this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2023
184 points (97.4% liked)

Games

16803 readers
959 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works
184
Starfield Is Seemingly Missing Entire Stars (the local 'sun') When Running On AMD Radeon GPUs (wccftech.com)
submitted 1 year ago by geosoco@kbin.social to c/games@sh.itjust.works
39 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

So a user on Reddit (ed: u/Yoraxx ) posted on the Starfield subreddit that there was a problem in Starfield when running the game on an AMD Radeon GPU. The issue is very simple, the game just won't render a star in any solar system when you are at the dayside of a moon or even any planetary object. The issue only occurs on AMD Radeon GPUs and users with the Radeon RX 7000 & RX 6000 GPUs are reporting the same thing.

The issue is that the dayside of any planetary body or moon needs a source of light that gets it all lit up. That source is the star and on any non-AMD GPU, you will see the star/sun in the sky box which will be illuminating light on the surface. But with AMD cards, the star/sun just isn't there while the planet/moon remains illuminated without any light source.

Original Reddit post by u/Yoraxx

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] geosoco@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That really just means AMD gave them a lot of money, and they just made sure FSR2 worked. lol

[–] Naz@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

I've got a 7900XTX Ultra, and FSR2 does literally nothing, which is hilarious.

100% resolution scale, 128 FPS.

75% resolution scale .. 128 FPS.

50% resolution scale, looking like underwater potatoes ... 128 FPS.

I don't know how it's possible to make an engine this way, it seems CPU-bound and I'm lucky that I upgraded my CPU not too long ago, I'm outperforming my friend who has an RTX 4090 in literally all scenes, indoor, ship, and outdoor/planet.

He struggles to break 70 FPS on 1080p Ultra, meanwhile I'm doing 4K Ultra.

[–] redcalcium@lemmy.institute 3 points 1 year ago

Creation Engine has always been cpu-bound since gamebryo era.

[–] geosoco@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Some of the benchmarks definitely pointed out that it was CPU bound in many areas (eg. the cities).

I think the HUB one mentioned that some of the forested planets were much more GPU bound and better for testing.

I'm on a tv so capped at 60fps, but I do see a power usage difference with FSR - 75% vs FSR- 100% that's pretty substantial on my 7900xt.

[–] Xperr7@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

I have noticed it's better anti-aliasing than the forced TAA (once I forced it off)

[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

#include "fsr2.h"

Ok, can we have the monies please?