On the eve of Digital Foundry experts published two materials related to Starfield on PC. The team not only compiled a more detailed analysis of the computer version, but also tested the space RPG on the system with the characteristics of the Xbox Series X to check, it would pull the console mode with an increased number of frames per second. There was also information about the time for the release of tools for fashionables.
Would cope with the XSX with the 60 fps mode?
Recall, Bethesda Limited Framretite Starfield on consoles up to 30 FPS, as the developers "gave preference to stability". After their experiment, DF came to the conclusion that the studio was not in vain deprived of the game of performance mode with an increased number of frames per second – the framework reaches 60 FPS only in closed spaces.
To recreate Xbox Series X in the PC body as close as possible, experts gathered the next Frankenstein:
In DF, they gazed that the resulting system is not identical, but copes with the main goal – to reproduce the unique architecture around the CONSOLE CON. The team set the settings that are used on XSX, and began the test.
In 4K resolution with Apskaner FSR 2 Starfield issued 60 FPS only in closed locations. During space flights, the frequency was held in the area of 35-50 FPS, and in all other places I had to play 30–40 FPS.
When the resolution was reduced https://piratespinscasino.net/bonus/ to 1440p, leaving all the other settings untouched, the picture was transformed: the minimum framework rose to 40 FPS, and in most cases the title worked at 60 frames per second. That is, even in “heavy” locations like neon and during battles, performance remained at a decent level.
Digital Foundry is sure that Xbox Series X will have enough resources to draw Starfield at least 40 fps under almost any conditions. That’s why Bethesda could organize an appropriate mode suitable for screens with support for 120 Hz and a variable frequency of update. Experts also called the 30 fps restriction on the right solution – this really provided a huge scale for stable performance.
Parsing a PC version
According to the specialist DF Alexa Battalia (Alex Battaglia), it is best to play in Starfield It is on PC. All thanks to higher performance and a huge number of mods that managed to stick the community. However, the disadvantages of this version were still found.
The project does not suffer due to problems with the compilation of shaders-one of the most common recent sores on the PC. In the test Battalia Several statster met, but the host does not believe that they are somehow related to compilation.
The graphics settings menu offers a lot of toggle switches and runners, however, none of them informs the user what exactly they affect, and how also the performance will increase or the quality of the graphics will decrease when the options are changed.
Also, the menu did not find basic settings like adjusting the field of view or anisotropic filtering. If in the first case advanced users can still make ups to the appropriate file, then to adjust the filtration you will have to climb into the video card settings, and this, in turn, will seriously affect the quality of the shadows in Starfield. In addition, the PC will not be able to debug the HDR (with the display of colors in this mode, there are also problems), although in the console version there is such an opportunity to eat.
As noted Battalia, Games Bethesda They are famous for their vast capabilities for modding – fans are already actively completing the project instead of developers. On the network you can find many useful mods, including DLSS support, "which was actually worth being in Starfield On the day of the release ". The expert believes that FSR 2, DLSS and XESS, and not only Apskyaler from such a large-budget AAA-Igro, AMD. For example, in places where FSR 2 has a halo from the image or flicker, DLSS does not give out such artifacts.
Depending on the characteristics of the PC, loading can be much faster than on Xbox Series X. For example, the system with Intel Core i9-12900k and SSD M.2 on board loads the game in less than a third of time required by the console. Also Battalia He noted that the option of dynamic resolution does not give out the correct 30 fps, so so far it is useless.
Starfield too much loads video cards from NVIDIA And Intel. In all tests, graphic accelerators from AMD Analogs bypassed from NVIDIA in terms of performance and did this contrary to the standard profiles of the performance of these card data. For example, the Radeon RX 6800 XT jumped up the GeForce RTX 3080 by an impressive 40 %. Battalia I noticed that the mentioned glands are approximately at the same level, so in the theory of such a gap there should not be. “This state of affairs throws a shadow of cooperation Bethesda With AMD ", – said the expert.
The presenter mentioned and cases when on the release Starfield not launched on maps from Intel. Even after several updates of drivers, ARC A770 performance, the most powerful video card from Intel, lagging behind it in RTX 2070 Super and even the basic AMD RX 5700. In support Bethesda One of the users was reported that the ARC A770 "does not meet the minimum system requirements". It seems that the studio did not optimize the game on maps from Intel.
After testing the project on the Core i9-12900K and Ryzen 5 3600, the presenter came to the conclusion that Starfield sees the processor resources. At the same time, it seemed to him that the game shows himself better at certain architects of the CP.
