Starfield will be 30 fps on Xbox Series X and S.

[Pemalite]

SvennoJ said:

No, as always I assert multi platform releases aren't as optimized / tailor made as titles made for one specific set of hardware. Hence you see the stumbles when Sony 1st party titles get PC ports. And why it's still so hard to emulate the ps3 :/

PS3 emulation is better than Xbox 360 emulation.

Emulation is generally, just hard. - But PS3 emulation has come a long way with many games being perfectly playable.

SvennoJ said:

Total CPU performance is important, but in the end there's always one process / thread that maxes out holding the rest back. Hence it's so difficult to fully utilize multi core processors as the other cores can't help the thread that does most of the heavy lifting.

Those some same threads exist on console.

Things used to be different when we needed to translate/interpret/chop up instructions to translate PowerPC code to x86, but... That hasn't been an issue in a couple of generations now.

SvennoJ said:

If you manage to code your game using all 7 cores to most of their potential (1 is reserved for the OS), it won't simply run the same or better on a faster 6 core CPU. Ryzen 5600 isn't that much faster that you can simply combine 2 threads to run on one core and be faster, unless those 2 threads were only utilizing 60% or so of the cores they were running on. Of course games have many more threads and load balancing should be part of the engine if not done by the OS already.

Not really how that works.
Thread scheduling isn't an issue.

Either way, Ryzen 7000 series is upwards of double the per-core performance of the Ryzen 3000 series, making your point moot.

SvennoJ said:

For example here from when I was playing err tracing bugs in FS2020

111 threads, yet one thread had a particular bug (tracked down to a conflict in overlapping controlled airspace areas, location dependent)
A faster cpu would power through better, splitting that thread up would half the issue (fixing the bug of course was the real fix)

And here you see one core (or half of it) is close to maxed out while overall CPU use is only 35%

And as suggested I used that to make sure the game remains GPU limited for a more stable experience.
Actually here I dropped the render resolution down to see how fast it could go on a mobile CPU.

Very hard game to 'optimize' as the demands are so different depending on where you are. Big airports are very heavy on GPU

While going further North or South increases the demand on the CPU due to how the 'cells' are organized (Data stored in Mercator projection)

Flight Simulator is held back by it's engine, not because of consoles, it was a PC title first, remember.

SvennoJ said:

So I wonder why is dynamic resolution not used more on PC? Or maybe it is nowadays? Last demanding titles I played on my laptop were Halo Infinite and Forza Horizon and both didn't have dynamic resolution options. Just dynamic frame rate :p Actually I played Sea of Thieves not long ago, that ran pretty poorly on my laptop (The thing is long overdue for replacement I know)

Dynamic Frame Rate? You mean, just disabling V-Sync right?

Dynamic resolution is found in many games, but we need to remember that the PC is a far more hardware rich than consoles, so there is simply less of a need.