30, 40 or 60fps options available - but VRR works best.
Bethesda’sStarfieldwas generallya well-regarded RPG, but the game’s 30fps target on consoles was the subject of some controversy.
Players can now independently select performance and visuals modes at arbitrary frame-rates.
Starfield presents players with a pretty dazzling array of options at first glance.
Let’s start by untangling the visuals and performance modes.
Other basic visual controls appear to be more or less matched between the two modes.
There’s also no discernible difference in crowd density, which is a quality option on PC.
I believe both modes are upscaling to or around 4K using FSR 2.
So these findings should apply equally to all permutations of the visuals and performance modes.
As you might expect, Starfield’s performance with the new update is a little complicated.
Interior combat encounters generally run at a flat 60fps, for instance, with minimal frame-time deviations.
Certain smaller-scale city environments, including Cydonia and Neon, generally hit 60fps most of the time too.
Planet exteriors also run at 60fps, although small hitches do punctuate the experience fairly frequently.
We’re typically in the 30s and 40s here, with some larger repeatable hitches in certain areas.
Stepping down to 30fps, we achieve a pretty solid frame-rate lock in the visuals mode.
There are more substantial dips here as well on occasion, but it’s otherwise smooth sailing.
The same is true of the performance mode at 30fps.
If we step up to 120Hz output, a 40fps option becomes available.
With some of these options - especially when targeting 60fps - VRR can help greatly.
Overall, Starfield’s high frame-rate console debut is successful.
VRR is helpful for sure, though a lot of content works well enough without it.
My only real disappointment is that the Series S doesn’t get any of the new visual options.
