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

[Eyeklops]

13900KS & DDR5-8200Mhz with tuned timings.
NOTE: Parentheses is change from untuned DDR5-8000.

Game: 6.10 with all DLC
CPU: 13900KS (EVGA Z790 Dark Kingpin stock settings with 300w limiter)
GPU: RTX 4090 (stock settings)
Ram: 2x24GB DDR5-8200 CL38-49-49-36 CR2 (tuned XMP profile)

Resolution: 2560x1440
Graphics Settings: Low
Young Gun Empty: 163~165 (+3%)
Dense Empire: 40~42 (+7%)
Dense Empire Empty: 143~146 (+7%)

8200 with tuned primary and secondary timings. Not fully stability tested.
AIDA64 Cache & Memory Benchmark
Read 128.73 GB/s (+7%)
Write 125.62 GB/s (+15%)
Copy 122.25 GB/s (+12%)
Latency 54.7 ns (-10%)

I would say the data suggests "Dense Empire" scales fairly linearly with memory bandwidth/latency for my CPU. I don't think I can get much more than 8200Mhz for a "daily" tune. I guess I'll have to settle for 40 FPS in Dense Empire.

[Blitz4]

13900KS & DDR5-8200Mhz with tuned timings.
NOTE: Parentheses is change from untuned DDR5-8000.

Game: 6.10 with all DLC
CPU: 13900KS (EVGA Z790 Dark Kingpin stock settings with 300w limiter)
GPU: RTX 4090 (stock settings)
Ram: 2x24GB DDR5-8200 CL38-49-49-36 CR2 (tuned XMP profile)

Resolution: 2560x1440
Graphics Settings: Low
Young Gun Empty: 163~165 (+3%)
Dense Empire: 40~42 (+7%)
Dense Empire Empty: 143~146 (+7%)

8200 with tuned primary and secondary timings. Not fully stability tested.
AIDA64 Cache & Memory Benchmark
Read 128.73 GB/s (+7%)
Write 125.62 GB/s (+15%)
Copy 122.25 GB/s (+12%)
Latency 54.7 ns (-10%)

I would say the data suggests "Dense Empire" scales fairly linearly with memory bandwidth/latency for my CPU. I don't think I can get much more than 8200Mhz for a "daily" tune. I guess I'll have to settle for 40 FPS in Dense Empire.

6 GHz for the CPU tested above 13900KS.
I'm not sure if that's the first one tested.

Eveklops brilliant tests.

Some interesting info:

Highest we have available. What would 9GHz do? I want that bench tested on it, I believe it's the only video game capped so much by cpu, most are gpu bottlenecked, and many reviewers, even Gamer's Nexus, doesn't know about X4 or how demanding it is. They believe no game is a challenge for a 6GHz cpu.

The CPU will likely become memory latency bottlenecked at those frequencies. Even though monolithic Intel CPUs generally maintain low memory latencies.

This issue can be seen on non-X3D AMD CPUs where the reported "effective clock" is far below the frequencies the CPU cores can obtain, because the cores just cannot be fed with data fast enough.

People are literally buying cpu's for this game thinking it'll improve performance. There's no stats like what you tested that are known by all. If these reviewers knew about X4 by you sharing your findings with them. I imagine not only will those that own the game know better which cpu to buy, but it'll bring more sales to X4, and thus increase the ability to fix the issue.

X4 runs well on a Ryzen 9 3900X. Anything like a 5800X or 7800X will run X4 even better than well. Any modern gaming orientated CPU should run X4 well in most situations.

A lot of the people reporting performance issues either are expecting X4 to do the impossible, more than 60 FPS perfectly stable at max settings with whatever randomness their universe throws in front of them, or they are using older gaming orientated CPUs which no longer cut it performance wise, such as quad core Intel processors from the 7th generation or older.

[xapoc]

All DLCs
Game version 6.20
CPU: i5 14600kf
GPU: RX 7900GRE OC Pure
Ram: 32GB 6400mhz
Resolution: 1080p
Young Gun Empty: 156 fps
Dense Empire: 32 fps
Dense Empire Empty: 129 fps
MSI afterburner GPU load 45%
MSI afterburner CPU load 25%

settings off and low

https://imgur.com/a/KAUClKG

[Blitz4]

Any hope of adding a save to test a fleet battle?

I have seen big fleet battles that I flew through kill my framerate more than dense empire.

[Garack666]

GaME IS 7.10

OK got it, 25 FPS lol 9800x3D and 4090 all low. 64 GB RAM 6000@30

[RandomUser1239]

GaME IS 7.10

OK got it, 25 FPS lol 9800x3D and 4090 all low. 64 GB RAM 6000@30

What the hell did you do to get only 25 Fps?

Here are my benchmarks with 9800x3d and 3070 low preset, 1920x1080 resolution. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1L6bIdF ... Csg62/view

As people mentioned you should be paying attention after around 10 seconds once i enter the world as people reported inconstancy if you don't wait such time.. So you can go and check numbers yourself on the video i linked. Basically at around 15 second mark it passes the famous 10 seconds.

And remember my CPU isn't even golden bin nor any special tune. Its running 6400 MT/s with tuned subtimings and +200 1x scalar and -CO.

There are people running 5.6 static and 6600 / 8700 MT/ speeds which would be probably faster by at least 5% if not more.

That would equal to Intel people running 8800 MT/s and +6GHz clock speeds and whatnot..

This game optimization is terrible, thanks god this isn't my main game.

Have nice day.

[KinzerX]

It looks like the 9800X3D is the final answer in this game, since 9950X3D cannot utilize all 16 cores effectively.

Now I'm wondering what performance a 9700X could achieve. Will it be close to the 9800X3D?

GaME IS 7.10

OK got it, 25 FPS lol 9800x3D and 4090 all low. 64 GB RAM 6000@30

What the hell did you do to get only 25 Fps?

Here are my benchmarks with 9800x3d and 3070 low preset, 1920x1080 resolution. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1L6bIdF ... Csg62/view

As people mentioned you should be paying attention after around 10 seconds once i enter the world as people reported inconstancy if you don't wait such time.. So you can go and check numbers yourself on the video i linked. Basically at around 15 second mark it passes the famous 10 seconds.

And remember my CPU isn't even golden bin nor any special tune. Its running 6400 MT/s with tuned subtimings and +200 1x scalar and -CO.

There are people running 5.6 static and 6600 / 8700 MT/ speeds which would be probably faster by at least 5% if not more.

That would equal to Intel people running 8800 MT/s and +6GHz clock speeds and whatnot..

This game optimization is terrible, thanks god this isn't my main game.

Have nice day.

[alt3rn1ty]

It looks like the 9800X3D is the final answer in this game, since 9950X3D cannot utilize all 16 cores effectively.

I just had my new laptop delivered on Saturday, I cant really participate in this topic of comparisons because I think its all relative to Desktop machines performance ..

.. But in my short experience of this laptop (see my signature specs), and after taming it of all the usual crap the laptop vendors try to get in your face/running in the background, its performing far better than I dreamed of. Worst case scenario experienced so far only went down to 70 fps. For me as a seasoned Laptop user, thats phenominal. I used to dream of one day maintaining above 30 fps in all X4 scenarios.
Note: I'm running 7.60 beta 7 of X4, which has made remarkable performance/stability improvements.

Anyway point is - I think you Desktop guys need to have a look at the new Intel Core Ultra 9s.
Intel Core Ultra Processors (Series 2).
Here's a review of mine on CPU Benchmark .. https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?id ... ra+9+275HX

I skipped the 13th & 14th gen I7/I9 Intel CPU machines due to the math bug those CPUs can have .. Sooo glad I looked into Ultras'.

[Scoob]

It'd be interesting to hear what sort of performance you get in larger battles. While I'm more than happy with general game performance, it's larger battles that see FPS dip to 30 or below. Regular Faction vs. Faction stuff is generally fine, remaining over 60fps, but when the player is involved with their larger fleets, things struggle a bit.

I have a 5800X3d btw, which was a HUGE jump over the 3900X I was using before - and just a drop-in upgrade.

[alt3rn1ty]

It'd be interesting to hear what sort of performance you get in larger battles.

I'm still building up but have a Raptor with 70 Moreya onboard, once again there are no Xenon to play with in my current game (all factions have made them extinct), so took it into a Vig sectors hornets nest ..
.
Screenshot 1 - https://i.imgur.com/BDPJgjI.png
.
.. And poked the bear ..
.
Screenshot 2 - https://i.imgur.com/nQnh9pm.png
.
It wasn't pretty - FPS is in the lower right of that last screenshot.

I mean on a laptop in a big battle I didn't expect miracles, but it managed to keep above 7fps in 7.60 beta 7
I was in sector onboard the Raptor. And died rather quickly.

I just cant give you any kind of idea how an Ultra 9 will perform on a desktop, but the above battle on my old laptop would not have been even considered, to call it a slideshow would be an understatement, just travelling Vig sectors with that many fighters and without causing a ruccus would still be a "stay away from there" situation. At least now I can fly through them comfortably.
For the rest of the game though and medium sized battles I'm more than happy with this machines performance.

[Scoob]

For the rest of the game though and medium sized battles I'm more than happy with this machines performance.

Thanks for sharing, that's certainly a significant skirmish you've initiated there. Glad you're happy with the overall performance though I admit, the holy grail for me in terms of X4 performance is larger battles not having such a large fps impact. Smaller skirmishes are fine now - I'm perfectly happy as long as thing don't drop too much below 60fps - but the larger fights can still chug a bit. If I disappear off OOS - or at least far enough away - performance isn't an issue at all of course. However, I really do like to be there watching. I love seeing Carriers deploy their Fighter Wings in particular, and I found the Station viewing platform Modules a GREAT addition to my Defence Platforms.

I've never really gamed on a laptop, outside of Supreme Commander - Forged Alliance LAN games, having always had a decent gaming PC. Out of my current games, X4 is the only one I wished performed a bit better, and that's only the case for larger battles.

[alt3rn1ty]

~ I admit, the holy grail for me in terms of X4 performance is larger battles not having such a large fps impact. ~

Same, but I reckon I will be digging up the daisies before a machine comes along capable of that.
The games big battles are just way too much for any spec.

[Scoob]

Same, but I reckon I will be digging up the daisies before a machine comes along capable of that.
The games big battles are just way too much for any spec.

Well, the combination of hardware improvements and Egosofts own efforts have improved things a lot. So there's hope lol.

I think X4's - and X games in general - strength is often what catches it out too. I mean, we can build VAST empires and have HUGE battles. Mods makes things even more crazy. Indeed, Egosoft are currently asking for "interesting" long-term saves for them to showcase. Sadly, all of mine are Modified, so don't qualify.