Like 👍 Notify 🔔 Google is Not Sending Notifications on Time when a video is posted Please Help, It makes a difference. ✅Enlist Star Citizen | robertsspaceindustries.com/enlist?referral=STAR-XVY5-D2MV ✅Join 1337 DISCORD For Free NOW! - discord.gg/G8QV32M ✅Support | PATREON - ttps://www.patreon.com/TheNOOBIFIER1337 🟨MONSTERTECH | Code "noobifier" on checkout for -5% USA - monstertechusa.com 🟨GAME GLASS | USE LINK lddy.no/ab81 🟨MAINGEAR | Workstation - maingear.com/ref/noobifier/ 🟨E-WIN Chair code SSFF 20% | bit.ly/3geNo6F and USA bit.ly/3AvUSJy 🟨MERCH | META 1337 Bomber - metathreads.com/products/noobifier-bomber-jacket 🟨MERCH | META 1337 Teeshirt - metathreads.com/products/noobifier-logo-dryfit-tee 🟨MERCH | Cheap Tees - www.teepublic.com/user/thenoobifier1337 ⭐WEEOO | 🟥🟦🟦🟨🟨🟩noobifier.com ⭐Website | noobifier.com
Hey, NOOBIFIER! How did you get those RAM numbers? MSI Afterburner? I've never seen the game use more than 24gb for anyone else so I'm wondering how you got those numbers?
For a budget build would you suggest the 4930k or the i3 10100? Both ebay for about the same and not sure if the core count on the 4930 or the ddr4 and higher speeds of the i3 would win out in the end
Good info. It's worth noting that the server you're playing on can make a big difference as well. I normally run pretty well with my monster PC but can get crap frames if the server is suffering. That's usually a good sign to switch servers before it croaks.
Good info, thanks. But I'm not going to even look at getting specific hardware for Star Citizen until we're in Beta and getting the sense that we're getting close to launch. Frames per second? Nah, second per frame!
@@RyanlovesTh i mean he's right i just love that everytime someone says it runs poorly everyone says it's alpha that doesn't mean it could run at least 60fps for high end PCs lmao
Back when i upgraded my system in 2019, i did it piece by piece and i saw the biggest increase by upgrading my ram from 16 to 32 GB. switching from a sata ssd to nvme i saw near zero performance gain. gpu made a difference too. I will recommend upgrading the ram first.
The reason you didn't see a terribly noticeable difference is because your CPU can only process so much bandwidth. The NVME, iirc, uses the same bus as the PCI, so you only have so much to access between the GPU and the NVME drive in such an intense game. At the same time, while the information may travel faster on the PCI bus, it still gets queued in your RAM. With an SSD, you get a significantly smaller bus (SATA6 is 6 Gigabit per second, 750 megabyte per second, whereas PCIe 4 has a bandwidth of 512 gigabit per second, or 64 gigabyte per second). The reason why it's irrelevant is because Star Citizen is severely CPU intensive due to being nowhere near optimized. This stresses the CPU to not only process the game's code, but to also process the RAM cache, sending information to the PCI for the GPU to en-/de- code, other background information, keep your OS running, etc. The RAM for an average DDR4 is around low 20s gigabyte per second (160 gigabit), so there are two main limiting factors in SSD vs NVME: bandwidth used and the max bus rate of a CPU. In the case of my Ryzen 5 2600, my bus rate is 4 x 8 gigatransfers per second, or roughly 4 x 8 gigabit per second (according to Quora), or 4 x 1 gigabyte per second. So theoretically, I have a max bus rate of 4 gigabyte per second between all 4 busses. Between RAM, GPU, and storage, that's not a lot and nowhere close to fully utilizing an NVMe drives abilities. Compared to a 12900k's max bus of 8 x 16 gigatransfers per second (roughly 8 x 128 gigabyte per second), my CPU is obviously and MASSIVELY slower in comparison. The difference between an SSD and a mechanical HDD is astronomical since the HDD maxed out at an average read speed of 80-160 megabytes per second, the HDD is nowhere near properly utilizing a SATA6 port, where as an SSD's read speed of up to 550 megabyte per second is lot more useful. I'm not a computer science guy, just attempting to nerd out my best via Google, so I may not necessarily be correct on how busses work. For star citizen, the biggest jumps are going to be in the following order: switching from HDD to SSD (just due to read times) -> upgrading RAM (allows for more cached information = quicker processing) -> upgrading your CPU (more work per second is obviously going to be better) -> upgrading your GPU -> (if your CPU to has the transfer rates to support it) switching from SSD to NMVE. I too switched mine from a SSD to a NVME and I saw at BEST a 3 frame per second difference. I jumped from completely unplayable to "playable" when I switched from HDD to SSD (10fps to 18-23fps); to actually playable (25-30fps cities, 40-50 fps space) when upgrading my RAM from 16 to 32GB; jump to 29-35 cities, 45-50 space going from SSD to NVME; zero change switching from a RX580 to a RTX 3070 (CPU bottleneck); and based off what I've seen, I should be expecting a jump to 40s-50s in cities, 80+ everywhere else at 1080 (or even 1440) when I upgrade to a R5 5600x here in a few weeks.
"Low end budget gamer laptop." I have a Nitro 5 laptop with an Intel 11th gen i5, 1650ti (but listed as 1650), upgraded it to 1 TB nvme & 32gb of 3200mhz DDR4. With the duel fans in the machine & a cooling pad the GPU & CPU stay below 75c after a few hours of game play. According to Telemetry I get 26fps avg, CPU score of 130, GPU of 69 ;), & 65 sec load time. I play on high settings and get 35-50 fps in space, 27-40fps in space stations and surface POIs and 19-30fps at landing zones. I see all texture on surface, decent explosions, NPC faces look rubbery though. I will stick with this machine for at least a few years and consider getting a desktop rig for SC later. Great video for all the new players. Would you consider doing or recommending an optimizing guide for settings on machines/operating systems to squeeze out a few more frames for us budget gamers?
at 04:00, I am running it fine with an i7 4790k from 2014, and 32 gigs of DDR3 ram. While it is not future proof and may be outdated by the game's release, older CPU still work great for starcitizen. Keep in mind however, that, Gen12 rendered and vulkan are not implemented yet, but they may eat more CPU power in exchange for much better ingame performances.
I am going strong with an overclocked i7 4770k@4.2GHz myself. It is still running fine for now, but I do would like to play at 60fps one day. I think I will wait for the new generation of CPUs and RAM coming up.
The 4790K is one of the best CPUs I've had over the last 30 or so years, some really stood out. It's still very powerful, especially with unoptimized chaos like Alpha versions because its single-core performance and on the first two cores is quite beefy. It's a hot one though, the 4790K, so I'd recommend to delid it, then start overclocking it and you can easily squeeze out 3-4 more years with even a recognizable performance gain initially.
@@ancogaming you really have no idea how stuff works hüh? Use a system with an 9k series or a ryzen 5000+ and you will notice a huge difference in performance 👏
It's impossible to run this game really well (in a 4K equivalent resolution at least), but it has gotten a bit better the past few years - or it's just the newer hardware taking advantage. I remember before upgrading my CPU, I had an i7 8700K, and SC would actually completely max it (12 threads), particularly when I was down in ArcCorp. I will say that I applaud the team for programming in really proper multi core support, as well as taking advantage of whatever RAM you have on offer. Shows they are serious about developing a game for the future. Just hope I'm alive to see it, haha.
In the graphics settings in SC there are two settings Sharpness and Chromatic Aberration. If you are running at 1080p or above, these do nothing. But if you drop down to 900p, these will sharpen and correct the image so that it looks almost as good as 1080p but with a massive performance boost. The minimum specs on the website are for 1080p, so at 900p you can run SC pretty well on a computer like mine i5 10th gen nvidia 1660ti 32Gb ram. I get 30fps in cities and 60fps in space.
@@ThePauseNow this is pretty much exactly what I'm using and yes, it functions well enough and I hadn't considered going down from 1080p yet. Some bad frame drops every now and then in certain cities and stations though but elsewhere works quite well. Any city or station where there's smokey atmospheric effects seem to be the issue, idk why..
Bad info, chromatic aberration doesn't sharpen or "correct" the image, it mimics the color distortion that creates an outline of color along the edges of objects in a photograph/video through a failure of the lenses to focus all the light at one point. Turning it on won't give you a speed boost, if anything, it'll decrease performance slightly. And it especially won't make lower resolutions look or perform better.
There is no way on earth I can afford a new PC with my salary and country of residence, but my humble system works decently enough for now (granted, it was far above humble when I built it five years ago). I do have to say, the fact that increasing RAM does produce good results beyond 16Gb is great news, because that's a space where I can still make relatively affordable adjustments.
Interesting, I've never seen RAM usage go over 28GB on my 32GB system. It usually stands around 20-24Gb. With that said, my suggestion for Recommended hardware: @1080p CPU: 8 Cores / 16 Threads (with a CPU that has come out after 2017) GPU: 6Gb VRAM (with a GPU that has come out after 2017) RAM: 16Gb DDR4 SSD NvME: Don't even bother installing on an spinning HDD! 1440p: 8Gb VRAM | 4K +8Gb VRAM My current build sports a 3900X, 2070S, 32GB 3600Mhz CL16, playing at 1440p. Performance is all over the place, but it's only getting better, by the time they add Vulkan and Server Meshing performance will have improved a lot.
I hit myself over the head recently on why my new 32 gigs 3600 only marginally improved my performance. Until I found out my xmp profile wasn't loaded,... 16 to 32 was a good performance upgrade. Having those 32 work at intended speed made it a great upgrade!
Extreme Memory Profiles. They’re the speeds advertised on the box but are not always on by default. You enable them in the BIOS. Otherwise your memory will run slower. Also I think my BIOS is broken somehow because even when I enable XMP and save the BIOS Task Manager still says I’m running at 2133 mhz instead of 3600mhz. Any ideas?
@@jessicaorisaaclaemmle6905 bit late but, your ram cannot run faster than your CPU so check that, also if you have mixed ram and one is slower than the other it will always run at the slowest speed.
Having tested this with a lot of different hardware I can conclude the following. Most important part is the cpu. Disable smt on Ryzen for additional performance. Differences between Sata and PCIe SSDs are minimal and only really noticeable during the initial loading. 32 gigs of ram is a good choice for the game and I couldnt see any difference going to 64. Your GPU is pretty much irrelevant (within reason) as long as it has 8 gigs of vram. On a 5900x OCd to 4.9 Ghz there is no performance difference between a RTX 3090 and a GTX 1080ti @ 1440p. Your cpu will basically always be the limiting factor. The game will run on an HDD but it wont be fun.
@@TheDude50447 Yeah. It's usually the busiest cities that get you. Seems to spike at the beginning of QT half the time too. Not enough to lag, but I notice it on the charts
@@SuperMontsta what I noticed during QT travel start is that it switches to 1 cpu core for a second, spiking it at 100%. Yeah in citys Ive noticed that as well but since minor hickups in citys arent really impacting the gameplay I didnt mention that.
Question with a fair preamble: we all saw improvement in fps on multi-core/multi-thread since they started utilizing it in 3.14. Though there is a difference: a CPU with lets say 4 cores will have a performance of - lets say - 1x, the same CPU with multi-thread enabled (and maybe capable of handling or co-handling physx) will give you 1.8x to 2x, but a lot of people get "limited CPUs" those traps that cost less, performs slightly better on single core, but don't have all the PCI lanes enabled, basically "handicapped" CPU, like the in-famous i7-5820k cpu, used to be super popularly cheap, only to find out that you could only run 2/3rds of the ram and pci slots. Basically I see recommendations in great number on getting new parts, for new builds but you said it perfectly: "...a game that will be ready 7 to 10 years from now, while playing with a 7 years old rig..." - Please be also advised that the telemetry board was not yet updated to reflect the new multicore improvements and it will take probably all of 3.15 to capture enough significant data to be again relevant, as all the cpu/gpu combo in the board right now are skewed and incorrect. I will get there in a minute... I would like to see more recommendation on 1) how to upgrade and 2) What type of upgrades: switching a single thread cpu with multi thread supported by the mobo would be a HUGE money saver and move more budget toward a better graphic card, and yes, MORE RAM (Thank you noobifier). I have been seeing in a few of last videos you made often mention of nothing less that 2080 GTX and 5600X family to play "decently" at 1080p. I play "decently" with SSD dedicated, and nVME pci 3, and noticed NO difference in playing or loading. Instead I admit the 64 Gb of ram in multichannel gave a HUGE boost and the threadrypper CPU once 3.14 came live gave me another huge bump up in fps, but I am running JUST FINE with a GTX 970... yes... i retype, the old archaic GTX 970. I have 28 to 40 fps in combat and arena, a bit of a slowdown in microtech (e.g. train stations approach) and its almost a slideshow (15/20 fps) in Orison, but while flying around and mining or just admiring, I got even in trhe upper 70fps if I lower the cloud complexity I can still enjoy.Orison as well. The question nobody wants to answer: now that multi-thread/multi-core is supported, what does really a graphic card do and why do I have to become scalper pray to seek a 3070 or a 3080 if, according to the matrix provided, we would not get the desired fps anyway? I don't know much about videocards, but I have friends, and they have everything bigger and larger in GPU terms but they are not getting more fps than I do, sometime I actually beat them... so what GPU should I really be looking forward to upgrade on a PCI3 or less rig (70% of us) to get improvement? I decided to move my money and invest on more ram and nvme drive, and better cpuy for my mobo, and it paid off big time. What GPU should we really point at ad interim to get average, better fps without becoming scalper's food?
@@leosam7097 the game is currently cpu heavy. 01/22. The game actually plays better when requesting higher graphic details because this offloads work from the taxed cpu to the gpu. Use console command r_displayinfo 1, this will show the number of fps, entities loaded (objects to render) and the real gpu workload. Then fuss with the graphic settings and try tuning them up.. Paradoxically you will see that the higher you set the graphic settings, will give you better or same fps to a point. The one setting currently to avoid (keep it low or disabled) is the cloud setting, especially around Orison. Good luck.
@@jor7345 i'm debating getting it i have a pretty decent system and i been following the game for years. i have an 1070 ftw 8gb, msi meg z-590 gaming force the purple one, with a 10700k on a h150i pro. 32gigs of corsair cl15 3000mhz. samsung nvme system drive and a sata samsung for games. being that they added multicore and its cpu heavy i'm kinda want to try it even with all the issues surrounding content and the focus on things that should be saved for last. its actually mind boggling with some of it. imagine if elite dangerous and the SC teams mashed, where one failed the other nailed imo lol
I build computers for a living, I have tested SC in many configurations . The best I have found so far is A Ryzen 9 12 cores 24 threads, 3900x or the 5900x Video card: Well the best one you can afford, have found good frames on, like a 5700 xt. Or newer if you can get one. 32 or 64 gig of ram, If you run other background apps Hotas software, Voice attack or Head tracking the more, the better. I run 64 gig. And run the game on a dedicated SSD drive or M.2 drive. Mechanical drives just don't hack it, there are too slow.
Was going to upgrade my 32GB to 64 for MSFS, yet even 16GB easily supports MSFS now after MS's extensive tweaking and optimization. Star Citizen will end up the same within a year.
Great vid! Thank you. Somehow I didn't even know about the Telemetry Dashboard and it was very informative to see that my system is barely above 'Minimum'. I play on an entry level gaming laptop with 16GB ram and a 1650ti with 4GB dedicated GPU mem. I had already decided I need to upgrade ram to my max of 32GB and I am very interested to see how much performance that gains me as currently the SSD is paging non-stop
CPU: 7800HQ GPU: GTX 1060 500gb intel QLC NVMe SSD 16GB RAM it runs, but planetside FPS is a nono. 25-45 fps in space 18-25 fps in dense environments 12-20 fps in arccorp didnt check orison yet
when the kickstarter was over i saved up to build a PC just for star citizen. I built the PC in 2014 it had a i7 and a gtx 980. I had that machine until recently. Until I had to put something together with a 3080 and an i9. I'm probably going to shove 64 gigs in there cause I use the machine for photogrammetric. Its smooth.. er. but the game has been getting optimised now more then ever. I hope it keeps going.
Glad I came across this. That dashboard app will help me spec out parts for a pc upgrade. My core I5 pc is more than 10 years old and SC is the first game I've tried that it could not handle.
GoodVideo, i think you forgot to mention that especially in Capital Citys (initial Spawnpoints) currently until Gen12 and Vulcan API is working full the single core performance is very important for Frames, even tho they slowly start and already have implemented partrs of it its still a thing.
I'm on an i7-8700K that is not overclocked, 32GB RAM, 1080ti, 500GB Samsung EVO960, and a 1TB Samsung EVO 860. I built the rig back in late 2017 and have been playing Star Citizen in 2K since. I feel like it's still a decent setup for my personal needs. When the game actually gets closer to release, I will definitely look to be upgrading to the latest and greatest.
I have an identical setup... except with a I-7-7700 (slightly overclocked) and a 1060 (6GB). I consider this to be the lowest spec system that will comfortably (for me, not for people used to smooth 60+ fps) run the game in 1080p, with 25-35 fps most places and bearable slowdowns at Lorville and Orison (~15 fps). When 25+ ships are battling the javelin during xenothreat stages 2 and 3, it becomes a slideshow. CPU and GPU are about equally maxed out when playing the game on high with volumetric clouds set to medium. Fortunately, SC plays well with other programs so I can still do other things while I play, and I frequently have a less-resource-hungry game open on the second monitor. If someone is building a budget system, they should definitely look for something a bit more capable than mine if they want it to have any staying power at all. I'll be upgrading as soon as hardware prices become reasonable again. They ARE going to go back down soon, right? RIGHT??
Great info....Im close to the bleeding edge in computer performance (9900K, OCd 2080ti in SLI, 32gig DDR4). BIGGEST boost in performace I saw was when I upgraded the drive I run SC in to M2....I cant run 4K at fast frames, but have no probs with 1440K or G2 VR and rarely have crashes or slowdowns unless the server is dying. FYI ALOT of the info in the video is crossover for MSFS too
Currently running on 5900X, 32GB, 2080 Super, 1TB NvME. Playable 40-60 fps. Telemetry says 40's fps. I like to run my games at 2560x1440. Started playing the game with a 3570K OC to 4.1Mhz, 1060 Extreme GC, and 16GB on a 500GB SSD...about 20 fps less than current system. The very old 3570K finally gave out on me and found a heck of a deal on the above specs on a prebuilt @ $1,600 about a year and a half ago that I couldn't pass up.
Thanks for this. I run 32 Gb, my wife has 48Gb both DDR4, we're both on NVME M.2 SSD, but we're looking to upgrade our son's system (he's 7, so we're looking at local used systems). He can actually play with us on my old system. It's my old system from the summer of 2011, an i7 that's had the GPU upgraded a few times and the RAM bumped up to 24Gb. It's not fun to solo it on it, but it's still good enough for him to co-pilot. When it was still my system, I used the Telemetry page to decide on what to buy when I configured my new system. But it's been a few months and the Telemetry page still shows my old system.
Thanks for the work Noobifier. I upgraded my PC over 4 years ago. CPU Intel i7-7700K 4.20GHz. with DDR4 Vengeance 4x8GB 3000 C15, GeForce GTX 1080 Gaming x 8G with a Samsung 850 EVO 250GB SSD. The system was running reasonably well so far. Question: Will that Samsung 250GB SSD become the main bottleneck?
I have SC installed in the same Samsung Sata model, I see almost no difference compared to when it was installed in my NVME. That being said, the difference I could notice, so far, is when I quantum jump. Most time when leaving a place or arriving in it from/to quantum jump, I can see the game freezes for aroung 3-5 seconds. I'm sure that's the SSD loading stuff. But that's the only thing I could notice so far.
i7 6700k, rx 5700xt, 32gb ram, SSD of course and I play on 2k. I get really good frame rates everywhere except for arc Corp in the main common area I usually hover in the low 20’s there. Other than that this setup has served me well
I'm running a Ryzen 5800x, 32 GB RAM at 3600 MHz, NVME 1 TB drive Sabrent Rocket M.2, XFX RX 5700XT Reference model. Also a 49" LG NanoCell 4k TV with 120 refresh rate native. I can get 100+ frames in space, 40-90 frames on stations and mid 20s-50s at cities. Also setting the virtual ram sizes min to 2x RAM and max to 4x Ram, helps with game smoothness. My bottleneck is the gpu, got it very shortly after it released, old gpu died on me needed something quick and inexpensive. My telemetry scores are GPU 167 and CPU 190 game setting Ultra High Ping AVG 33 ms.
I love these as I leaned something. I am going to build a new PC when I move back stateside. I dont want to do it before because I'll have to pack it in a container and that is nerve wracking. Thanks for the info Noob!!
Thanks Noob! B550m w/5600X > 32GB(3600) > 1660 Super(6gb) > SSD > Win 11pro > 3.15 PTU == 30 - 35 fps in cities and stations and 40 - 55 elsewhere. Of course that depends on the server. My video card runs cool and not pushed, and CPU is rarely above 50%. My system is never hot in older Dell XPS mid case. I play at 1080p with the game on high, not very high. Overall, my system plays well, but am thinking of getting a new Gen 4 M.2 drive soon, which should help some.
THIS IS A LOT BUT IF YOU ARE WONDERING ABOUT YOU'RE OWN SYSTEM, THIS MAY HELP Right now I have a 1070ti and a 5600x , 24gigs of pretty cheap ram (like super cheap 8gigs of which I salvaged from a productivity prebuilt from around 2015 and 16 gigs that I bought for around 33 bucks at whatever speed advertised (I didn't care)) and both a data 2.5 inch drive and an m.2. I have a 3070 coming in tomorrow for future proofing my system more as I play at 1080p right now. I plan on jumping to 1440p at somepoint. So, at 1080p, with a Nvidia 1070ti and a Ryzen 5 5600x, I get around 30-well over 60 frames depending on where I am in the verse. Either way I can play this game comfortably. 30 frames is on the low end of what I normally get. I know this is a lot but I hope this can help anyone wondering about their own system.
I'm playing with a 10 YO rig and my Performances vary wildly depending on the server. My 3770K has 16GB DDR3 and a SATA SSD coupled with a RTX2060. Not ideal but fact is that I'm switching between 35 FPS and a back in the Teens depending on the server I'm in, even on area 18 or Loreville. Guaranteed, not ideal for FPS players, but good enough for anyone else. Sometimes disabling parasite programs is important when playing SC (steam upgrade, GoG, Wargaming etc), but what really makes the game unplayable for me sometimes is the Jittering and stuttering which are server related, not due to my low specs. My advice is to build as beefy as you can if you need, but hold out if you have something that can still run SC albeit not ideal: new hardware is always coming out (intel 12k, next gen Rizen, more affordable GPUs, DDR5) and this is not the best time to upgrade a system due to crazy pricing. Do not expect to jump up in performance massively anyway: most problems are still server related (alpha unoptimized) and you will probably get about 10 FPS better as an average at most, not double what you see. Unless you stream: then every bit helps.
Upgrade to 32GB of RAM and the game will only stutter for a few minutes after loading in. This is what happened to me. R5 2600, 32GB, NVME, RX580-8GB(at time of RAM upgrade, now 3060) I get 25+ anywhere except Orison now and I know that my Ryzen is the bottleneck(Single thread performance) but my MoBo supports Ryzen 5000 so that bottleneck will be resolved early next year.
@@kokiklv probably, but because my rig is the size of a shoe cardboard box 16GB is all I can get (never found 16GB simm of DDR3 pc1660). Next year I'll most probably change PC, "IF" this nonsense price madennss calms down a bit and once I see what AMD will bring to counter the 12k serie. I'm a sucker for low power and I'd never invest in a PC that draws more then my dish washer! This being said, my point is that you "can" play Stav Citize with a low spec system provided you are not expecting competitive FPS shoot-em-up PVP performances. The game is so unoptimized at the moment that you won't have those even on a 5K$ system!
Identical ram is not a necessity. You can mix and match rams as you want, it will just downclock the better ram to match the slowest ram. I have my self 4 sticks of 2 different kind of clock and cl rams and they work fine. And because of 4 ram sticks being faster than 2, I got even 15% ram performance overall, when I added the new extra ram
Currently playing on an i7 12700K with 32GB DDR4 RAM (not running XMP, because that resulted in a LOT of SC crashes) and an EVGA GeForce RTX 3080 FTW3. The game is installed on a fast PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSD. I usually get fps of around 60-70 in space, but at the big capital cities it sometimes drops down to ~20 fps. Outpost missions usually are anywhere between 40-60 fps. Edit: almost forgot. I play on an ultra wide monitor in 3440x1440.
Not currently playing, but I've always built my main system with extra RAM. Most games don't really try to make use of it when they should, so on a technical level this game engine is a breath of fresh air.
I think you mean, on a technical level this game is all over the place. From 15 fps on a monster rig to 120 fps. Memory leakage and servers that perform really bad is more the norm than anything.
@@kiwd-dynamic Not all resources unless necessary, no. But why not put some more RAM to use in a game that is streaming assets in all the time and there's like 16GB more RAM sitting unused by anything else on the system.
For the telemetry, I'm one down, one left of the green dot with a 1070ti, R7 1700x, 32gb ram, and standard SSD. Upgrades are woefully unobtainable with a fixed income (it's like trying to milk a rock to get enough scratch for a cheap second monitor) so I'm in a position where I have to hope the gen12/vulkan updates will make what I have work. My rig IS my upgrade since my old system became unable to run SC when 3.0 went live.
My System: AMD 5600x, GTX1660Ti, 32Gb 3600Mhrz CL16 RAM. Me and a friend tried the free flight and I struggled to get more than 20FPS in New Babbage. On another moon I got around 30fps. My CPU was being red lined at 100% on all cores while my GPU utilization was 50-90% depending on where in PU I was. This was quite frustrating as changing in game settings made zero difference as I was completely CPU bound. We gave up and I started doing some research on what we could do. I found that you can disable some things using a custom user config file. The game didn't look nearly as nice, but I more than doubled my FPS (Over 40fps in New Babbage) and my CPU is no longer just reading 100% all the time with my GPU at around 90-100% utilization. My friend with his 4 core CPU saw a change from about 8fps to about 30fps in New Babbage, but his GTX1060 is still only at about 50-60% utilization. Can only do so much with a 5 year old quad core :( The biggest performance issue is the render thread and CIG has talked about this being the biggest bottleneck that they are working on to improve with the new rendering. So if you can turn some stuff off, the render thread ends up doing a lot less which could result in a decent FPS boost which was the case for me and my friend. Yes, the game didn't look as pretty, but I'll make that trade for the FPS all day. I wish these setting were available in game so it's easy for general players to get access to.
The important thing about RAM, is Windows and background apps still need some of that too, which lowers the available RAM for the game, and many seem to forget that, especially those recommending 16 GB as fine. I think folks that recommend 16 GB, are those with 16 GB, that have never tried more. More cores, more clock speed, NVME, and lots of RAM, however, GPU so far has made a much smaller improvement that I'd expect it to, but that will change over the next 12 months.
@@RatBagDad on my 1080p, 32GB laptop, it's usually around 10-16. Laptop has a GTX 2080 with 8GB dedicated VRAM. Either way, as noob says, bare min requirements has never been enough for an enjoyable game experience, in any game, as far back as I can remember seeing pc system requirements.
I have a i7-6700k, 1070, and 16gb. Star citizen runs fantastically but I do experience bad frames when in Area 18. Other than that though it's smooth and fluid
So.. I’m upgrading slowly. Thisbis basically wheat I’m going to be working with until I’m done upgrading ram and gpu. Motherboard: Asus TUF AM4 x570-plus Ram: ddr4 3600 (28gb) Storage: 1tb m.2 gen4 5,150mb/s Gpu: 1660 super 6gb I’m upgrading the ram and gpu later this year during cyber Monday.
Good info. In my opinion a 256GB NvME SSD is to small for the performance difference of a 1TB SATA3 SSD if that SATA is a good drive. I am running a Samsung 850 EVO 1TB and it runs about as fast as a lot of deferent NvME drives. By all means if you are needing to buy right now get a good NvME around at least 500+GB. Also you may be limited by your motherboard on if a NvME can run at it's top speed. Most drives are backwards compatible if you plan to change board later. Also I have seen in some cases you need to get the larger drive to get the better chipsets, so that is another reason not to go to small.
I had i5 8600K with Corsair 32Gb 2666Mhz CL16 RAM, Samsung 860 EVO M2 and MSI DUKE 1080ti and SC was just playable on medium settings @3440x1440p but did suffer occasionally. I recently bought a Ryzen 5900X, G.Skill 32Gb 3600Mhz CL16 RAM and a Corsair MP600 PRO XT M2. I am still running the 1080ti and I am running high settings @3440x1440p and its very smooth except for Orison, notice a very slight amount of frame drop but doesn't affect smooth playability. Load times have improved significantly.
I upgraded from a really old computer (i5 first gen, GTX 660, 16GB DDR3) to high-end PC (5800X, 32GB 3600mhz C15 RAM, 3080 ti, PCIe 4.0 SSD) but also upgraded from 1080 to 21:9 3440x1440p Monitor. In Landing Zones it is about 30-35 fps, Space about 60-100 fps. It is playable but not perfect. Scores in the telemetry: GPU Score: 430 CPU: 218 When I started SC in 2015 it was also playable in FHD on my old system with 25-40 fps depending on the mode (PU, Arena Commander)
Upgraded from a 3600 with a 970 and 16gb RAM (basically unplayable near or on planets even on 720p - mostly a VRAM/GPU issue.) to a 3700x and a 1070 16GB RAM (@3800mhz cl15) and now I can play on max settings (except clouds) 1080p with minimum 30 fps. Some things that I can reccomend doing is using the fastest SSD available and setting process priority to "higher than normal". It doesn't increase your fps but makes it chugg noticeably less. More RAM surely helps and the faster the CPU, the better.
Just to add to this and give people an idea how important the CPU is, my friend just upgraded his 2600 to a 5800x and it is a night and day difference for him. His GPU is a 5700xt and it barely got to 50% load with the 2600. Sort of a little bit of good new during the GPU crisis, at least CPUs are available ...
i have 32 gb but it only uses 11gb of ram leaving me with only 20-28 fps max. and it doesn't let me change the priority to high as it says access denied despite the fact it ran as admin with full permissions?
My Aya Neo 2021 Pro can actually run SC. It has a AMD Ryzen 7 4800U, 16GB of fast DDR4 Ram, and 3GB dedicated to the integrated APU's VRAM. With no tweaking of settings, it's almost a stable 30FPS at it's native 1920x800 resolution. I'm confident I'll get it running smooth shortly. Then I'll be playing SC anywhere as I have a 4G LTE Hotspot. 😁👍
Can't wait for my upgrade! I'm BARELY able to play SC on my current system (i5-4460, 16GB DDR4, GTX 960, SATA SSD) but it's doable! Pathetic, I know. But my new planned system is as follows... 12400F or 12600K, 32GB DDR4, RTX 2070 or 3060, NVMe SSD.
Telemetry is bugged. I've switched PC last month and it still shows old system. Found thread in issue council, where people like me had this problem. Some mod just came and closed it, because it's not game related.
I also think internet speed and server communication are very important variable. I have a decent rig, 1070, 6700k, ssd and 32 dd4 and the game runs smoothly but my internet connection is 800mb/s constant
I don’t have the game yet but am planning on buying it just trying to see if my computer will run it or not first, I get asus rog B550 motherboard 32 gbs of 3600 DDR4 RAM a 2t SSD and AMD Ryzan 5 5700x processor and I feel like that that should be decent for this game but I can’t tell
I tried playing with 16gb on low.. i went into some tram thingy, got a 50 sec frametime while resource monitor was saying it was trying to use ~23gb (swap+ram), why tf did that happen lmao
On fresh servers I have great frames with a 7700k, 32GB Ram and a 1070. Not spending more money on a rig when it's the game that's the issue. Well optimized games of today run great in 1440p.
I currently run SC on a 27 inch monitor at 4K with an I-7 8700K CPU, an Nvidia GTX 1080ti GPU, 32Gb 3200 GHz Corsair RAM, on a 1T NVME PCie 3 SSD. I consider the 30 to 50 FPS to be acceptable, but I don’t do the FPS or PVE games, so lag can be almost unrecognized for me.
I get ~90fps floating around Port O with 5800x, 64GB 3600MHz RAM, RTX 2080S, and 1TB M.2. No OC on the GPU and I’m using custom PBO limits and curve for the 5800X. 1440p, Very High settings.
"I9 9900k @ 5ghz - DDR4 32GB 3200 - 3070 RTX - m.2 nvme" here, and I'm achieving 25-35 fps regardless of resolution (1440p-4k). It is a bit different on other areas, as at Port Oli or any other Space Station, I average at 45-60fps at 4k. In space, I see my self hitting 60fps on average when in an empty area or not looking at planets. I'm pretty confident to say either my Cpu could use and upgrade or my ram going to 64gb may help increase that performance better.
My rig has an RTX 2080, and I just recently upgraded my CPU to a Ryzen 7 3900X, which also let me bring the speed of my 16 gigs of RAM up to its rated 3200. Star Citizen is running off a PCI-E gen 3 NVME drive. I've only played once since this upgrade, and it was on the PTU, but I'd call the performance at 1080p "fairly good"-mostly 40-50 fps, down around 20-30 at Orison.
Thanks for the info 👍. I upgraded to the 5600 in a gigabyte aorus x570s master. But I'm still using my 2070gtx for now. Just can't see spending twice what I paid for the cpu,motherboard and 64g of ddr4 3600 memory, and a m.2 4th gen.drive. Gpu's are ridiculously stupid expensive Right now. Besides I've got to save some money for a new ship right? After upgrading I noticed about a 20 to 30 frame rate boost . Again thanks for your time to make this video.
Some good points but I found that after a modest point the users hardware makes less of a different than the state of CGI's servers. I upgraded from 16 to 48GB RAM and it gave me only3-4 FPS. Only using a Ryzen 3600 and GTX1060 I can get close to 60FPS when the servers are happy. Lows can go down to 14FPS on a bad day especially in asset busy locations like microtech. I'm not sure how CGI plan to support the constant release of new assets (ships, weapons, skins) because these all need to be loaded into user memory when Inthe area and rendered when visible. I don't see it as a sustainable practice.
Thats good to hear as thats pretty much the spec I plan for my 1st time pc build when I can afford it, but with 32gb ram. Im guessing elite dangerous and ksp2 will run fine on it also. 👍
@@coffeeandvapes1308 If you're only gaming, and if you want to save money, by a motherboard with 4 RAM slots. Buy 2x 8GB to begin with as even most current games don't utilise 16GB yet and you'll be able to upgrade to 32GB in a few years when newer games will scale to fill that much.
I play on a 1660ti i7 16 gig ram and since the past update i have rarely experienced stutters i run voice attack and joystick gremlin in the background and ghub with a g920 and still maintain around 50 fps. Exept on transit and new babbage but still over 30.
The ram usage was a shock and confirms my idea of why i had some issues. When Micro tech was first launched i only had 16gb, bought ankther 16gb and could finally get off MT.. This last patch did it again. CTD alot due to ram spiking to max. Increased page file and CTD stopped instantly. There was a tool for limiting the memory leak but dont remember what it was. But any way im on a ryzen 5600x,32gb of 3200mhzram, merc319 6800xt @1440p and laoding in to hurston i hold 45-60 fps, and 90-120 flying.
I have a 2070 Super 8 gig and 16 mb of ram. I can run the game in 1440p on medium and its fine so long as some other settings are low. We will see what I need to run it in 10 years' time.
Hey man love the video! Do you by any chance have the link to that dashboard calculator? or is it more of an in game configuration? Thanks! ( my apologies if I missed the link lol)
Started running SC on a R5 3600x, 16GB 3200Mhz DDR4, 1660S, not too terrible but planetary hubs like the starting spawn was frame city. Recently upgraded to a 2070S, graphics on med and small lag here and there. I've got my DDR5 build mapped out and should be ready to go by the end of the year, should be interesting to see the difference.
I got 32GB 3200Mhz RAM, and a Ryzen 5 5600X... I'm using an RX580 8GB GDDR5 OC Armor 2048SP right now that's bottlenecking the system but come January i'm getting a ROG Strix 3070Ti 8GB GDDR6X OC so I can't wait to see how that performs considering I have to use an old dell monitor for star citizen specifically due to the fact right now it's the only game I have to run in 1080 25fps due to my current gpu limits... to be able to finally play star citizen on my 4k monitor even if I don't get a full 60fps i'll still be happy as long as I don't get 18 fps in Babbage spaceport and A18 again!
Currently doing fine with a 2700x, 1080ti, and 32gb ddr4. SC sits at a fine 20-40fps. Trying to decide if I want to update now to a 5800x, 6900xt, and 64gb ddr4; or wait for next gen parts. Main deciding factor on parts is if SC will do a Linux build soon.
We have 2 systems that runs SC for my wife and myself. My Rig is a Ryzen 3900X on a Asrock X570 Taichi motherboard. 32gb Trident memory, (Don't recall the speeds right off hand but was paired correctly with the CPU, same on my wife's build). For storage I'm using multiple Sabrent 1tb PCIe 4.0 nvme M.2 drives and a RTX 2080 (non Ti model) and play at 1440p. I average 40 to 70 fps depending location in the verse. Cities are worse. Orison is a special place, get 20 - 25 fps there lol. But overall smooth game play. Now my wife build is a bit older mid range setup as she didn't want a rig devoted to gaming but general use but the ability to play from time to time at 1080p. She is using a Ryzen 2600X on a Gigabyte B450 Aorus Pro Wifi motherboard. 32gb Trident Z Royal for memory. And for storage Western Digital Blue SATA M.2 SSD's (2 of them). For GPU a GTX 1660ti. And surprisingly she gets decent frames as well in game. Orison she was getting 12 to 25, not the greatest but it was fluid in movements, no stuttering or hang-ups. Space, Moons, outposts she was getting upper 40s to low 50s just depended on the area. Then 20s to 30s in cities. But still playable and enjoyable for her. And where I'm hardwired to the router she's playing wireless. Both systems are water cooled. And I do plan on giving her rig an upgrade at some point. But with the way the economy is going, shortages of everything and what you can find is well over priced, we just haven't put it on as a big rush. Since it does what she needs it to do and still enjoys some light gaming.
Her rig seems perfectly great for the purposes. The 5600x dropped in price recently, but I don’t think you would see a huge bump in performance for her from the 2600x
Good info Noob. One thing you missed covering is the spec and quality of the motherboard. You'll want to ensure you choose a mobo with good power delivery and obviously support for PCIe Gen 4 if choosing a gen 4 NVMe or wanting to future proof. I think the most important thing is the power delivery since SC will push power delivery to the max. On the back of that, you'll want to choose a decent PSU to deliver all the power efficiently and quietly. For me it's a Corsair RM850x PSU, MSI b550m Mortar mobo, 4 x 8gb Viper 4400mhz ram clocked at 3600mhz 14-14-14-?? timings, 1Gb Samsung evo gen 3 NVMe, PowerColor Red Devil 6800xt GPU, all inside a high airflow case using Artic fans and CPU cooler. This is driving a 2k ultra wide monitor at 60-70FPS generally. I'm looking forward to any performance improvements the gen 12 vulkan engine will deliver.
power supplies are always over looked for a cheap option for most people but Ive always liked having Quad rails to keep the dirty electric away from the clean low Voltage stuff but with SSD and USB taking the spinning crap out removes the dirty stuff but still like a good PSU Enermax as been my pick for years untill one killed a MB EVGA now lol
@@Tainted-Soul i love my supernova lol you can tell they are quality, i like how the fan is quite too but its always on which is a good thing, silent psu's are a bad idea. thats one thing i hated about my corsair psu, it had that auto fan that would only kick on if you were over a certain power draw therefor it would have coil whine and get hot as hell at idle or doing things under 400w lol. corsairs worst idea ever. imo supernovas and seasonic are the best ones. for the most part tho the base standard is gold now so generally any psu will be good unless they are all out lying about the rating.
so using DDR5 is an issue i thought they were quicker and im also using a 980 pro from samsumg and a 3080ti and i9 12900k and the game hitches like crazy idk whats wrong plz help me
I have 32 GB of RAM. Running on a SATA SSD. I have an older system that was not performing well at all with a AMD FX-8320E processor and a GTX 980 Ti graphics card. It was barely running the game at 10-18 FPS. It didn't matter what resolution I ran it at from 4k down to 720p it would run at the same FPS. I overclocked the graphics card and that made no difference in Star Citizen. However when I overclocked the CPU from 3200hz to 4500h (That processor overclocks really nicely!) it made a HUGE difference. Now I get a pretty solid 25-35 FPS on land and 45 FPS in space. The game is playable and I didn't have to buy any new hardware. But I really should upgrade to a newer system next year.
@@NOOBIFIER1337 Well not anymore. Overclocking the GPU and CPU is running things great now at 45 FPS. I've got two other Nvidia tweaks to try that really helped on my gaming laptop. The first was setting Low Latency Mode to Ultra and the second is setting the FPS limiter to 30. Those seemed to reduce the occasional stutter to almost nothing now.
i upgrade fairly recently from a 17-4790k to a 5900x same graphics card ( RTX 2060 aorus extreme) i kept the 970 evo plus too, i put ofc 32 GB RAM and as expected the performance jumped leaps and bounds i can keep average 50fps and it's completely another game and i've enjoyed it. Telemetry even if i played a lot after ugrading it still keep my old spec on it, i gave up on telemetry on rsi site
Yeah, I don’t know what to say about the telemetry. It seems that it’s pretty buggy but with the new patch coming out it should update. I’m happy though that you got the performance you were after with your upgrade
So how long do you have to play before telemetry picks up your specs? I just did a drastic upgrade of my GPU from a 1660 to a 3080 and have played for about an hour and still telemetry has not changed and is still showing the specs for the 1660. Does not appear to be a very accurate tool to say the least. I even logged out and back into Spectrum thinking it needed to refresh. Tested after logging out and in fact my specs disappeared and showed a blank telemetry but logging back in and no joy, same specs as if I still was running the 1660. Thoughts?
"Game will be ready 7-10 years from now" Good lord, that put this game's development in perspective. I might just not even look at Star Citizen for a few years in that case lmao.
This is all spot on. RAM is cheap currently, and the latency of gen 1 DDR5 is atrocious. I've found pcie gen 4 to be a meaningful upgrade over gen 3 with an appropriate SSD, while I don't think gen 5 will be as noticeable, because we're no where near saturating gen 4 throughput.
Only true for Intel side AMD side you see a difference from latency and from memory MHz and in Ryzen 5000 you need minimum 4 Ranks (thats number of side’s of your RAM sticks with chips on them) When AMD goes DDR5 there will be a difference Intel added DDR5 support because they can not because they needed to AMD however are adding it not because they can but because they need to
Do not wait for this game to upgrade....I told myself that about 8 years ago "Ill upgrade right before SC comes out" and have since upgraded 3 times waiting for this game. lol Just go upgrade if you are due.
Damn when SC started my computer was on the high side. Now my SB is minimum. Still playing on my 2011 2600k CPU and 2016 1060 6gb GPU though also with mixed 1333mhz ram at 28gb. LOL. Frankenstein would be proud. With as FUBAR as SC has been with patches lately, I will just hold off on new computer until next gen releases by mid 2022. I am in upper 20s FPS in space combat but low teens or single digit FPS in LZs. Not bad for 2560x1080.
Like 👍 Notify 🔔 Google is Not Sending Notifications on Time when a video is posted
Please Help, It makes a difference.
✅Enlist Star Citizen | robertsspaceindustries.com/enlist?referral=STAR-XVY5-D2MV
✅Join 1337 DISCORD For Free NOW! - discord.gg/G8QV32M
✅Support | PATREON - ttps://www.patreon.com/TheNOOBIFIER1337
🟨MONSTERTECH | Code "noobifier" on checkout for -5% USA - monstertechusa.com
🟨GAME GLASS | USE LINK lddy.no/ab81
🟨MAINGEAR | Workstation - maingear.com/ref/noobifier/
🟨E-WIN Chair code SSFF 20% | bit.ly/3geNo6F and USA bit.ly/3AvUSJy
🟨MERCH | META 1337 Bomber - metathreads.com/products/noobifier-bomber-jacket
🟨MERCH | META 1337 Teeshirt - metathreads.com/products/noobifier-logo-dryfit-tee
🟨MERCH | Cheap Tees - www.teepublic.com/user/thenoobifier1337
⭐WEEOO | 🟥🟦🟦🟨🟨🟩noobifier.com
⭐Website | noobifier.com
Hey, NOOBIFIER! How did you get those RAM numbers? MSI Afterburner? I've never seen the game use more than 24gb for anyone else so I'm wondering how you got those numbers?
For a budget build would you suggest the 4930k or the i3 10100? Both ebay for about the same and not sure if the core count on the 4930 or the ddr4 and higher speeds of the i3 would win out in the end
Can star citizen shorten the lifespan of your pc in the long run?
@@leonardomartin8876 no
memory ranks are a thing, you slot stuffer
Good info. It's worth noting that the server you're playing on can make a big difference as well. I normally run pretty well with my monster PC but can get crap frames if the server is suffering. That's usually a good sign to switch servers before it croaks.
What do you usually get for frames in places like lorville?
Agreed. I have had fluctuations from 60fps to 20fps depending on server.
Good info, thanks. But I'm not going to even look at getting specific hardware for Star Citizen until we're in Beta and getting the sense that we're getting close to launch. Frames per second? Nah, second per frame!
@@user-ve2jj1ik4b no shit it’s an alpha you gotta accept that if you wanna play it
@@user-ve2jj1ik4b your life is broken
@@RyanlovesTh i mean he's right i just love that everytime someone says it runs poorly everyone says it's alpha that doesn't mean it could run at least 60fps for high end PCs lmao
@@beeboo2890 cus poor management and sq42 black hole sucking all the dev time even through alot more want SC the sq42
@@thesilver3794 ye i don't know why they focus squadron
"Out to lunch" - love it. Haven't heard that in a long time. Douglas Adams fan, perhaps?
Back when i upgraded my system in 2019, i did it piece by piece and i saw the biggest increase by upgrading my ram from 16 to 32 GB. switching from a sata ssd to nvme i saw near zero performance gain. gpu made a difference too.
I will recommend upgrading the ram first.
Agreed. Ram upgrade does wonders for SC. (From 16 to 32)
Yeah, getting an SSD over a mechanical hard drive is a big difference, SSD to SSD much less so
What ever your weakest component is will be the best upgrade. Use logic.
My ram is coming in today I had a feeling it was a ram issue since I can run vr easily
The reason you didn't see a terribly noticeable difference is because your CPU can only process so much bandwidth. The NVME, iirc, uses the same bus as the PCI, so you only have so much to access between the GPU and the NVME drive in such an intense game. At the same time, while the information may travel faster on the PCI bus, it still gets queued in your RAM.
With an SSD, you get a significantly smaller bus (SATA6 is 6 Gigabit per second, 750 megabyte per second, whereas PCIe 4 has a bandwidth of 512 gigabit per second, or 64 gigabyte per second). The reason why it's irrelevant is because Star Citizen is severely CPU intensive due to being nowhere near optimized. This stresses the CPU to not only process the game's code, but to also process the RAM cache, sending information to the PCI for the GPU to en-/de- code, other background information, keep your OS running, etc. The RAM for an average DDR4 is around low 20s gigabyte per second (160 gigabit), so there are two main limiting factors in SSD vs NVME: bandwidth used and the max bus rate of a CPU.
In the case of my Ryzen 5 2600, my bus rate is 4 x 8 gigatransfers per second, or roughly 4 x 8 gigabit per second (according to Quora), or 4 x 1 gigabyte per second. So theoretically, I have a max bus rate of 4 gigabyte per second between all 4 busses. Between RAM, GPU, and storage, that's not a lot and nowhere close to fully utilizing an NVMe drives abilities. Compared to a 12900k's max bus of 8 x 16 gigatransfers per second (roughly 8 x 128 gigabyte per second), my CPU is obviously and MASSIVELY slower in comparison.
The difference between an SSD and a mechanical HDD is astronomical since the HDD maxed out at an average read speed of 80-160 megabytes per second, the HDD is nowhere near properly utilizing a SATA6 port, where as an SSD's read speed of up to 550 megabyte per second is lot more useful.
I'm not a computer science guy, just attempting to nerd out my best via Google, so I may not necessarily be correct on how busses work.
For star citizen, the biggest jumps are going to be in the following order: switching from HDD to SSD (just due to read times) -> upgrading RAM (allows for more cached information = quicker processing) -> upgrading your CPU (more work per second is obviously going to be better) -> upgrading your GPU -> (if your CPU to has the transfer rates to support it) switching from SSD to NMVE.
I too switched mine from a SSD to a NVME and I saw at BEST a 3 frame per second difference. I jumped from completely unplayable to "playable" when I switched from HDD to SSD (10fps to 18-23fps); to actually playable (25-30fps cities, 40-50 fps space) when upgrading my RAM from 16 to 32GB; jump to 29-35 cities, 45-50 space going from SSD to NVME; zero change switching from a RX580 to a RTX 3070 (CPU bottleneck); and based off what I've seen, I should be expecting a jump to 40s-50s in cities, 80+ everywhere else at 1080 (or even 1440) when I upgrade to a R5 5600x here in a few weeks.
"Low end budget gamer laptop." I have a Nitro 5 laptop with an Intel 11th gen i5, 1650ti (but listed as 1650), upgraded it to 1 TB nvme & 32gb of 3200mhz DDR4. With the duel fans in the machine & a cooling pad the GPU & CPU stay below 75c after a few hours of game play. According to Telemetry I get 26fps avg, CPU score of 130, GPU of 69 ;), & 65 sec load time.
I play on high settings and get 35-50 fps in space, 27-40fps in space stations and surface POIs and 19-30fps at landing zones. I see all texture on surface, decent explosions, NPC faces look rubbery though.
I will stick with this machine for at least a few years and consider getting a desktop rig for SC later. Great video for all the new players. Would you consider doing or recommending an optimizing guide for settings on machines/operating systems to squeeze out a few more frames for us budget gamers?
Dont even get a pc unless its an RTX build since its useless
Oh to be young, rich and childless.
at 04:00, I am running it fine with an i7 4790k from 2014, and 32 gigs of DDR3 ram.
While it is not future proof and may be outdated by the game's release, older CPU still work great for starcitizen.
Keep in mind however, that, Gen12 rendered and vulkan are not implemented yet, but they may eat more CPU power in exchange for much better ingame performances.
I am going strong with an overclocked i7 4770k@4.2GHz myself. It is still running fine for now, but I do would like to play at 60fps one day. I think I will wait for the new generation of CPUs and RAM coming up.
I am waiting to upgrade to a monster desktop until release as well. We probably got a few years to save.
I mean. Everything you can buy right now will be outdated by release.
The 4790K is one of the best CPUs I've had over the last 30 or so years, some really stood out. It's still very powerful, especially with unoptimized chaos like Alpha versions because its single-core performance and on the first two cores is quite beefy. It's a hot one though, the 4790K, so I'd recommend to delid it, then start overclocking it and you can easily squeeze out 3-4 more years with even a recognizable performance gain initially.
@@ancogaming you really have no idea how stuff works hüh? Use a system with an 9k series or a ryzen 5000+ and you will notice a huge difference in performance 👏
It's impossible to run this game really well (in a 4K equivalent resolution at least), but it has gotten a bit better the past few years - or it's just the newer hardware taking advantage. I remember before upgrading my CPU, I had an i7 8700K, and SC would actually completely max it (12 threads), particularly when I was down in ArcCorp.
I will say that I applaud the team for programming in really proper multi core support, as well as taking advantage of whatever RAM you have on offer. Shows they are serious about developing a game for the future. Just hope I'm alive to see it, haha.
can a core i7 dell laptop work? i just bought the game
@@starflight_wof39 Depends on what sort of i7 it is, also does the laptop have a dedicated gpu? RAM matters a ton as well in the game.
@@wobble2001can i7 7700hq gtx 1050 4gb and 16gb ram with 1tb ssd run it?
In the graphics settings in SC there are two settings Sharpness and Chromatic Aberration. If you are running at 1080p or above, these do nothing. But if you drop down to 900p, these will sharpen and correct the image so that it looks almost as good as 1080p but with a massive performance boost. The minimum specs on the website are for 1080p, so at 900p you can run SC pretty well on a computer like mine i5 10th gen nvidia 1660ti 32Gb ram. I get 30fps in cities and 60fps in space.
Hey what do you reccomend putting it on? The sharpeni and the aberration
so do you think I can run it on a i5 10th gen 1660 Super, 16gb? if so im buying rn and becoming a star citizen and dedicating my life to it
@@ThePauseNow this is pretty much exactly what I'm using and yes, it functions well enough and I hadn't considered going down from 1080p yet. Some bad frame drops every now and then in certain cities and stations though but elsewhere works quite well.
Any city or station where there's smokey atmospheric effects seem to be the issue, idk why..
Bad info, chromatic aberration doesn't sharpen or "correct" the image, it mimics the color distortion that creates an outline of color along the edges of objects in a photograph/video through a failure of the lenses to focus all the light at one point. Turning it on won't give you a speed boost, if anything, it'll decrease performance slightly.
And it especially won't make lower resolutions look or perform better.
There is no way on earth I can afford a new PC with my salary and country of residence, but my humble system works decently enough for now (granted, it was far above humble when I built it five years ago). I do have to say, the fact that increasing RAM does produce good results beyond 16Gb is great news, because that's a space where I can still make relatively affordable adjustments.
Interesting, I've never seen RAM usage go over 28GB on my 32GB system. It usually stands around 20-24Gb.
With that said, my suggestion for Recommended hardware:
@1080p
CPU: 8 Cores / 16 Threads (with a CPU that has come out after 2017)
GPU: 6Gb VRAM (with a GPU that has come out after 2017)
RAM: 16Gb DDR4
SSD NvME: Don't even bother installing on an spinning HDD!
1440p: 8Gb VRAM | 4K +8Gb VRAM
My current build sports a 3900X, 2070S, 32GB 3600Mhz CL16, playing at 1440p. Performance is all over the place, but it's only getting better, by the time they add Vulkan and Server Meshing performance will have improved a lot.
Would you say a Ryzen 5 2600 and a RTX 2060 are enough for 1080p and somewhat good looking graphics above 24 fps?
@@WB-mi7io thanks, I will try it out
I hit myself over the head recently on why my new 32 gigs 3600 only marginally improved my performance. Until I found out my xmp profile wasn't loaded,...
16 to 32 was a good performance upgrade. Having those 32 work at intended speed made it a great upgrade!
What is XMP profile for first computer learners
Extreme Memory Profiles. They’re the speeds advertised on the box but are not always on by default. You enable them in the BIOS. Otherwise your memory will run slower. Also I think my BIOS is broken somehow because even when I enable XMP and save the BIOS Task Manager still says I’m running at 2133 mhz instead of 3600mhz. Any ideas?
@@jessicaorisaaclaemmle6905 Is it limited by your motherboard?
@@jessicaorisaaclaemmle6905 bit late but, your ram cannot run faster than your CPU so check that, also if you have mixed ram and one is slower than the other it will always run at the slowest speed.
Having tested this with a lot of different hardware I can conclude the following. Most important part is the cpu. Disable smt on Ryzen for additional performance. Differences between Sata and PCIe SSDs are minimal and only really noticeable during the initial loading. 32 gigs of ram is a good choice for the game and I couldnt see any difference going to 64. Your GPU is pretty much irrelevant (within reason) as long as it has 8 gigs of vram. On a 5900x OCd to 4.9 Ghz there is no performance difference between a RTX 3090 and a GTX 1080ti @ 1440p. Your cpu will basically always be the limiting factor. The game will run on an HDD but it wont be fun.
I've seen the game alone hit 32gb or RAM usage before. I've always been at 64 for safety
@@SuperMontsta Mustve been at very specific places in citys.
@@TheDude50447 Yeah. It's usually the busiest cities that get you. Seems to spike at the beginning of QT half the time too. Not enough to lag, but I notice it on the charts
@@SuperMontsta what I noticed during QT travel start is that it switches to 1 cpu core for a second, spiking it at 100%. Yeah in citys Ive noticed that as well but since minor hickups in citys arent really impacting the gameplay I didnt mention that.
Which CPU gave you the best FPS boost and do you know of any new tech coming out that will give us a big SC boost?
Nice video, I run it with: i5 10400f, Gtx 1650, 16gb ram, and M.2 storage. I achieve about 25-35 frames on high graphics at 720p. 1080p is a no go lol
Question with a fair preamble: we all saw improvement in fps on multi-core/multi-thread since they started utilizing it in 3.14. Though there is a difference: a CPU with lets say 4 cores will have a performance of - lets say - 1x, the same CPU with multi-thread enabled (and maybe capable of handling or co-handling physx) will give you 1.8x to 2x, but a lot of people get "limited CPUs" those traps that cost less, performs slightly better on single core, but don't have all the PCI lanes enabled, basically "handicapped" CPU, like the in-famous i7-5820k cpu, used to be super popularly cheap, only to find out that you could only run 2/3rds of the ram and pci slots.
Basically I see recommendations in great number on getting new parts, for new builds but you said it perfectly: "...a game that will be ready 7 to 10 years from now, while playing with a 7 years old rig..." - Please be also advised that the telemetry board was not yet updated to reflect the new multicore improvements and it will take probably all of 3.15 to capture enough significant data to be again relevant, as all the cpu/gpu combo in the board right now are skewed and incorrect. I will get there in a minute...
I would like to see more recommendation on 1) how to upgrade and 2) What type of upgrades: switching a single thread cpu with multi thread supported by the mobo would be a HUGE money saver and move more budget toward a better graphic card, and yes, MORE RAM (Thank you noobifier).
I have been seeing in a few of last videos you made often mention of nothing less that 2080 GTX and 5600X family to play "decently" at 1080p. I play "decently" with SSD dedicated, and nVME pci 3, and noticed NO difference in playing or loading. Instead I admit the 64 Gb of ram in multichannel gave a HUGE boost and the threadrypper CPU once 3.14 came live gave me another huge bump up in fps, but I am running JUST FINE with a GTX 970... yes... i retype, the old archaic GTX 970. I have 28 to 40 fps in combat and arena, a bit of a slowdown in microtech (e.g. train stations approach) and its almost a slideshow (15/20 fps) in Orison, but while flying around and mining or just admiring, I got even in trhe upper 70fps if I lower the cloud complexity I can still enjoy.Orison as well.
The question nobody wants to answer: now that multi-thread/multi-core is supported, what does really a graphic card do and why do I have to become scalper pray to seek a 3070 or a 3080 if, according to the matrix provided, we would not get the desired fps anyway? I don't know much about videocards, but I have friends, and they have everything bigger and larger in GPU terms but they are not getting more fps than I do, sometime I actually beat them... so what GPU should I really be looking forward to upgrade on a PCI3 or less rig (70% of us) to get improvement? I decided to move my money and invest on more ram and nvme drive, and better cpuy for my mobo, and it paid off big time. What GPU should we really point at ad interim to get average, better fps without becoming scalper's food?
So... By your experience, do you think that the game is cpu or gpu heavy. (sounds like cpu heavy)
I’m planning to mix 2x16 gb with 2x8 gb will that work same cl voltage and make, will that work?
@@leosam7097 the game is currently cpu heavy. 01/22. The game actually plays better when requesting higher graphic details because this offloads work from the taxed cpu to the gpu. Use console command r_displayinfo 1, this will show the number of fps, entities loaded (objects to render) and the real gpu workload. Then fuss with the graphic settings and try tuning them up.. Paradoxically you will see that the higher you set the graphic settings, will give you better or same fps to a point. The one setting currently to avoid (keep it low or disabled) is the cloud setting, especially around Orison. Good luck.
@@alexeyminakov4680 motherboard make and model please?
@@jor7345 i'm debating getting it i have a pretty decent system and i been following the game for years. i have an 1070 ftw 8gb, msi meg z-590 gaming force the purple one, with a 10700k on a h150i pro. 32gigs of corsair cl15 3000mhz. samsung nvme system drive and a sata samsung for games. being that they added multicore and its cpu heavy i'm kinda want to try it even with all the issues surrounding content and the focus on things that should be saved for last. its actually mind boggling with some of it. imagine if elite dangerous and the SC teams mashed, where one failed the other nailed imo lol
I build computers for a living, I have tested SC in many configurations .
The best I have found so far is A Ryzen 9 12 cores 24 threads, 3900x or the 5900x
Video card: Well the best one you can afford, have found good frames on, like a 5700 xt. Or newer if you can get one.
32 or 64 gig of ram, If you run other background apps Hotas software, Voice attack or Head tracking the more, the better. I run 64 gig.
And run the game on a dedicated SSD drive or M.2 drive. Mechanical drives just don't hack it, there are too slow.
SC LOVES threads
Was going to upgrade my 32GB to 64 for MSFS, yet even 16GB easily supports MSFS now after MS's extensive tweaking and optimization. Star Citizen will end up the same within a year.
Great vid! Thank you. Somehow I didn't even know about the Telemetry Dashboard and it was very informative to see that my system is barely above 'Minimum'. I play on an entry level gaming laptop with 16GB ram and a 1650ti with 4GB dedicated GPU mem. I had already decided I need to upgrade ram to my max of 32GB and I am very interested to see how much performance that gains me as currently the SSD is paging non-stop
Im in the same boat as you GTX 1660 TI
CPU: 7800HQ
GPU: GTX 1060
500gb intel QLC NVMe SSD
16GB RAM
it runs, but planetside FPS is a nono.
25-45 fps in space
18-25 fps in dense environments
12-20 fps in arccorp
didnt check orison yet
Thats a laptop cpu.
@@TheDude50447 sadly so.
can you update on orison fps because my pc has 2080ti 9900k nvme m.2 ssd and 16 gb of ram and gets gets like 10-20 fps on orison
when the kickstarter was over i saved up to build a PC just for star citizen. I built the PC in 2014 it had a i7 and a gtx 980. I had that machine until recently. Until I had to put something together with a 3080 and an i9. I'm probably going to shove 64 gigs in there cause I use the machine for photogrammetric. Its smooth.. er. but the game has been getting optimised now more then ever. I hope it keeps going.
Those i7s were absolute beasts though.
Helpful. Thanks. I'm running a 3070 in 1440p and it's good to know that I *might* be able to handle 4k.
Glad I came across this. That dashboard app will help me spec out parts for a pc upgrade. My core I5 pc is more than 10 years old and SC is the first game I've tried that it could not handle.
Excellent video, Noob! Hopefully this will help many optimize/upgrade their system to better handle SC.
I hope so too
GoodVideo, i think you forgot to mention that especially in Capital Citys (initial Spawnpoints) currently until Gen12 and Vulcan API is working full the single core performance is very important for Frames, even tho they slowly start and already have implemented partrs of it its still a thing.
I'm on an i7-8700K that is not overclocked, 32GB RAM, 1080ti, 500GB Samsung EVO960, and a 1TB Samsung EVO 860. I built the rig back in late 2017 and have been playing Star Citizen in 2K since. I feel like it's still a decent setup for my personal needs. When the game actually gets closer to release, I will definitely look to be upgrading to the latest and greatest.
I have an identical setup... except with a I-7-7700 (slightly overclocked) and a 1060 (6GB). I consider this to be the lowest spec system that will comfortably (for me, not for people used to smooth 60+ fps) run the game in 1080p, with 25-35 fps most places and bearable slowdowns at Lorville and Orison (~15 fps). When 25+ ships are battling the javelin during xenothreat stages 2 and 3, it becomes a slideshow. CPU and GPU are about equally maxed out when playing the game on high with volumetric clouds set to medium. Fortunately, SC plays well with other programs so I can still do other things while I play, and I frequently have a less-resource-hungry game open on the second monitor. If someone is building a budget system, they should definitely look for something a bit more capable than mine if they want it to have any staying power at all. I'll be upgrading as soon as hardware prices become reasonable again. They ARE going to go back down soon, right? RIGHT??
Great info....Im close to the bleeding edge in computer performance (9900K, OCd 2080ti in SLI, 32gig DDR4). BIGGEST boost in performace I saw was when I upgraded the drive I run SC in to M2....I cant run 4K at fast frames, but have no probs with 1440K or G2 VR and rarely have crashes or slowdowns unless the server is dying. FYI ALOT of the info in the video is crossover for MSFS too
My biggest gain of performance was CPU. Overclocking gained me many many frames.
Appreciate the info, thanks Noobifier.
Currently running on 5900X, 32GB, 2080 Super, 1TB NvME. Playable 40-60 fps. Telemetry says 40's fps. I like to run my games at 2560x1440.
Started playing the game with a 3570K OC to 4.1Mhz, 1060 Extreme GC, and 16GB on a 500GB SSD...about 20 fps less than current system. The very old 3570K finally gave out on me and found a heck of a deal on the above specs on a prebuilt @ $1,600 about a year and a half ago that I couldn't pass up.
Super helpful video. I think I'll wait to build a PC.
The telemetry page is useless. I updated my computer 2 months ago and it still displays my old system data.
Running a 3070 with an Intel 11700k. 32gb ram for now. Game runs fairly smooth. Not running 4k though. Too fancy for me🤪
Thanks for this. I run 32 Gb, my wife has 48Gb both DDR4, we're both on NVME M.2 SSD, but we're looking to upgrade our son's system (he's 7, so we're looking at local used systems). He can actually play with us on my old system. It's my old system from the summer of 2011, an i7 that's had the GPU upgraded a few times and the RAM bumped up to 24Gb. It's not fun to solo it on it, but it's still good enough for him to co-pilot. When it was still my system, I used the Telemetry page to decide on what to buy when I configured my new system. But it's been a few months and the Telemetry page still shows my old system.
spoiled kid
Thanks for the work Noobifier.
I upgraded my PC over 4 years ago.
CPU Intel i7-7700K 4.20GHz. with DDR4 Vengeance 4x8GB 3000 C15,
GeForce GTX 1080 Gaming x 8G with a Samsung 850 EVO 250GB SSD.
The system was running reasonably well so far.
Question: Will that Samsung 250GB SSD become the main bottleneck?
I have SC installed in the same Samsung Sata model, I see almost no difference compared to when it was installed in my NVME.
That being said, the difference I could notice, so far, is when I quantum jump. Most time when leaving a place or arriving in it from/to quantum jump, I can see the game freezes for aroung 3-5 seconds. I'm sure that's the SSD loading stuff. But that's the only thing I could notice so far.
Is SC playable with a 1080 and 16gigs of ddr4 ram ?
solid content. built my comp not to long ago.
Good info. I will be upgrading soon and I not really a computer builder guy so...every little bit helps.
i7 6700k, rx 5700xt, 32gb ram, SSD of course and I play on 2k. I get really good frame rates everywhere except for arc Corp in the main common area I usually hover in the low 20’s there. Other than that this setup has served me well
I'm running a Ryzen 5800x, 32 GB RAM at 3600 MHz, NVME 1 TB drive Sabrent Rocket M.2, XFX RX 5700XT Reference model. Also a 49" LG NanoCell 4k TV with 120 refresh rate native. I can get 100+ frames in space, 40-90 frames on stations and mid 20s-50s at cities. Also setting the virtual ram sizes min to 2x RAM and max to 4x Ram, helps with game smoothness. My bottleneck is the gpu, got it very shortly after it released, old gpu died on me needed something quick and inexpensive. My telemetry scores are GPU 167 and CPU 190 game setting Ultra High Ping AVG 33 ms.
I love these as I leaned something. I am going to build a new PC when I move back stateside. I dont want to do it before because I'll have to pack it in a container and that is nerve wracking. Thanks for the info Noob!!
Thanks Noob!
B550m w/5600X > 32GB(3600) > 1660 Super(6gb) > SSD > Win 11pro > 3.15 PTU == 30 - 35 fps in cities and stations and 40 - 55 elsewhere. Of course that depends on the server.
My video card runs cool and not pushed, and CPU is rarely above 50%. My system is never hot in older Dell XPS mid case. I play at 1080p with the game on high, not very high.
Overall, my system plays well, but am thinking of getting a new Gen 4 M.2 drive soon, which should help some.
If you do, install win 10 and upgrade for free to 11. I’m loving it so far.
THIS IS A LOT BUT IF YOU ARE WONDERING ABOUT YOU'RE OWN SYSTEM, THIS MAY HELP
Right now I have a 1070ti and a 5600x , 24gigs of pretty cheap ram (like super cheap 8gigs of which I salvaged from a productivity prebuilt from around 2015 and 16 gigs that I bought for around 33 bucks at whatever speed advertised (I didn't care)) and both a data 2.5 inch drive and an m.2. I have a 3070 coming in tomorrow for future proofing my system more as I play at 1080p right now. I plan on jumping to 1440p at somepoint. So, at 1080p, with a Nvidia 1070ti and a Ryzen 5 5600x, I get around 30-well over 60 frames depending on where I am in the verse. Either way I can play this game comfortably. 30 frames is on the low end of what I normally get. I know this is a lot but I hope this can help anyone wondering about their own system.
RyZen 3800x
16gb ram
Evga gtx 1070 sc2
Sata3 ssd
My bottle neck is the 16gb ram, but I've never seen it eat more than 8gb Ram in my task manager
How well do you think my pc with a 3060ti, i5 11400f and 16 gigs of ram would perform?
I'm playing with a 10 YO rig and my Performances vary wildly depending on the server.
My 3770K has 16GB DDR3 and a SATA SSD coupled with a RTX2060.
Not ideal but fact is that I'm switching between 35 FPS and a back in the Teens depending on the server I'm in, even on area 18 or Loreville.
Guaranteed, not ideal for FPS players, but good enough for anyone else.
Sometimes disabling parasite programs is important when playing SC (steam upgrade, GoG, Wargaming etc), but what really makes the game unplayable for me sometimes is the Jittering and stuttering which are server related, not due to my low specs.
My advice is to build as beefy as you can if you need, but hold out if you have something that can still run SC albeit not ideal: new hardware is always coming out (intel 12k, next gen Rizen, more affordable GPUs, DDR5) and this is not the best time to upgrade a system due to crazy pricing.
Do not expect to jump up in performance massively anyway: most problems are still server related (alpha unoptimized) and you will probably get about 10 FPS better as an average at most, not double what you see.
Unless you stream: then every bit helps.
u mean RTX 2060....
Upgrade to 32GB of RAM and the game will only stutter for a few minutes after loading in. This is what happened to me. R5 2600, 32GB, NVME, RX580-8GB(at time of RAM upgrade, now 3060)
I get 25+ anywhere except Orison now and I know that my Ryzen is the bottleneck(Single thread performance) but my MoBo supports Ryzen 5000 so that bottleneck will be resolved early next year.
@@kokiklv probably, but because my rig is the size of a shoe cardboard box 16GB is all I can get (never found 16GB simm of DDR3 pc1660).
Next year I'll most probably change PC, "IF" this nonsense price madennss calms down a bit and once I see what AMD will bring to counter the 12k serie. I'm a sucker for low power and I'd never invest in a PC that draws more then my dish washer!
This being said, my point is that you "can" play Stav Citize with a low spec system provided you are not expecting competitive FPS shoot-em-up PVP performances.
The game is so unoptimized at the moment that you won't have those even on a 5K$ system!
@@failomas1443 Yep! Corrected.
Identical ram is not a necessity. You can mix and match rams as you want, it will just downclock the better ram to match the slowest ram.
I have my self 4 sticks of 2 different kind of clock and cl rams and they work fine. And because of 4 ram sticks being faster than 2, I got even 15% ram performance overall, when I added the new extra ram
Currently playing on an i7 12700K with 32GB DDR4 RAM (not running XMP, because that resulted in a LOT of SC crashes) and an EVGA GeForce RTX 3080 FTW3. The game is installed on a fast PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSD.
I usually get fps of around 60-70 in space, but at the big capital cities it sometimes drops down to ~20 fps.
Outpost missions usually are anywhere between 40-60 fps.
Edit: almost forgot. I play on an ultra wide monitor in 3440x1440.
RTX 2060, ryzen 3600 16gb ram at 3200 and a ssd and im still getting some really low frames like 10s to 30s on low settings
Not currently playing, but I've always built my main system with extra RAM. Most games don't really try to make use of it when they should, so on a technical level this game engine is a breath of fresh air.
I think you mean, on a technical level this game is all over the place. From 15 fps on a monster rig to 120 fps. Memory leakage and servers that perform really bad is more the norm than anything.
As a developer what you said is not true. No game or any software piece should take all resources. Efficiency =/= Using everything.
@@kiwd-dynamic Not all resources unless necessary, no. But why not put some more RAM to use in a game that is streaming assets in all the time and there's like 16GB more RAM sitting unused by anything else on the system.
For the telemetry, I'm one down, one left of the green dot with a 1070ti, R7 1700x, 32gb ram, and standard SSD. Upgrades are woefully unobtainable with a fixed income (it's like trying to milk a rock to get enough scratch for a cheap second monitor) so I'm in a position where I have to hope the gen12/vulkan updates will make what I have work. My rig IS my upgrade since my old system became unable to run SC when 3.0 went live.
I’m planning to mix 2x16 gb with 2x8 gb will that work same cl voltage and make
That will work
@@NOOBIFIER1337 woah, thank you for such a quick responce!, I'm so huped to finally start playing with you all guys=)
My System: AMD 5600x, GTX1660Ti, 32Gb 3600Mhrz CL16 RAM.
Me and a friend tried the free flight and I struggled to get more than 20FPS in New Babbage. On another moon I got around 30fps. My CPU was being red lined at 100% on all cores while my GPU utilization was 50-90% depending on where in PU I was. This was quite frustrating as changing in game settings made zero difference as I was completely CPU bound. We gave up and I started doing some research on what we could do.
I found that you can disable some things using a custom user config file. The game didn't look nearly as nice, but I more than doubled my FPS (Over 40fps in New Babbage) and my CPU is no longer just reading 100% all the time with my GPU at around 90-100% utilization. My friend with his 4 core CPU saw a change from about 8fps to about 30fps in New Babbage, but his GTX1060 is still only at about 50-60% utilization. Can only do so much with a 5 year old quad core :(
The biggest performance issue is the render thread and CIG has talked about this being the biggest bottleneck that they are working on to improve with the new rendering. So if you can turn some stuff off, the render thread ends up doing a lot less which could result in a decent FPS boost which was the case for me and my friend.
Yes, the game didn't look as pretty, but I'll make that trade for the FPS all day. I wish these setting were available in game so it's easy for general players to get access to.
I recently upgraded. Now running an MSI 6800xt gpu, and a 5900x cpu, with 32 gb ram. Getting around 60 fps most places now
The important thing about RAM, is Windows and background apps still need some of that too, which lowers the available RAM for the game, and many seem to forget that, especially those recommending 16 GB as fine. I think folks that recommend 16 GB, are those with 16 GB, that have never tried more. More cores, more clock speed, NVME, and lots of RAM, however, GPU so far has made a much smaller improvement that I'd expect it to, but that will change over the next 12 months.
SC consistently uses between 18 to 21gb of my 32gb ram when running native 4K. It sometimes creeps higher if I play in 5K for screenshots.
@@RatBagDad on my 1080p, 32GB laptop, it's usually around 10-16. Laptop has a GTX 2080 with 8GB dedicated VRAM.
Either way, as noob says, bare min requirements has never been enough for an enjoyable game experience, in any game, as far back as I can remember seeing pc system requirements.
SO IF YOU GIVE IT 64, IT WILL USE 42?!
squadron 42 confirmed?!!?@?!@?!?@?!@
lmao
I have a i7-6700k, 1070, and 16gb. Star citizen runs fantastically but I do experience bad frames when in Area 18. Other than that though it's smooth and fluid
So.. I’m upgrading slowly. Thisbis basically wheat I’m going to be working with until I’m done upgrading ram and gpu.
Motherboard: Asus TUF AM4 x570-plus
Ram: ddr4 3600 (28gb)
Storage: 1tb m.2 gen4 5,150mb/s
Gpu: 1660 super 6gb
I’m upgrading the ram and gpu later this year during cyber Monday.
Good info. In my opinion a 256GB NvME SSD is to small for the performance difference of a 1TB SATA3 SSD if that SATA is a good drive. I am running a Samsung 850 EVO 1TB and it runs about as fast as a lot of deferent NvME drives. By all means if you are needing to buy right now get a good NvME around at least 500+GB. Also you may be limited by your motherboard on if a NvME can run at it's top speed. Most drives are backwards compatible if you plan to change board later.
Also I have seen in some cases you need to get the larger drive to get the better chipsets, so that is another reason not to go to small.
I had i5 8600K with Corsair 32Gb 2666Mhz CL16 RAM, Samsung 860 EVO M2 and MSI DUKE 1080ti and SC was just playable on medium settings @3440x1440p but did suffer occasionally. I recently bought a Ryzen 5900X, G.Skill 32Gb 3600Mhz CL16 RAM and a Corsair MP600 PRO XT M2. I am still running the 1080ti and I am running high settings @3440x1440p and its very smooth except for Orison, notice a very slight amount of frame drop but doesn't affect smooth playability. Load times have improved significantly.
It’s nice to see that GPU isn’t the only thing to get a good experience
I upgraded from a really old computer (i5 first gen, GTX 660, 16GB DDR3) to high-end PC (5800X, 32GB 3600mhz C15 RAM, 3080 ti, PCIe 4.0 SSD) but also upgraded from 1080 to 21:9 3440x1440p Monitor. In Landing Zones it is about 30-35 fps, Space about 60-100 fps. It is playable but not perfect. Scores in the telemetry:
GPU Score: 430 CPU: 218
When I started SC in 2015 it was also playable in FHD on my old system with 25-40 fps depending on the mode (PU, Arena Commander)
Upgraded from a 3600 with a 970 and 16gb RAM (basically unplayable near or on planets even on 720p - mostly a VRAM/GPU issue.) to a 3700x and a 1070 16GB RAM (@3800mhz cl15) and now I can play on max settings (except clouds) 1080p with minimum 30 fps.
Some things that I can reccomend doing is using the fastest SSD available and setting process priority to "higher than normal". It doesn't increase your fps but makes it chugg noticeably less.
More RAM surely helps and the faster the CPU, the better.
Just to add to this and give people an idea how important the CPU is, my friend just upgraded his 2600 to a 5800x and it is a night and day difference for him. His GPU is a 5700xt and it barely got to 50% load with the 2600.
Sort of a little bit of good new during the GPU crisis, at least CPUs are available ...
i have 32 gb but it only uses 11gb of ram leaving me with only 20-28 fps max. and it doesn't let me change the priority to high as it says access denied despite the fact it ran as admin with full permissions?
My Aya Neo 2021 Pro can actually run SC. It has a AMD Ryzen 7 4800U, 16GB of fast DDR4 Ram, and 3GB dedicated to the integrated APU's VRAM. With no tweaking of settings, it's almost a stable 30FPS at it's native 1920x800 resolution. I'm confident I'll get it running smooth shortly. Then I'll be playing SC anywhere as I have a 4G LTE Hotspot. 😁👍
Can't wait for my upgrade! I'm BARELY able to play SC on my current system (i5-4460, 16GB DDR4, GTX 960, SATA SSD) but it's doable! Pathetic, I know. But my new planned system is as follows... 12400F or 12600K, 32GB DDR4, RTX 2070 or 3060, NVMe SSD.
Telemetry is bugged. I've switched PC last month and it still shows old system. Found thread in issue council, where people like me had this problem. Some mod just came and closed it, because it's not game related.
I don’t have that experience. Mine changes depending on which of the two computers I play on
Commenting my comments in the comments, Cheers Noob!
I also think internet speed and server communication are very important variable. I have a decent rig, 1070, 6700k, ssd and 32 dd4 and the game runs smoothly but my internet connection is 800mb/s constant
I don’t have the game yet but am planning on buying it just trying to see if my computer will run it or not first, I get asus rog B550 motherboard 32 gbs of 3600 DDR4 RAM a 2t SSD and AMD Ryzan 5 5700x processor and I feel like that that should be decent for this game but I can’t tell
I tried playing with 16gb on low.. i went into some tram thingy, got a 50 sec frametime while resource monitor was saying it was trying to use ~23gb (swap+ram), why tf did that happen lmao
On fresh servers I have great frames with a 7700k, 32GB Ram and a 1070. Not spending more money on a rig when it's the game that's the issue. Well optimized games of today run great in 1440p.
I currently run SC on a 27 inch monitor at 4K with an I-7 8700K CPU, an Nvidia GTX 1080ti GPU, 32Gb 3200 GHz Corsair RAM, on a 1T NVME PCie 3 SSD. I consider the 30 to 50 FPS to be acceptable, but I don’t do the FPS or PVE games, so lag can be almost unrecognized for me.
This was a good one.!
I get ~90fps floating around Port O with 5800x, 64GB 3600MHz RAM, RTX 2080S, and 1TB M.2.
No OC on the GPU and I’m using custom PBO limits and curve for the 5800X.
1440p, Very High settings.
"I9 9900k @ 5ghz - DDR4 32GB 3200 - 3070 RTX - m.2 nvme" here, and I'm achieving 25-35 fps regardless of resolution (1440p-4k). It is a bit different on other areas, as at Port Oli or any other Space Station, I average at 45-60fps at 4k. In space, I see my self hitting 60fps on average when in an empty area or not looking at planets.
I'm pretty confident to say either my Cpu could use and upgrade or my ram going to 64gb may help increase that performance better.
My rig has an RTX 2080, and I just recently upgraded my CPU to a Ryzen 7 3900X, which also let me bring the speed of my 16 gigs of RAM up to its rated 3200. Star Citizen is running off a PCI-E gen 3 NVME drive. I've only played once since this upgrade, and it was on the PTU, but I'd call the performance at 1080p "fairly good"-mostly 40-50 fps, down around 20-30 at Orison.
well that explains it i spawned at orison
I got a 3060, ryzen 7 5700X and 16 gigs of ram, i keep crashing and im geting another 16 gigs of ram to attenpt to stop the crashes
Thanks for the info 👍. I upgraded to the 5600 in a gigabyte aorus x570s master. But I'm still using my 2070gtx for now. Just can't see spending twice what I paid for the cpu,motherboard and 64g of ddr4 3600 memory, and a m.2 4th gen.drive. Gpu's are ridiculously stupid expensive Right now. Besides I've got to save some money for a new ship right? After upgrading I noticed about a 20 to 30 frame rate boost . Again thanks for your time to make this video.
Some good points but I found that after a modest point the users hardware makes less of a different than the state of CGI's servers.
I upgraded from 16 to 48GB RAM and it gave me only3-4 FPS.
Only using a Ryzen 3600 and GTX1060 I can get close to 60FPS when the servers are happy. Lows can go down to 14FPS on a bad day especially in asset busy locations like microtech. I'm not sure how CGI plan to support the constant release of new assets (ships, weapons, skins) because these all need to be loaded into user memory when Inthe area and rendered when visible. I don't see it as a sustainable practice.
Thats good to hear as thats pretty much the spec I plan for my 1st time pc build when I can afford it, but with 32gb ram. Im guessing elite dangerous and ksp2 will run fine on it also. 👍
@@coffeeandvapes1308 If you're only gaming, and if you want to save money, by a motherboard with 4 RAM slots. Buy 2x 8GB to begin with as even most current games don't utilise 16GB yet and you'll be able to upgrade to 32GB in a few years when newer games will scale to fill that much.
I play on a 1660ti i7 16 gig ram and since the past update i have rarely experienced stutters i run voice attack and joystick gremlin in the background and ghub with a g920 and still maintain around 50 fps. Exept on transit and new babbage but still over 30.
The ram usage was a shock and confirms my idea of why i had some issues. When Micro tech was first launched i only had 16gb, bought ankther 16gb and could finally get off MT.. This last patch did it again. CTD alot due to ram spiking to max. Increased page file and CTD stopped instantly. There was a tool for limiting the memory leak but dont remember what it was. But any way im on a ryzen 5600x,32gb of 3200mhzram, merc319 6800xt @1440p and laoding in to hurston i hold 45-60 fps, and 90-120 flying.
So do you recommend going to 32 gigs of ram?
I have a 2070 Super 8 gig and 16 mb of ram. I can run the game in 1440p on medium and its fine so long as some other settings are low. We will see what I need to run it in 10 years' time.
Hey man love the video! Do you by any chance have the link to that dashboard calculator? or is it more of an in game configuration? Thanks! ( my apologies if I missed the link lol)
Are you speaking about “ Star Citizen Telemetry “ ? If so, that can be searched for in Google, it will pop right up.
@@NOOBIFIER1337 yes that’s correct! Thank you so much :)
Started running SC on a R5 3600x, 16GB 3200Mhz DDR4, 1660S, not too terrible but planetary hubs like the starting spawn was frame city. Recently upgraded to a 2070S, graphics on med and small lag here and there. I've got my DDR5 build mapped out and should be ready to go by the end of the year, should be interesting to see the difference.
Why are you "upgrading" to a 20 series when 30 and 40 is a lot more affordable now
@@bryantwilliams2269 because I picked the 2070s up of a mate who got a 40 series and I only paid like £100..
The telemetrie tool didn't work for me. I changed my system 2 months ago and its still display my old rig.
When patch 315 goes live it’ll update
@@NOOBIFIER1337 thx
@@NOOBIFIER1337 it still displays my old Computer :(
I got 32GB 3200Mhz RAM, and a Ryzen 5 5600X... I'm using an RX580 8GB GDDR5 OC Armor 2048SP right now that's bottlenecking the system
but come January i'm getting a ROG Strix 3070Ti 8GB GDDR6X OC so I can't wait to see how that performs considering I have to use an old dell monitor for star citizen specifically due to the fact right now it's the only game I have to run in 1080 25fps due to my current gpu limits... to be able to finally play star citizen on my 4k monitor even if I don't get a full 60fps i'll still be happy as long as I don't get 18 fps in Babbage spaceport and A18 again!
Currently doing fine with a 2700x, 1080ti, and 32gb ddr4. SC sits at a fine 20-40fps.
Trying to decide if I want to update now to a 5800x, 6900xt, and 64gb ddr4; or wait for next gen parts.
Main deciding factor on parts is if SC will do a Linux build soon.
Telemetry is not working for me from summer. It's not showing my upgrades (video card and cpu)
It will now that 3.15 launched
We have 2 systems that runs SC for my wife and myself. My Rig is a Ryzen 3900X on a Asrock X570 Taichi motherboard. 32gb Trident memory, (Don't recall the speeds right off hand but was paired correctly with the CPU, same on my wife's build). For storage I'm using multiple Sabrent 1tb PCIe 4.0 nvme M.2 drives and a RTX 2080 (non Ti model) and play at 1440p. I average 40 to 70 fps depending location in the verse. Cities are worse. Orison is a special place, get 20 - 25 fps there lol. But overall smooth game play.
Now my wife build is a bit older mid range setup as she didn't want a rig devoted to gaming but general use but the ability to play from time to time at 1080p. She is using a Ryzen 2600X on a Gigabyte B450 Aorus Pro Wifi motherboard. 32gb Trident Z Royal for memory. And for storage Western Digital Blue SATA M.2 SSD's (2 of them). For GPU a GTX 1660ti. And surprisingly she gets decent frames as well in game. Orison she was getting 12 to 25, not the greatest but it was fluid in movements, no stuttering or hang-ups. Space, Moons, outposts she was getting upper 40s to low 50s just depended on the area. Then 20s to 30s in cities. But still playable and enjoyable for her. And where I'm hardwired to the router she's playing wireless.
Both systems are water cooled. And I do plan on giving her rig an upgrade at some point. But with the way the economy is going, shortages of everything and what you can find is well over priced, we just haven't put it on as a big rush. Since it does what she needs it to do and still enjoys some light gaming.
Her rig seems perfectly great for the purposes. The 5600x dropped in price recently, but I don’t think you would see a huge bump in performance for her from the 2600x
Great explanation about ram :)
Love the storm trooper helmet in your vid, is that something you bought, or did you 3d print it?
3D printed. th-cam.com/video/sdOOWg5Le1k/w-d-xo.html
@@NOOBIFIER1337 thanks! It's great that you're so active with responding to your viewers, by the way. Have a good day!
My new build after running only gaming laptop for 10 years:
1440P max graphics (frames 99% 50-60)
i10-600k (OC 5.1)
32 GB ram 3200
RTX 3090
SSD NVME
Good info Noob. One thing you missed covering is the spec and quality of the motherboard. You'll want to ensure you choose a mobo with good power delivery and obviously support for PCIe Gen 4 if choosing a gen 4 NVMe or wanting to future proof. I think the most important thing is the power delivery since SC will push power delivery to the max. On the back of that, you'll want to choose a decent PSU to deliver all the power efficiently and quietly.
For me it's a Corsair RM850x PSU, MSI b550m Mortar mobo, 4 x 8gb Viper 4400mhz ram clocked at 3600mhz 14-14-14-?? timings, 1Gb Samsung evo gen 3 NVMe, PowerColor Red Devil 6800xt GPU, all inside a high airflow case using Artic fans and CPU cooler. This is driving a 2k ultra wide monitor at 60-70FPS generally. I'm looking forward to any performance improvements the gen 12 vulkan engine will deliver.
Sounds like buying a 980 pro instead of the Evo would do more for your performance than an expensive motherboard
power supplies are always over looked for a cheap option for most people but Ive always liked having Quad rails to keep the dirty electric away from the clean low Voltage stuff but with SSD and USB taking the spinning crap out removes the dirty stuff but still like a good PSU Enermax as been my pick for years untill one killed a MB EVGA now lol
@@Tainted-Soul i love my supernova lol you can tell they are quality, i like how the fan is quite too but its always on which is a good thing, silent psu's are a bad idea. thats one thing i hated about my corsair psu, it had that auto fan that would only kick on if you were over a certain power draw therefor it would have coil whine and get hot as hell at idle or doing things under 400w lol. corsairs worst idea ever. imo supernovas and seasonic are the best ones. for the most part tho the base standard is gold now so generally any psu will be good unless they are all out lying about the rating.
Yeah….now how do I configure things….for some reason the back end configurations aren’t working great.
so using DDR5 is an issue i thought they were quicker and im also using a 980 pro from samsumg and a 3080ti and i9 12900k and the game hitches like crazy idk whats wrong plz help me
I have 32 GB of RAM. Running on a SATA SSD. I have an older system that was not performing well at all with a AMD FX-8320E processor and a GTX 980 Ti graphics card. It was barely running the game at 10-18 FPS. It didn't matter what resolution I ran it at from 4k down to 720p it would run at the same FPS. I overclocked the graphics card and that made no difference in Star Citizen. However when I overclocked the CPU from 3200hz to 4500h (That processor overclocks really nicely!) it made a HUGE difference. Now I get a pretty solid 25-35 FPS on land and 45 FPS in space. The game is playable and I didn't have to buy any new hardware. But I really should upgrade to a newer system next year.
CPU and GFX are your issue TBH
@@NOOBIFIER1337 Well not anymore. Overclocking the GPU and CPU is running things great now at 45 FPS. I've got two other Nvidia tweaks to try that really helped on my gaming laptop. The first was setting Low Latency Mode to Ultra and the second is setting the FPS limiter to 30. Those seemed to reduce the occasional stutter to almost nothing now.
i upgrade fairly recently from a 17-4790k to a 5900x same graphics card ( RTX 2060 aorus extreme) i kept the 970 evo plus too, i put ofc 32 GB RAM and as expected the performance jumped leaps and bounds i can keep average 50fps and it's completely another game and i've enjoyed it.
Telemetry even if i played a lot after ugrading it still keep my old spec on it, i gave up on telemetry on rsi site
Yeah, I don’t know what to say about the telemetry. It seems that it’s pretty buggy but with the new patch coming out it should update. I’m happy though that you got the performance you were after with your upgrade
@@NOOBIFIER1337 one day i will update the gpu..., but for the rest i'm really happy with this boost performance thx :)
So how long do you have to play before telemetry picks up your specs? I just did a drastic upgrade of my GPU from a 1660 to a 3080 and have played for about an hour and still telemetry has not changed and is still showing the specs for the 1660. Does not appear to be a very accurate tool to say the least. I even logged out and back into Spectrum thinking it needed to refresh. Tested after logging out and in fact my specs disappeared and showed a blank telemetry but logging back in and no joy, same specs as if I still was running the 1660. Thoughts?
Telemetry is super buggy, sometimes it wont pick up for months
"Game will be ready 7-10 years from now"
Good lord, that put this game's development in perspective. I might just not even look at Star Citizen for a few years in that case lmao.
Or more
This is all spot on. RAM is cheap currently, and the latency of gen 1 DDR5 is atrocious. I've found pcie gen 4 to be a meaningful upgrade over gen 3 with an appropriate SSD, while I don't think gen 5 will be as noticeable, because we're no where near saturating gen 4 throughput.
Only true for Intel side
AMD side you see a difference from latency and from memory MHz and in Ryzen 5000 you need minimum 4 Ranks (thats number of side’s of your RAM sticks with chips on them)
When AMD goes DDR5 there will be a difference
Intel added DDR5 support because they can not because they needed to
AMD however are adding it not because they can but because they need to
Do not wait for this game to upgrade....I told myself that about 8 years ago "Ill upgrade right before SC comes out" and have since upgraded 3 times waiting for this game. lol
Just go upgrade if you are due.
Damn when SC started my computer was on the high side. Now my SB is minimum. Still playing on my 2011 2600k CPU and 2016 1060 6gb GPU though also with mixed 1333mhz ram at 28gb. LOL. Frankenstein would be proud. With as FUBAR as SC has been with patches lately, I will just hold off on new computer until next gen releases by mid 2022. I am in upper 20s FPS in space combat but low teens or single digit FPS in LZs. Not bad for 2560x1080.
Hold off there is no rush
Gtx 970(4gb) i76700k 16gb ram +SSD will this game be playable?