How well does Starfield run on PC?

theverge.com:

Bethesda’s Starfield universe launches this week, with access to more than 1,000 planets and promises of unlimited exploration. It’s a giant game that even after more than 100 hours of gameplay you’ll still be finding things to do and places to explore. But for all this adventure, you might be wondering: how well does it all run on modern PCs?

I’ve spent the past week or so testing Starfield on a few different GPUs, and I’ve come to the conclusion that Starfield is actually very CPU heavy and will demand the most out of both your CPU and GPU. Whether that’s from the regular loading points in the game to the combat and physics-driven parts of adventuring around its various planets, you’ll absolutely want a modern CPU to play this game and maintain high frame rates.

I’ve been running Starfield on AMD’s latest 7800X3D as well as playing the game on the Xbox Series S and X. While the console versions are designed to hit 30fps, the PC version will go as high as your rig can take it.

I focused most of my testing on two areas that I think are reflective of the typical gameplay experience you’ll find in Starfield. One is the city of Neon, which is largely an inside area full of NPCs, smoky alleyways, and lots of neon lights. The other is the planet of Masada III, with all of my testing here done outside, traversing through foggy areas and past large buildings and big open spaces.

All testing was completed at 1440p and 4K, with settings maxed out at highest or ultra, dynamic resolution disabled, 100 percent render resolution, and FSR 2 disabled. I’ve noticed that enabling just FSR 2 without lowering the render resolution will actually lower frame rates most of the time on a 7800X3D system.

Starfield alsoforces dynamic resolution