No Man Sky

Xpdite69

n00b
Joined
Feb 25, 2021
Messages
26
I have been playing NMS for a bit now but am running in to low FPS.

My system is old
3770K processor with 32 gigs of ram and a GTX 680.
Any benefit to replacing the video card with a used 1070 ti or does the whole system need to be upgraded.
Prices seem high right now in Canada.
 
get the 1070, live with a slight cpu bottle neck, then transplant it into an upgraded system later, then upgrade from it down the road.
 
I seem to recall NMS being fairly CPU dependent but that 680 is probably a bigger bottleneck overall. It's also worth mentioning that the game doesn't run super great on any hardware but I doubt you're just being super picky.

If I were you I would look for a graphics setting guide to find some settings that tax the cpu more and others that tax the gpu and play around with them separately to see which has a bigger impact on performance.
 
I seem to recall NMS being fairly CPU dependent but that 680 is probably a bigger bottleneck overall. It's also worth mentioning that the game doesn't run super great on any hardware but I doubt you're just being super picky.

If I were you I would look for a graphics setting guide to find some settings that tax the cpu more and others that tax the gpu and play around with them separately to see which has a bigger impact on performance.
thanks for the input. I did go through some of the guides but maybe you are right and it might be worth a second look. Doesn't cost anything so that is a bonus on it's own.
 
The GPU will get you more FPS in general but on GPU orientated games with CPU intensive games not so much. You will see the 3770k struggling at 100% while GPU is under utilized. That, said it can't hurt for the right price.
https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-680-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1070-Ti/3148vs3943
You got me thinking about this so I installed afterburner to see what is actually happening. CPU is averaging about 30% utilization but the GPU is generally at 99% utilization. Wonder if there is some tuning I can do for the video card.
 
If it means anything to you, I have a 3770k paired with a 1070.
I'm literally just starting out and haven't seen any action at all, just walking around and collecting the materials it's telling me to. My framerate is a constant 75fps at 1440p - that is the refresh rate of my monitor and I must have v-sync turned on since I set the cap to 160fps. ***Edit*** just turned off v-sync and my fps were bouncing between 86 and 108. Again, this is just walking around in the starting area with nothing else going on.
I'm guessing my fps may plummet when I get into anything demanding, but for now it's fine.

Specs...
3770k @ 4.4Ghz
16GB ram
MSI Geforce 1070

I do have some effects turned down, some to help the framerate and some because I just don't care for them.
Everything is on "High" except for...
Shadow Quality - Standard
Post Processing - Standard
Volumetric Effects - Enhanced
AF - 16
AA - Off. Might get some flak about this one, but I never, ever notice jaggies when I'm playing, must have gotten used to them over the years.
On some other page I remember setting "motion Blur" to "0" as well.
 
Last year I started noticing a jump in speed of loading game and area between not oc and oc on my 2600k. So CPU definitely helps there. After textures load is mostly down to GPU.
 
If it means anything to you, I have a 3770k paired with a 1070.
I'm literally just starting out and haven't seen any action at all, just walking around and collecting the materials it's telling me to. My framerate is a constant 75fps at 1440p - that is the refresh rate of my monitor and I must have v-sync turned on since I set the cap to 160fps. ***Edit*** just turned off v-sync and my fps were bouncing between 86 and 108. Again, this is just walking around in the starting area with nothing else going on.
I'm guessing my fps may plummet when I get into anything demanding, but for now it's fine.

Specs...
3770k @ 4.4Ghz
16GB ram
MSI Geforce 1070

I do have some effects turned down, some to help the framerate and some because I just don't care for them.
Everything is on "High" except for...
Shadow Quality - Standard
Post Processing - Standard
Volumetric Effects - Enhanced
AF - 16
AA - Off. Might get some flak about this one, but I never, ever notice jaggies when I'm playing, must have gotten used to them over the years.
On some other page I remember setting "motion Blur" to "0" as well.
thanks for the feed back. only problem is finding a card these days
 
Not sure if this would help, but this CPU settings tweak helped a lot of players gain better frame rate and reduce stuttering on cpus similar to yours.

Even if you get a mere 5 to 10% increase in performance, I'd say that's worth it.
https://www.reddit.com/r/NoMansSkyT...oost/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

Also, the 1070ti works great in NMS.
I will give it a try but from what Afterburner was showing it is the Video card that is the bottleneck. I found a program called Low Specs experience and it tuned my settings in the game which helped
 
I will give it a try but from what Afterburner was showing it is the Video card that is the bottleneck. I found a program called Low Specs experience and it tuned my settings in the game which helped
Gave it a try but it did not seem to make much of a difference in my processor usage
 
I found a program called Low Specs experience and it tuned my settings in the game which helped

I tossed this on my laptop and tried the least level of optimization on Skyrim. While it maybe gives me 2-4 FPS more (30-45 FPS outside, 45-55 FPS inside), it did something to the image quality that easily looks as good as 4x anti-aliasing, for free or with slightly improved framerates. Great find!

Also I have an older Intel 3770K desktop with an RX 580 and it runs No Man's just fine at 1440p. Admittedly, I can't seem to get into the game long enough to leave the first world, but that first world runs at 60 FPS with v-sync enabled and decent quality settings. That machine also happens to have 32 gigs of RAM running at 2.1 or so gigahertz with tight timings which probably doesn't hurt.

Now I'm not playing super-modern games on that thing, but I haven't found any graphically intensive games that fully saturate the CPU. Like, at all. For gaming it's fine; for productivity, well, even my Ryzen laptop shames it for batching photos or cutting videos.

I really think that this year, maybe last year, was the first time a 4c/8th CPU was the true bottleneck in terms of general gaming. It was always the GPU, and in some cases, system memory, both in terms of size and bandwidth. Only now are we really at the point where it makes a lot more sense to consider a 6c/8th or better CPU. It's kind of impressive that Intel managed to put out a CPU, what, 8 years ago, 9? that was adequate for gaming for that long.
 
I tossed this on my laptop and tried the least level of optimization on Skyrim. While it maybe gives me 2-4 FPS more (30-45 FPS outside, 45-55 FPS inside), it did something to the image quality that easily looks as good as 4x anti-aliasing, for free or with slightly improved framerates. Great find!

Also I have an older Intel 3770K desktop with an RX 580 and it runs No Man's just fine at 1440p. Admittedly, I can't seem to get into the game long enough to leave the first world, but that first world runs at 60 FPS with v-sync enabled and decent quality settings. That machine also happens to have 32 gigs of RAM running at 2.1 or so gigahertz with tight timings which probably doesn't hurt.

Now I'm not playing super-modern games on that thing, but I haven't found any graphically intensive games that fully saturate the CPU. Like, at all. For gaming it's fine; for productivity, well, even my Ryzen laptop shames it for batching photos or cutting videos.

I really think that this year, maybe last year, was the first time a 4c/8th CPU was the true bottleneck in terms of general gaming. It was always the GPU, and in some cases, system memory, both in terms of size and bandwidth. Only now are we really at the point where it makes a lot more sense to consider a 6c/8th or better CPU. It's kind of impressive that Intel managed to put out a CPU, what, 8 years ago, 9? that was adequate for gaming for that long.
I find flying around on planets or in space the hardest on it but the app definitely helped although the card is still running at 99%. Either way the game is still playable... Just the human factor of always wanting to pay at the best resolution I guess

Admittedly this game is not for everyone but I do find myself loosing hours just roaming around planets. Not exactly sure why
 
Admittedly this game is not for everyone but I do find myself loosing hours just roaming around planets. Not exactly sure why
Understandable, it's the ancient wish of humans to fly around in space and it's relaxing. For me that was one aspect too why I bought no man sky besides the nice fighting scenes and I still love it.
 
You got me thinking about this so I installed afterburner to see what is actually happening. CPU is averaging about 30% utilization but the GPU is generally at 99% utilization. Wonder if there is some tuning I can do for the video card.
All this means you would benefit from the GPU upgrade more than a CPU upgrade because the game you play is optimized for GPU utilization.
 
"Honey, I know the video card costs the same a new computer, but desperate times dear. " :LOL:
 
Back
Top