Starfield on PC delivers the best way to play the game, assuming your hardware is capable enough - but it's clear that there's a lot of issues that Bethesda needs to address. In this PC tech review, Alex delivers optimised settings and console-equivalent settings, and also takes a look at the DLSS mod quality vs AMD's bespoke FSR 2 integration. Graphics and CPU optimisation is also under the microscope, where it's clear there's still a lot of work to be done.
Starfield on PC is the best way to play - but the game still requires a lot of work
The Digital Foundry tech review - including those all-important optimised settings.
www.eurogamer.net
- not much shader compilation stutter
- menu experience is a mixed bag. lots of basic options are missing and has to be modded in
- DLSS is better than FSR and TAA by a good deal
- loading is faster than on Xbox
- optimized settings (using a 2070 super at 1440p 59% scale)
- foliage - medium
- volumetrics - medium
- reflections - medium
- contact shadows - medium
- shadows - medium or high if using a higher end gpu
- variable rate shading - on
- GTAO - medium
- particle quality - high
- motion blur - low
- indirect lighting - any setting, no real difference
- crowds - low setting, no real visual or performance difference
- DLSS runs better than FSR at times
- dynamic resolution only works when you're below 30fps
- causes improper frame pacing
- use Special K
- game is gpu limited
- unusual delta between AMD and Nvidia
- 6800XT 46% faster than 3080
- AMD has a smoother frame time at ultra
- using optimized settings smooths out frame times
- ultra shadows causing frame time issues on Nvidia
- Nvidia users will just have to wait for patches and drivers
- Intel users are even more fucked
- the game is cpu heavy
- has traversal stutter, better cpus reduce the size of stutter
- the game doesn't scale between core counts all that much
- Intel hyperthreading on performs worse than with HT off
- AMD SMT on performs better than SMT off
Last edited: