Post your FPS & CPU's scores - instructions how to measure included - 5950x + 12900k + now 5800x3D!!

[gorman2040]

Alright, here is my numbers with my 10 years old computer!
I upgraded the graphic card and storage though

All test have been done with the low graphics preset as advised, no AA, no scaling, no VSync and game running version 5.00 beta 6HF1 with both Split Vendetta and Cradle of Humanity.
I have tested two different resolution 192x1080 fullscreen and 3840x2160 borderless (this is what I use when playing).

My current configuration:
i7-3770S (3.10Ghz, boost 3.8Ghz, Hyper-threading ON), 16GB DD3 1333mhz, 1TB SSD, RTX2060 Super. Everything running at factory clock/settings, there was no XMP at that time.

FPS has been eyeballed with the in game FPS indicator after waiting a few seconds to get a stable reading and not moving the ship. Those damn captains comming you makes it difficult as I get a slight FPS drop when their face appears.

Young Gun: 80 FPS @1080p or 4K (no real change in FPS between the two resolutions)
Dense Emp: 10 FPS @1080p or 4K (no real change in FPS between the two resolutions)
Dense Emp/Empty: 31 FPS @1080p or 4K (no real change in FPS between the two resolutions), for this one I had to to teleport back and forth to the ship as the game was running at 2 FPS otherwise, I'm assuming something with the new interiors maybe?

I was surprised to see the resolution not changing the FPS.

I'll create a new post when I am upgraded.

Cheers

[Hoborific]

Version: 4.20 Beta (465891)

CPU: I7-12700KF @ 52x/38x/42x 1.34v
RAM: 2x8GB 3600mhz(16-19-19-41) 1.35v, 61.2ns latency
GPU:RTX 3090
Windows 11 Pro 21H2(22000.493)
Resolution: 3440x1440

empty: 127-137
dense: 38-42
young: 155-159

considering my old setup was an 8700k@5ghz that got 35-37 on dense, not a massive upgrade for X4 but a great CPU regardless.

going to refine the overclock and report back later with hopefully better results.

[gorman2040]

Version: 4.20 Beta (465891)

CPU: I7-12700KF @ 52x/38x/42x 1.34v
RAM: 2x8GB 3600mhz(16-19-19-41) 1.35v, 61.2ns latency
GPU:RTX 3090
Windows 11 Pro 21H2(22000.493)
Resolution: 3440x1440

empty: 127-137
dense: 38-42
young: 155-159

considering my old setup was an 8700k@5ghz that got 35-37 on dense, not a massive upgrade for X4 but a great CPU regardless.

going to refine the overclock and report back later with hopefully better results.

I wouldn't be surprised if optimization is logarithmic. With that amount of ships and displayed objects, it's probably very hard to get decent FPS with the state of the engine.
It was probably not designed as this situation to be the normal, this is just my theory though.

[Metran]

I issue with X games is that they are not optimised, to my knowledge at least, for multicore or multi-thread utilisation. To achieve that would require almost a complete redesign of the code.

I would hope that if, or more likely when, Egosoft decides to make X5 they'll invest the time to redesign the game code to fully utilise current CPU's capabilities.

[gorman2040]

I issue with X games is that they are not optimised, to my knowledge at least, for multicore or multi-thread utilisation. To achieve that would require almost a complete redesign of the code.

I would hope that if, or more likely when, Egosoft decides to make X5 they'll invest the time to redesign the game code to fully utilise current CPU's capabilities.

I'm not sure what you mean exactly but there was this post from CBJ, one of the game's dev.

As with X Rebirth, X4 will use two cores pretty heavily for its primary activities (simulation and rendering) and as many other cores as are available for other peripheral tasks (such as path-finding and asset loading). Drivers and APIs used by the game, such as Vulkan, may also be able to make use of more than one core. Overall, the game is likely to work best on a system with at least 4 cores, and the benefits of more than that will probably tail off fairly rapidly.

As csaba pointed out, though, the Intel on-board graphics isn't going to help matters, not only in performance terms but also because their driver support tends to lag behind NVidia and AMD.

You can see more here:
viewtopic.php?p=4692161

[gorman2040]

Here is my results with my new configuration:

i5-12600K (3.70Ghz, boost 4.9Ghz, Hyper-threading ON), 32GB DDR4-3200, 1TB NVMe, RTX2060 Super. Everything running at factory clock/settings, no XMP.
Basically everything was changed besides the graphic card.

Young Gun: 125 FPS @1080p or 4K (no real change in FPS between the two resolutions)
Dense Emp: 20 FPS @1080p or 4K (no real change in FPS between the two resolutions)
Dense Emp/Empty: 73 FPS @1080p or 4K (no real change in FPS between the two resolutions)

So that's around twice more FPS in heavier scenarios, the Young Gun didn't improve as much but it was already pretty decent so who cares
Another big difference is the loading time, I used to have 2:53 and 3:25 to load my two main saves, now I am at 1:07 and 1:24!
That will make a big difference when I have to reload a lot.

Cheers

[vadiolive]

Still look for some in-build benchmark.... that output somekind like telemtry page from scamctizen https://robertsspaceindustries.com/telemetry

Its win/win/win

Is win to consumer , since they can analyse whats setup he need... whats part he need upgrade ... in overall
Its win to egosoft , they trackdown areas need improve and system that need improve as well
And finaly is win to youtubers/medias can use X4 to compare CPU , since most games actual is kind bad in cpu benchmark

[Wheem]

Here is my results with my new configuration:

i5-12600K (3.70Ghz, boost 4.9Ghz, Hyper-threading ON), 32GB DDR4-3200, 1TB NVMe, RTX2060 Super. Everything running at factory clock/settings, no XMP.
Basically everything was changed besides the graphic card.

Young Gun: 125 FPS @1080p or 4K (no real change in FPS between the two resolutions)
Dense Emp: 20 FPS @1080p or 4K (no real change in FPS between the two resolutions)
Dense Emp/Empty: 73 FPS @1080p or 4K (no real change in FPS between the two resolutions)

So that's around twice more FPS in heavier scenarios, the Young Gun didn't improve as much but it was already pretty decent so who cares
Another big difference is the loading time, I used to have 2:53 and 3:25 to load my two main saves, now I am at 1:07 and 1:24!
That will make a big difference when I have to reload a lot.

Cheers

Out of curiosity, do you notice much of a performance difference during regular gameplay after upgrading your CPU? I'm currently using an i5-6600k at stock speeds, older DDR4 RAM, and an RTX 2060 and I sometimes get substantial FPS drops. Like you, I don't notice much difference in FPS when changing resolutions (between 1080p and 1440p in my case) or most graphical settings, so I don't think my GPU is the main issue here.

I've been debating upgrading some hardware for a while now, and with availability and prices somewhat normalizing for CPUs, I'm thinking about it a bit more closely. That said, my 6600k works fine for everything else I use this machine for, and it doesn't seem like the OP's 6700k lags much/any behind most of the newer mid-range CPUs. It almost makes me wonder if my performance woes are actually due to some other problem, and not actually my CPU.

Loading up the provided Young Gun save with Split Vendetta, Cradle of Humanity, and Tides of Avarice all enabled, I was averaging around 92 FPS. I haven't checked the other saves linked in the OP just yet since I think that would probably "cheat" my available resources higher when it comes to custom game starts (or would that only change if I actually saved the game after loading it up?)

[gorman2040]

Out of curiosity, do you notice much of a performance difference during regular gameplay after upgrading your CPU? I'm currently using an i5-6600k at stock speeds, older DDR4 RAM, and an RTX 2060 and I sometimes get substantial FPS drops. Like you, I don't notice much difference in FPS when changing resolutions (between 1080p and 1440p in my case) or most graphical settings, so I don't think my GPU is the main issue here.

I've been debating upgrading some hardware for a while now, and with availability and prices somewhat normalizing for CPUs, I'm thinking about it a bit more closely. That said, my 6600k works fine for everything else I use this machine for, and it doesn't seem like the OP's 6700k lags much/any behind most of the newer mid-range CPUs. It almost makes me wonder if my performance woes are actually due to some other problem, and not actually my CPU.

Loading up the provided Young Gun save with Split Vendetta, Cradle of Humanity, and Tides of Avarice all enabled, I was averaging around 92 FPS. I haven't checked the other saves linked in the OP just yet since I think that would probably "cheat" my available resources higher when it comes to custom game starts (or would that only change if I actually saved the game after loading it up?)

Good point on the custom gamestart budget!

After a few weeks of using it now, I can really tell the difference.
Large fleet combat in high attention (~10 destroyers + ~100 fighters foraying in Xenon territory) is much smoother, it doesn't turn into a slideshow anymore when all ships are actively engaging.
Map interaction is day and night, much smoother than before, comparable to when you start a new game and have nothing revealed yet. It also looks like watching ships on the map in low attention is smoother and the movements are more natural. Weird!
Loading times are so much better as well, but that might be also related to upgrading to the latest NVMe available.
Overall FPS is better with the following exceptions.

Station and ship interior navigation is just slightly better, I'm usually between 30~45 FPS.
Certain sectors with lots of gas and asteroid fields. I still have performance issues in Heretics Ends, Tharka's Fall and a few other similar systems. Reducing the volumetric fog quality helped a bit but it is still much lower FPS than usual. I'm attributing this to my video card.

Your CPU was already much better than my old one so I expect the different to not be as stark.

[Wheem]

Out of curiosity, do you notice much of a performance difference during regular gameplay after upgrading your CPU? I'm currently using an i5-6600k at stock speeds, older DDR4 RAM, and an RTX 2060 and I sometimes get substantial FPS drops. Like you, I don't notice much difference in FPS when changing resolutions (between 1080p and 1440p in my case) or most graphical settings, so I don't think my GPU is the main issue here.

I've been debating upgrading some hardware for a while now, and with availability and prices somewhat normalizing for CPUs, I'm thinking about it a bit more closely. That said, my 6600k works fine for everything else I use this machine for, and it doesn't seem like the OP's 6700k lags much/any behind most of the newer mid-range CPUs. It almost makes me wonder if my performance woes are actually due to some other problem, and not actually my CPU.

Loading up the provided Young Gun save with Split Vendetta, Cradle of Humanity, and Tides of Avarice all enabled, I was averaging around 92 FPS. I haven't checked the other saves linked in the OP just yet since I think that would probably "cheat" my available resources higher when it comes to custom game starts (or would that only change if I actually saved the game after loading it up?)

Good point on the custom gamestart budget!

After a few weeks of using it now, I can really tell the difference.
Fleet combat is much smoother, it doesn't turn into a slideshow anymore.
Map interaction is day and night, much smoother than before, comparable to when you start a new game and have nothing revealed yet. It also looks like watching ships on the map in low attention is smoother and the movements are more natural. Weird!
Loading times are so much better as well, but that might be also related to upgrading to the latest NVMe available.
Overall FPS is better with the following exceptions.

Station and ship interior navigation is just slightly better, I'm usually between 30~45 FPS.
Certain sectors with lots of gas and asteroid fields. I still have performance issues in Heretics Ends, Tharka's Fall and a few other similar systems. Reducing the volumetric fog quality helped a bit but it is still much lower FPS than usual. I'm attributing this to my video card.

Your CPU was already much better than my old one so I expect the different to not be as stark.

There was a pretty good stretch of time there where Intel made pretty minimal improvements from one CPU generation to the next, presumably due to a lack of real competition at the time, so I'm not sure if the gap between our old CPUs is really all that large. I went ahead and bit the bullet earlier and ordered an i5-12600k, so we'll be equal in that department once it arrives; though I'm using an "original" RTX 2060 compared to your 2060 Super, and 16GB DDR4-2400 RAM with 15-15-15-35 timings.

Also, I should mention that if you're using all stock settings and no XMP, DDR4 RAM will only be running at 2133mhz. Enabling XMP in the BIOS should bump it up to the "right" speed, so long as your motherboard supports it.

[risonwt]

Current system config I'm getting around 55-70 FPS on stations and busy areas.

SPECS:

I5-11600k
3090 GTX FE (with waterblock, no jet engine fans >.< )
32MB DDR4 3200


SETTINGS:

3440 x 1440, 100hz
SSAA 4x
Fullscreen
Vsync
Texture - High
Shadows - High
Softshadows - On
SSAO - High
Glow - High
Chromatic - On
Distortion - On
Radar - High
SSR - off
Fog - Medium


I currently have a I9-11900k from my primary and somewhat broken system and I'm thinking of taking my current system apart (again) to put it in.


As I'm not going to overclock anytime soon would there be much of a difference between the I5 and I9 for X4 ?

The stats between the chips don't seem that much different, and the I5 base clock is higher even ...


EDIT FOR SAVE GAME:

Almost all Maxed settings, no OC

Young Gun: 90-105 FPS
Dense Emp: 11-20 FPS
Dense Emp/Empty: 55-65 FPS


With SSAO OFF

Young Gun: 95-115 FPS
Dense Emp: 15-30 FPS
Dense Emp/Empty: 60-80 FPS

[Metran]

@risonwt use the 3 save games provided and post your data in those specific situations, your data is otherwise irrelevant to this comparison.

[gorman2040]

There was a pretty good stretch of time there where Intel made pretty minimal improvements from one CPU generation to the next, presumably due to a lack of real competition at the time, so I'm not sure if the gap between our old CPUs is really all that large. I went ahead and bit the bullet earlier and ordered an i5-12600k, so we'll be equal in that department once it arrives; though I'm using an "original" RTX 2060 compared to your 2060 Super, and 16GB DDR4-2400 RAM with 15-15-15-35 timings.

Also, I should mention that if you're using all stock settings and no XMP, DDR4 RAM will only be running at 2133mhz. Enabling XMP in the BIOS should bump it up to the "right" speed, so long as your motherboard supports it.

That would explain why I was able to keep that CPU for so long, definitely a record for me

I am planning to turn on the XMP but wanted to make sure the system is stable. Will update my post once I do that and get the timing for my RAM.

Curious to see your results when your new rig is ready!

[Animaga]

Got some 5800X3D results for everyone:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dj8L3xHuyUE

Interesting results:

Game: 5.10 with all DLC
CPU: 5800X3D
GPU: 3060ti
Ram: 32 3600 cl 16
Resolution: 3440x1440

Young Gun Empty: 170
Dense Empire: 26
Dense Empire Empty: 96


Not sure why the empire results were so low. I did run with all DLC on, not sure if that gave it more to calculate or not. I did try it in 1080p but that didn't really seem to make a difference. If it's just clock speed though, then why are the Young Gun Empty results higher than even the 12900k?

[gorman2040]

Got some 5800X3D results for everyone:

Not sure why the empire results were so low. I did run with all DLC on, not sure if that gave it more to calculate or not. I did try it in 1080p but that didn't really seem to make a difference. If it's just clock speed though, then why are the Young Gun Empty results higher than even the 12900k?

Interesting results, thanks for sharing. I almost feel bad about buying Intel a few months ago

[spookywatcher]

Got some 5800X3D results for everyone:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dj8L3xHuyUE

Interesting results:

Game: 5.10 with all DLC
CPU: 5800X3D
GPU: 3060ti
Ram: 32 3600 cl 16
Resolution: 3440x1440

Young Gun Empty: 170
Dense Empire: 26
Dense Empire Empty: 96


Not sure why the empire results were so low. I did run with all DLC on, not sure if that gave it more to calculate or not. I did try it in 1080p but that didn't really seem to make a difference. If it's just clock speed though, then why are the Young Gun Empty results higher than even the 12900k?

That's awesome. Thanks for testing! Very much appreciated. Interesting results. I'll add it to first post.

[Imperial Good]

Not sure why the empire results were so low. I did run with all DLC on, not sure if that gave it more to calculate or not. I did try it in 1080p but that didn't really seem to make a difference. If it's just clock speed though, then why are the Young Gun Empty results higher than even the 12900k?

You need to run them with exactly the same settings as the others for the results to be fair. Logically running with a DLC enabled is likely to lower performance over without as the universe has more ships and is more complex to simulate. Ideally the same patch version should be used as otherwise optimisations or regressions could affect the results.

12900k is possibly beating it purely due to the results given being DDR5 memory. Although the cache helps a lot, it just cannot compensate for out right ~40% more memory bandwidth and other DDR5 improvements. Could also be GPU related. Especially for dense empire as you are pushing resolution quite hard.

Still this is good signs for that CPU and I would not be surprised if higher was possible with some tuning, given the spectrum of results in this thread with similar processors.

[Action_Parsnip]

Got some 5800X3D results for everyone:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dj8L3xHuyUE

Interesting results:

Game: 5.10 with all DLC
CPU: 5800X3D
GPU: 3060ti
Ram: 32 3600 cl 16
Resolution: 3440x1440

Young Gun Empty: 170
Dense Empire: 26
Dense Empire Empty: 96


Not sure why the empire results were so low. I did run with all DLC on, not sure if that gave it more to calculate or not. I did try it in 1080p but that didn't really seem to make a difference. If it's just clock speed though, then why are the Young Gun Empty results higher than even the 12900k?

Ok I've already posted in this thread with my same machine but on an older version of x4 and got results that didn't line up with yours very well.

So tonight testing again with x4 on the same version as yours with nearly all DLC installed:

5600x
3800 16gb ram, tuned main + sub timings,
Rx580

Game version 5.10
All DLC except the new ToA
VRO
Tons of other mods
....all this smashing into a 3.x save game test I get the following:


Young Gun Empty: 111-115
Dense Empire: 11-13
Dense Empire Empty: 48-52

Here's the kicker boys: this is 720p all LOW...

....AND this was after waiting 2 solid minutes after the game had loaded for tests 2 & 3, not moving the ship at all or changing cameras, to let everything catch up and the FPS to stabilize. In both those tests the FPS was all over the place and going over your youtube video carefully you didn't experience *anything like* the hitches I did. This is with a NVMe SSD! It's only a cheapo Sabrent Rocket Q but still, my setup and yours look a class apart. System memory was pretty stretched here but not critically so and just to be sure I had all other programs closed while running these tests.

[Animaga]

Not sure why the empire results were so low. I did run with all DLC on, not sure if that gave it more to calculate or not. I did try it in 1080p but that didn't really seem to make a difference. If it's just clock speed though, then why are the Young Gun Empty results higher than even the 12900k?

You need to run them with exactly the same settings as the others for the results to be fair. Logically running with a DLC enabled is likely to lower performance over without as the universe has more ships and is more complex to simulate. Ideally the same patch version should be used as otherwise optimisations or regressions could affect the results.

12900k is possibly beating it purely due to the results given being DDR5 memory. Although the cache helps a lot, it just cannot compensate for out right ~40% more memory bandwidth and other DDR5 improvements. Could also be GPU related. Especially for dense empire as you are pushing resolution quite hard.

Still this is good signs for that CPU and I would not be surprised if higher was possible with some tuning, given the spectrum of results in this thread with similar processors.

Ok, so I did run some more tests. I tried multiple screen resolutions but nothing changed as far as FPS goes. My GPU was never taxed more than 50% on any of these tests.

So first I went back and disabled the Terran and Avarice expansions (had to leave split because the save needs it):

CPU: 5800X3D
GPU: 3060ti
Ram: 32 3600 cl 16
Resolution: 3440x1440
Version 5.10 only Split DLC

Young Gun Empty: 180
Dense Empire: 28
Dense Empire Empty: 109

So other than the giant station that's a gain of about 10FPS having the two newer DLCs disabled.

Tried to go back to 3.10 to match the save, but that is no longer an option. The earliest version of the game listed was 3.20 so that's what I did:

Version 3.20 with Split DLC

Young Gun Empty: 180 (It does start at 210 but over the course of a couple of minutes slowly drops then bottoms out at 180)
Dense Empire: 30
Dense Empire Empty: 193

Now the Dense Empire Empty save is unique because in version 5.10 where the save is isn't actually empty anymore. You load in looking at multiple ships and an accelerator. In 3.20 it is actually just empty space you are staring at.

[jebbyk]

CPU: ryzen 5600x (undervolted and caped to 4.45Ghz on all cores, this setting outperformes Auto OC a little bit)
RAM: 16GB (2x8 3200mhz, timings: 16,18,18)
GPU: GTX1060 3Gb (all setting are the lowest possible even lod, shadows and radar. 720p + FSR:performance)

5.10 all DLCs

Small addition: I've set a affinity for game process manually to use only logical processes 0,2,4,6,8,10 to restrict use of AMD's "hyperthreading". It gives me additional 5-8% of performance

Young gun: 138-140fps
Empire empty area: 85-100fps
empire dense area: 20-22fps