In terms of CPU/GPU use which of the newer games is most smilar to Fallout 4?

[363rdChemicalCompany]

Because I am looking at these perfomance comparisons for different GPUs but the example gamnes they list I have never played and most often not even heared of.

I wonder which one, if any, I should pick to "stand in" for FO4 in these tests?

[fraquar]

The most important thing to consider is what resolution are you planning on running at.   It will dictate the "baseline" GPU you need before even looking at performance comparisons.   Don't bother with anything less than your baseline - and don't bother with anything rated for the next higher resolution.

Ex.   I run at 1080p.    Anything more than a 3060 (or comparable GPU) is complete overkill.   I could have a 4090 and it's not going to do anything for me that the 3060 can - because the monitor is the bottleneck.    

Ex.  I plan on switching to 1440p this year.    Anything more than a 3070 (or comparable GPU) is complete overkill.   Like above, a 4090 would offer me nothing other than a nice sized hole in my wallet.

Added:   Remember, Fallout 4 is a 10 year old game.   There isn't a CPU made today that can't run that game optimal from a CPU perspective - unless you plan on using something like a Rasberry Pi to run it.   

You should be looking to make sure your "system" can run the most intensive game you play.   I'd have to think you have at least 1 title more intensive than Fallout 4.   

Edited Saturday at 08:25 PM by fraquar

[AndalayBay]

I had to replace my video cards recently. I had two Radeon R9 290Xs and replaced them with one Nvidia GeForce RTX 4060. When I ran the launcher it maxed out all the settings. I'm using Weapon Debris Crash Fix and it seems to be working fine.

I did some research before buying and felt that the 4060 was the right spot for performance and price. I keep my hardware for a long time before upgrading again. Those 290s will still work, but I had to repack them not long ago to reduce the heat load.

One of my starting points in my research is Tom's Hardware graphics card reviews.

[363rdChemicalCompany]

Thanks everyone!

And I apologize I did not give you enough info: 

AMD7800X3D, Samsung 990 PRO SSD, 4080 Super, 64GB DDR5 RAM

 

I know, yes, that almost looks like overkill for FO4 as it sits, but I run 300-400 mods active at the same time, I have  a 4k Monitor and i run it with Luxors HD overhaul 4K version, with most ( but not all) settings on Ultra.

 

Also I go in and out of the MCM and AFT often to manipulate NPCs in the world. Getting in and out of MCM, or picking up the NPCs "spec sheet" via AFT, there is a real lag, approx 1-3 seconds.

For that I want a CPU with better productivity scores than the 7800X3D. My laptop with a 14900 HX is faster in these MCM jumps than my desktop even though its throttled a lot for being in a laptop

With the CPU I been holding off until the 9950X3D comes out.

My 7800X3D is still quite good and I doubt there will be enough uplift with the 9800 X3D, which is why I did not get it, especially since my FPS are good so I will likely get the AMD 9950X3D when it comes out.

Already told the store to call me when their first unit comes in.

 

So my reasoning is with the GPUs, well the new RTX 5080 seems to be minimal uplift over 4080S according to most comparisons.

But I once I have a 9950X3D, maybe my GPU will be the bottleneck?

I was toying with the idea of putting in a 5080 but comparisons say improvements are minor to 4080S but none of the published comparisons cover my use case: heavily modded FO4, with 4k textures most settings on Ultra.

So that why I wonder which, if any of the new games, have a smiliar use profile on our machines to FO4? or to my particular use case?

[363rdChemicalCompany]

11 hours ago, fraquar said:

 I'd have to think you have at least 1 title more intensive than Fallout 4.   

I dont 

Fallout 4 is the only game I play right now. My other titles are even older (and not modded)

[South8028]

All the iconic games of late are already well known. Baldurs gate 3, cyberpunk, Stellar Blade (I don’t know if it’s out or should be out on PC), The Witcher 4. Well, one of those with an open world. Naturally, everything will fly for you. For fo4, everything that was released after 20 is a supercomputer. The game will soon be a hundred years old, and it doesn't need more than full hd + 60fps.

[BlackRampage]

Starfield would be the obvious answer here. Even runs on the same engine.

[363rdChemicalCompany]

3 hours ago, BlackRampage said:

Starfield would be the obvious answer here. Even runs on the same engine.

Thank you.

I will look for comparisons that include Starfield then

[RoNin1971]

19 hours ago, fraquar said:

The most important thing to consider is what resolution are you planning on running at.   It will dictate the "baseline" GPU you need before even looking at performance comparisons.   Don't bother with anything less than your baseline - and don't bother with anything rated for the next higher resolution.

Ex.   I run at 1080p.    Anything more than a 3060 (or comparable GPU) is complete overkill.   I could have a 4090 and it's not going to do anything for me that the 3060 can - because the monitor is the bottleneck.    

Ex.  I plan on switching to 1440p this year.    Anything more than a 3070 (or comparable GPU) is complete overkill.   Like above, a 4090 would offer me nothing other than a nice sized hole in my wallet.

Added:   Remember, Fallout 4 is a 10 year old game.   There isn't a CPU made today that can't run that game optimal from a CPU perspective - unless you plan on using something like a Rasberry Pi to run it.   

You should be looking to make sure your "system" can run the most intensive game you play.   I'd have to think you have at least 1 title more intensive than Fallout 4.   

 

You would be correct, IF resolution was all there is to it. But it isn't.

I'm actually running FO4 on the latest i9 with a 4090 & some of the fastest RAM & SSD's. My screen is an ultra-wide 3440x1440. (45") - (I use it for 3D modeling and stuff too)

Trust me, I'm using all the power they have to give. (although the CPU never gets fully utilized)

Why?

Because I'm using 4 & 8K textures and the highest possible settings on my ENB. In vanilla mode I can hit 10.000 fps, but I can still bring it down to below 60fps by going for the max. in quality.

 

edit:

I actually started playing FO4 on a 780M (2016/17), which was already sufficient to run it in (vanilla) ultra mode. Switched to the 2070Super in between, which couls easily hit 2300fps in vanilla ultra mode, but still could not handle my current settings & textures.

[AndalayBay]

I've also found that the CPU speed is the governing factor with Bethesda games. I had a Core i7 and when it died, I actually went with a faster Core i5 and all my Bethesda games run pretty fast now (Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout 3 & 4). Skyrim and Fallout 4 use the graphics card more than the old ones do, but they still seem to benefit from higher speed.

Core i5-10600K @ 4.10GHz
32 GB RAM
WD Black SN750 SE NVMe SSD

Having a fast SSD for your game files is also key. I have my saves on a traditional drive.