 4090 playing at 4k. It would dip into the mid-60s at times. The engine is just an absolute ass. And even with top-of-the-line gear
i cap to 35fps, do you recommend playing with keyboard or controller? some people says that playing 30fps is better controller, almost console experience but i dont know
This game is so poorly optimized its a joke, been using a 1060 6gb for years now (yes i know i need to upgrade) It runs Fallout 4 with120fps in open spaces and 90fps in dense area with Real Vision ENB with mid settings. Meanwhile this terrible looking game barely clocks 30fps at all times 100% GPU usage while CPU barely ever goes beyond 10% (i5-13600K)
I have a decent pc but the specs on pc are outragous so I've been playing on xbox and even though its locked 30fps I'm have a really good time and not having to fuss over any settings is a plus
@@killswitchon8989 Yea I'm playing on series s and its smooth 99% of the time with a occasional hickup in big cities but its far and few between, it's looking good too, the lighting and little details are lovely compared to past Bethesda releases
I feel like 30fps is fine by the majority of gamers. it's just the loud reddit pcmr elitists' who can't handle lower fps. Yes I think that starfield could use some more optimization, especially on Nvidia gpus, but I have no issue with 30fps if I have to. I'd prefer 60, but 30 is more than acceptable.
Sadly, there is no option setting that improves the cringy and terrible writing in this game. Its so pathetic that they even combined computer hacking and lockpicking into some Fisher Price match the shapes to the right hole mini game.
Optimisation across the board is pretty terrible, the AMD exclusivity preventing DLSS was incredibly dumb, BGS should have been desperate for every frame they could get.
it's not about "optimization" it's an intensive game. huge open landscapes. they could just "make everything blurry" but they chose not to. im happy they made this choice. everyone's next pc build will have this game in mind. starfield 10/10
@@MooseMeus Just because you like a game doesn't mean you can't be critical of it. Their engine runs the game poorly and you can tell because they needed id software to improve their lighting and a bunch of microsoft engineers to help bug fix and optimise the game.
@killswitchon8989 1650 is not a bad card - you can easily run the most beautiful and technologically advanced games like Cyberpunk, RDR2 etc. on it, without any problem. The thing is - Starfield is simply not optimized. I guess - a refund is the best choice now. (Btw, Starfield has pretty low online in comparison to other AAA releases. Let me guess why...😅)
I'm running 45 FPS at 1440p with a 3080. not fun :D
@@danieldaniel1210 I found the story to be ok, but yea its poorly optimized and not a lot of exploration
@@pochy305 imagine how bad this has to be, 1000 plantes to "discover", but actually its a loading screen marathon, and etc.I have a 4070, and this pile of garbage barely runs at 50fps 1440p at ultra
How is the Xbox going to perform at 1440 at 30 fps? If 30 and 40 series can't do much better
@@killswitchon8989 ask the incels from bethesda
@@danieldaniel1210 Cope harder dumbass
gotta make the most with what you got this is more than playable however i remember playing fallout on older consoles and it ran like poop but i still managed to have a good time obviously dipping below 30 is not ideal and when xbox cloud goes live for this on the 6th people will have the option to play it at around xbox series x fidelity and perf
for ppl who are coming in on this later, i have a GTX 1650 and i run starfield on low settings just fine. occasionally there are frame rate drops but they are rare. i pretty consistently get like 30-40 fps with no slowdown on ship landings and stuff on a Lenovo ideapad gaming 3, 2 years old now and clearly not great hardware. if u dont mind low settings the game is incredibly playable. the only modification i've made to my laptop is adding an extra 16 gigabytes of RAM for a total of 24. other than that im just running with listed specs at low just fine.
i modded the game to run at 3840x1080 and it was great until i went to akila city. where i got a cpu overheat crash lol. you gotta remember these big huge cities are still surrounded by the planet. you can hop the fence at new atlantis and go survey just like any other landing spot. i love this game
nvidia, it's time to release your true next gen cards and stop effing your customers since the 2000 series.
its the games fault it looks like ass and runs like it aswell. A 4060ti cant run a stable 60 at 1080p. Starfraud at its finest
i have a 6600xt and even cyberpunk didnt drop below 60 fps, im runing starfield at 40 - 50 fps average, and in some cities drop to 30 :( are they going to optimize this or is it going to stay like this?
I'm so glad I upgraded from a 1650 super to a 3060 ti
Have you seen the clip of Todd Howard saying you may have to upgrade your pc
@@killswitchon8989 yeah i have he's just pretty much calling people broke 😭
Rumor has it that Nvidia's game ready drivers were not up to snuff because resources were moved to work on AI. Apparently, Bethesda is angry because they are being blamed for what they see as Nvidia's failure here. Anyway, we'll see if in the coming weeks Nvidia puts out a driver that greatly improves performance for this game. The 6800 XT is apparently beating the 3080 by a +40% margin, that's ridiculous.
My RX6950XT hits 70-80ish at ultrawide 3440x1440 high setting with FSR2. What an underrated GPU.
The frame gen / DLSS mod was a life saver, and I'm on a 4090 playing at 4k. It would dip into the mid-60s at times. The engine is just an absolute ass. And even with top-of-the-line gear
Yo mind telling me if you were running FSR? If then at what upscale? This is incredibly bad optimization for a triple A
I have RTX 580 8gb can i play ?
I don't think so it's rough with a 1650
i cap to 35fps, do you recommend playing with keyboard or controller? some people says that playing 30fps is better controller, almost console experience but i dont know
I use controller for starfield but I don't know if that makes a difference
This game is so poorly optimized its a joke, been using a 1060 6gb for years now (yes i know i need to upgrade) It runs Fallout 4 with120fps in open spaces and 90fps in dense area with Real Vision ENB with mid settings. Meanwhile this terrible looking game barely clocks 30fps at all times 100% GPU usage while CPU barely ever goes beyond 10% (i5-13600K)
i mean my friend runs it on a 970 so this is a lap of luxary compared
it's still running fine with GTX1060 ti laptop , it's me
dang as someone who got the same gpu on a laptop though. smh
RIP
I have a decent pc but the specs on pc are outragous so I've been playing on xbox and even though its locked 30fps I'm have a really good time and not having to fuss over any settings is a plus
That's great I was worried about how it would play on console. 30fps doesn't bother me if it could hold 1440 resolution.
@@killswitchon8989 Yea I'm playing on series s and its smooth 99% of the time with a occasional hickup in big cities but its far and few between, it's looking good too, the lighting and little details are lovely compared to past Bethesda releases
60-80 fps @4k with my 4080 and r7 5800x3d lololololol
I have a GTX 1650 the pain of 20fps it hurts XD
Play on 720p resolution
i really don't grasp when i think about this specs and how the game looks graphically... just makes no sense! Should run well!!
If walking through the city is that bad in conbat it'll drop to 20s to me thats not playable constant 30 is fine for me
Would a GTX 1650 TI I7 10870 8 GB RAM run this game at least decently?
Google system requirements for starfield and you should be able to find the minimum and recommended
hardly, I wouldnt count on it champ
try to see how it goes
No. Just, no.
love how the game looks like it could be from 2008 but performes like shit
I feel like 30fps is fine by the majority of gamers. it's just the loud reddit pcmr elitists' who can't handle lower fps. Yes I think that starfield could use some more optimization, especially on Nvidia gpus, but I have no issue with 30fps if I have to. I'd prefer 60, but 30 is more than acceptable.
When you run starfield on Xbox One natively
This is how Starfield On Xbox One looks like
Sadly, there is no option setting that improves the cringy and terrible writing in this game. Its so pathetic that they even combined computer hacking and lockpicking into some Fisher Price match the shapes to the right hole mini game.
I have a 970. So your card is newer. 🙂
MY 2060 IS AT 99 USAGE LOL
Optimisation across the board is pretty terrible, the AMD exclusivity preventing DLSS was incredibly dumb, BGS should have been desperate for every frame they could get.
There is a DLSS mod.
it's not about "optimization" it's an intensive game. huge open landscapes. they could just "make everything blurry" but they chose not to. im happy they made this choice. everyone's next pc build will have this game in mind. starfield 10/10
@@MooseMeusyou have no idea how game development works, the optimisation is poor
@@MooseMeus Just because you like a game doesn't mean you can't be critical of it. Their engine runs the game poorly and you can tell because they needed id software to improve their lighting and a bunch of microsoft engineers to help bug fix and optimise the game.
Don't spread misinformation.
AMD never limited any tech, the game developers were just Lazy!!
I get the same and I’m on an RX 6600 XT 😅🥲
it only took me 20 minutes to delete and refund the game. if you have a gtx 1650 don't buy the game at least for now.
I didn't really expect much from my 1650. Hopefully, when the game comes out there will be a day 1 patch
@killswitchon8989 1650 is not a bad card - you can easily run the most beautiful and technologically advanced games like Cyberpunk, RDR2 etc. on it, without any problem. The thing is - Starfield is simply not optimized. I guess - a refund is the best choice now. (Btw, Starfield has pretty low online in comparison to other AAA releases. Let me guess why...😅)