TL;DR:

Image showing the release times for Starfield

Image comparing the different editions of Starfield

Minimum Specs:

  • OS: Windows 10 version 21H1 (10.0.19043)
  • Processor: AMD Ryzen 5 2600X, Intel Core i7-6800K
  • Memory: 16 GB RAM
  • Graphics: AMD Radeon RX 5700, NVIDIA GeForce 1070 Ti
  • DirectX: Version 12
  • Storage: 125 GB available space
  • Additional Notes: SSD Required

Recommended Specs:

  • OS: Windows 10/11 with updates
  • Processor: AMD Ryzen 5 3600X, Intel i5-10600K
  • Memory: 16 GB RAM
  • Graphics: AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080
  • DirectX: Version 12
  • Network: Broadband Internet connection
  • Storage: 125 GB available space
  • Additional Notes: SSD Required
  • PraiseTheSoup@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I didn’t follow this game. Can you explain why a lower frame rate is desirable here? Is it just too demanding to run at 60+?

    • lustrum
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s 720p on PS5 then upscaled. It runs ok at 60FPS. But the Res is simply too low for me

    • beefcat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It is the first shipping UE5 game that uses both Nanite and Lumen, and with insanely detailed environments to boot. It holds a pretty stable 60 FPS on the PS5, but it runs at 720p internally and upscales to 4k using FSR2, resulting in some very questionable image quality.

      I think these features are insanely cool and their commitment to supporting 60 FPS is commendable, but this really is a case where I would actually prefer 30 or 40 FPS with a higher internal resolution.