Fallout 4 Performance Thread

Wanna hear the funny stuff? I eradicated all organic life in Lexington. There is definitely not that much to goin on...like at all, really ...so, we don't have anything "huge" going on with a lot of background NPCs for instance.

 

I tried it, 31 fps .

It really seems to be an occlusion or batch optimization problem. I wonder if the Skyrime SKSE script would work with Fallout 4, or if the gentle soul who made it is preparing something similar for this one. This is really badly optimized, and it also runs badly on console (which is inexcusable for a game with its looks).

 

Sits at about 32FPS for me. Maybe a little lower than it would be if I wasn't using a 2560x1080 ultrawide monitor. No CF, so just one 7970.

 

Ok good idea with the save, its definitely a hard spot to render. My screen resolution is 1920x1200@25inch. Shadow quality and Godrays = medium, everything else Ultra.

25fps with no shadowboost, inf distance 20,000, shadow res 2048. ENBlocal.ini disabled.

30fps with no shadowboost, inf distance 6,000, shadow res 4098. ENBlocal.ini disabled.

27fps with shadowboost min 10,000 max 20,000, shadow res 2048. ENBlocal.ini VideoMemorySizeMb=10000 forced.

30 fps with shadowboost min 5,000 max 20,000, shadow res 2048. ENBlocal.ini VideoMemorySizeMb=10000 forced.

looks like 4096 res in screen shots that shadowboost uses as much clearer than 2048 stock, so it bypasses the fallout4 inf for resolution from what i can tell. Not sure if VideoMemorySizeMb=10000 is making a difference now.

 

Well. That's why I locked my FPS at 35. Don't like huge FPS transition...and 35 is acceptable minimum for me...for SP games ofc. But f@k me sideways... -5 fps with 60 bucks CPU (860k). Not bad at all

@DavidGX,

try it. But I doubt it. I have exac same with 1080p VS 1530p on that spot. With lower res i'm only getting increase on "max" FPS. "Lowest" stays the same.

@somemadcaaant,

I'm using 3072 for shadow res from now on. It's visually almost like 4096 but with much better performance. Very much nice lookin compared to 2048...which is ugly.

 

Have no doubts that if it's not already done it will be if it's possible and FAST.

Ppl are modding FO4 at a crazy rate, it's now Top 8 of games with most modded files (1640) in NexusMods:

http://www.nexusmods.com/games/?

Guess what are games Top 1 to 5 and his publisher?:

Skyrim
Oblivion
FO:NV
FO3
Morrowind

Imagine when official modding tool will be avalaible next year!

 

Yeah man i just updated my results with 4096 test same as yours also.

Gonna be crazy son!

 

860k (4.2Ghz currently) | 8Gb 2.4Ghz DDR3 | r9 280x - 25 fps
i7 5930K | 16Gb 2.4Ghz DDR4 | r9 290 - 30 fps

 

this game realy needs minimum 8gb i only have 4 gb the game will not run right.

 

Lol yeah exactly i wouldn't even sniff at anything under a 10 frames as an overall increase. Nothing i've done gives me more than 3 to 6 frames extra.

My cpu and gpu are at stock so im considering OC finally.

 

Did you tried this?:

http://www.nexusmods.com/fallout4/mods/978/?

 

OK. This might help with testing various tweaks and settings. Very "draw calls" hungry spots. I'm using those save files for such purposes:

'SAVE FILE' Download Link | Medium "hotness", I've got 30 fps in here

click on image to full size


***

'SAVE FILE' Download Link | Very "hot", I've got 24-26 fps in here

click on image to full size


***

'SAVE FILE' Download Link | Crazy Erratic spot, I've got 25-35 fps in here

click on image to full size


***

 

32 fps for me
fDirShadowDistance=6000.0000
fShadowDistance=6000.0000
iShadowMapResolution=4096
iDirShadowSplits=3
1440p/god rays medium
rest of the setting on ultra

 

Nah i can notice the quality difference so it would bug me, i go for the quality. I'm generally good with 45 to 60fps in general with a reshade activated, started with the 4k textures overhauls etc.

 

27Fps@1080p/1440p/1800p :wanker:
FXAA, Medium Shadow, Low Godray.

31Fps if i turn off Godray and Shadow resolution to 2048.

 

Have you noticed guys, we have around the same FPS amount (+/-) at the same spot with such variety of CPUs and GPUs. From AMD860k to i7 59xx; 5.0Ghz FXs and from Tahiti's to Fury. How ridiculous is that?

 

Found this - Upscale

This will allow 4k(8k? even) downsampling to native res Fullscreen/ Borderless for those who doesn't have appropriate GPUs. For instance, 280x and 7970 owners It has some bugs and scaling isn't perfect but it's there...I can do 4k to 1080p in Fallout 4 with that. Tested it. Tho it looks even worse than straight 1440p for me

@PrMinisterGR, wanna test it?

EDIT:

- Put corresponded files in to F4 executable folder
- in Fallout4Prefs.ini

bBorderless=1
bFull Screen=1

iSize H=2160
iSize W=3840

- in CCC set "Scale image to full panel size"
- Windows screen res set to native 1080p
- Run the game

WARNING! Not compatible with ENB. Prob with ShadowBoost even.

 

Because in many scenarios this game make GPU irrelevant and CPUs, regardless how powerful they are should be busy doing their job (feeding the GPU) not processing graphical information. It resembles in some way with the scenario in which AMD GPU users try to run a game that use Nvidia physx.
After so may years of development ( practically after releasing Skyrim, Fallout 4 became the primary project for Bethesda) to come out with this in 2015 is completely ludicrous.

 

Yeah I really feel like Skyrim was the last place they had any business using this old engine in.

With all the money they make, especially from Fallout 4 already, they have no good excuse not to build or license a new engine for their next game. It better damn well better use DirectX12, too.

 

yep, it has been shows on this forum, and many review sites, that the engine is a resource hog, and there are many scenarios where cpu limits, especially on AMD cards, define the minimum framerate. So you can end up with a 280x having higher fps than a furyx, and a gtx770 being faster than any AMD card.

Silly engine.