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

[South8028]

On 1/31/2025 at 2:06 AM, RoNin1971 said:

instead of trying to find a modern game which is similar in performance (that's going to be very hard), I believe it would be better to look at what FO4 actually needs, and more importantly, uses.

A modern game will utilize my i9 14900K's 24 cores, FO4 will only use 4 out of those (afaik). So, a CPU with less but faster cores, will do better, but also makes any comparison moot.

FO4 loads a lot faster from a good ol' harddrive instead of (much faster) SSD's.

On the GPU front anything higher as the 'recommended' will do, unless you want to play around with 4K or even 8K textures. Your GPU's memory should be the decisive factor in that case.

For using all kinds of shaders and/or ENB's you don't really have to look at anything, after fulfilling the above. Unless you wish to turn on "Godrays" (don't )

 

You really need to buy something very cheap, not to be able to play a 10 years old 3D game in ultra settings.

I checked. Copied fo4 to hdd. No. With an HDD, loading locations and the game itself is ~2 times slower than with an SSD. The game probably can't take full advantage of the m2's full potential, but the m2 fo4 still runs much faster than the hdd.

[RoNin1971]

2 hours ago, South8028 said:

I checked. Copied fo4 to hdd. No. With an HDD, loading locations and the game itself is ~2 times slower than with an SSD. The game probably can't take full advantage of the m2's full potential, but the m2 fo4 still runs much faster than the hdd.

The statement is a bit outdated, agreed. Haven't tested with my current setup (2x Samsung 990 Pro 2TB (7450 MB/s read)), but got nothing to compare it to anyway.

It loads a lot faster as on my previous rig, which had SSD's as well, but a lot slower. Those definitely took longer to load as my PC before that, which still had HDD's.

Let's just say it doesn't load as fast as it should be able to with SSD's.

7450 MB/s vs 286.8MB/s for the fastest seagate HDD, that's over 25 times faster, not 2 ...

[South8028]

14 minutes ago, RoNin1971 said:

The statement is a bit outdated, agreed. Haven't tested with my current setup (2x Samsung 990 Pro 2TB), but got nothing to compare it to anyway.

It loads a lot faster as on my previous rig, which had SSD's as well, but a lot slower. Those definitely took longer to load as my PC before that, which still had HDD's.

Let's just say it doesn't load as fast as it should be able to with SSD's.

I tested it on a wd10ezex 1 terabyte hdd. In the original it is installed on adata 860 m2. Subjectively, much slower. Maybe not even 2 times, but 3 or more. An empty map that loads for me in ~6 seconds took ~15 seconds to load.

[363rdChemicalCompany]

3 hours ago, RoNin1971 said:

 Haven't tested with my current setup (2x Samsung 990 Pro 2TB (7450 MB/s read)),

This is also my exact setup. I wanted two times 4T 990 PRO but they only had the 2T ones in stock when my current rig went together in July.

 

When the AMD 9950X3D comes out I may upgrade my hardrives to bigger ones. Not sure how much faster I can get than Samsung 990PRO w/o going to gen 5. 

My ASUSTeK . TUF GAMING B650-PLUS WIFI (AM5) is supposed ot support gen 5 SSDs but I hear mixed reviews for gaming on those.

Not sure what the verdict on those is for gaming yet.

[South8028]

9 hours ago, 363rdChemicalCompany said:

This is also my exact setup. I wanted two times 4T 990 PRO but they only had the 2T ones in stock when my current rig went together in July.

 

When the AMD 9950X3D comes out I may upgrade my hardrives to bigger ones. Not sure how much faster I can get than Samsung 990PRO w/o going to gen 5. 

My ASUSTeK . TUF GAMING B650-PLUS WIFI (AM5) is supposed ot support gen 5 SSDs but I hear mixed reviews for gaming on those.

Not sure what the verdict on those is for gaming yet.

throw away all this nonsense (or better yet, mail it to me). The true way is indicated - to play fo4 on old servers from aliexpress, on video cards from 10 years ago. Everything that good corporations produced 10 years ago is God's light. All they sell today is evil Skynet.

[AndalayBay]

Why? I understand 363 is only interested in FO4, but if they can get better video cards and flash drives for a good price, it future proofs their PC a bit.

We just bought a WD Black SN770 1TB for my husband’s machine for less than the 500GB I got last year. Yes, I’m jealous.

I noticed how much faster everything was, not just FO4 and now stuff on hubby’s machine will be even faster.

[South8028]

43 minutes ago, AndalayBay said:

Why? I understand 363 is only interested in FO4, but if they can get better video cards and flash drives for a good price, it future proofs their PC a bit.

We just bought a WD Black SN770 1TB for my husband’s machine for less than the 500GB I got last year. Yes, I’m jealous.

I noticed how much faster everything was, not just FO4 and now stuff on hubby’s machine will be even faster.

Why? Because I want rtx4080. If he becomes a follower of the holy archaeological scripture, he will return to the bright path gtx1080ti and mail me his devilish rtx4080.

[363rdChemicalCompany]

11 hours ago, South8028 said:

Why? Because I want rtx4080. If he becomes a follower of the holy archaeological scripture, he will return to the bright path gtx1080ti and mail me his devilish rtx4080.

I was gonna give away my 4080S to a deserving celebrity modder (I already had one picked, so no new Applications please) when I was resolved to get the 5080 when it came out.

But the 5080 generational uplift is so minimal over the 4080S, that I decided not to bother with the upgrade.

I would consider a 4090 if prices were to drop with the 5000 series coming out, but thaty is not happneing at all due to a) no availability of 5000 series product and b) generalized disapointment in the new generation.

So my spring update this year will likely be AMD 9950 X3D, with maybe, just maybe, a new/faster drive and maybe move up from 64 GB DDR5 to 128 GB DDR5 RAM (if the bigger RAM does not drop my RAM access speeds too much, the jury is still out on that)

My cooler (360mm) and power unit are still sufficient.

[AndalayBay]

You two are in a different space-time continuum than me. One of our optical drives failed recently. The manufacture date? June 2005.

[South8028]

10 hours ago, 363rdChemicalCompany said:

I was gonna give away my 4080S to a deserving celebrity modder (I already had one picked, so no new Applications please) when I was resolved to get the 5080 when it came out.

But the 5080 generational uplift is so minimal over the 4080S, that I decided not to bother with the upgrade.

I would consider a 4090 if prices were to drop with the 5000 series coming out, but thaty is not happneing at all due to a) no availability of 5000 series product and b) generalized disapointment in the new generation.

So my spring update this year will likely be AMD 9950 X3D, with maybe, just maybe, a new/faster drive and maybe move up from 64 GB DDR5 to 128 GB DDR5 RAM (if the bigger RAM does not drop my RAM access speeds too much, the jury is still out on that)

My cooler (360mm) and power unit are still sufficient.

I was joking. It’s just that our video cards are much more expensive. Due to sanctions and all that... 5090 is available for pre-order... Costs ~10k $. 5080 ~4k$. 4090 started at ~1.5k, now ~3k, 4080 ~1.5k. In general, everyone makes great money from sanctions and flagships are no longer accessible to everyone.The maximum that I can afford financially is a 4060ti, well, or a Radeon. rx7600xt, or rx7700.