Discussion How much (approximately) has Jedi Survivor's performance improved since launch?

[Order 66]

I remember that there was an update back in September because TH did an article about it. I more so want to know how it has improved on lower-end cards since launch. I know that it runs at about 90 fps at 1440p max on my 6800. I know that there are benchmarks out there, but they aren't usually the most recent.

 

[Frag Maniac]

Jedi Survivor is definitely one of the games on my radar, and yes, it looks like the patching has improved it's performance and polish considerably.

Here's a clip showing it being played on the 9/5 patch 7 on a RX6800 and 12900K, which is only roughly 4% more powerful than your 7700X. BTW, patch 7.5 that released 10/10 only includes a few polish tweaks that are not performance related.

This video shows it played at 1440p, but settings are maxed, so the average FPS is closer to 60. As you can see though even when it's averaging 55 FPS, there's not a hint of lag or stutter. It might come down to what refresh rate your display is, but anything that does well at 60Hz should be good on your spec.

As you can see at the 5:48 mark this build still has animation issues, which is part of what patch 7.5 fixes. So, while it looks like now is a good time to buy as far as the condition of the game, it's still going for $70 on Origin, Steam, and Epic for just the base game. You may or may not be able to hit a Black Friday sale on it if you wait a week or so. It is however included in the EA PlayPro subscription for $15 a month. PlayPro is a no contract service with no penalty for cancelling at any time, so you could play it for a month for $15.

 

[punkncat]

Lol, I still play around with Battlefront 2 and have yet to finish Fallen Order. I like the first one mostly for the opening scene and soundtrack. It seemed far easier for me to complete than Fallen Order has been. I feel pretty sure that I picked one of these up cheap and the other one free from Epic IIRC.

I figure if it takes me a bit longer to finish FO, then perhaps Survivor will then be on sale as well.

 

[Order 66]

Jedi Survivor is definitely one of the games on my radar, and yes, it looks like the patching has improved it's performance and polish considerably.

Here's a clip showing it being played on the 9/5 patch 7 on a RX6800 and 12900K, which is only roughly 4% more powerful than your 7700X. BTW, patch 7.5 that released 10/10 only includes a few polish tweaks that are not performance related.

This video shows it played at 1440p, but settings are maxed, so the average FPS is closer to 60. As you can see though even when it's averaging 55 FPS, there's not a hint of lag or stutter. It might come down to what refresh rate your display is, but anything that does well at 60Hz should be good on your spec.

As you can see at the 5:48 mark this build still has animation issues, which is part of what patch 7.5 fixes. So, while it looks like now is a good time to buy as far as the condition of the game, it's still going for $70 on Origin, Steam, and Epic for just the base game. You may or may not be able to hit a Black Friday sale on it if you wait a week or so. It is however included in the EA PlayPro subscription for $15 a month. PlayPro is a no contract service with no penalty for cancelling at any time, so you could play it for a month for $15.

I got it last week for 35% off on Steam. Let's go! I am so glad I did now that I know that it is $70 again.

 

[Frag Maniac]

I got it last week for 35% off on Steam. Let's go! I am so glad I did now that I know that it is $70 again.

How's it playing on your spec? I ask because I put a comment in on a video I saw on YT of a guy who tried in on a GTX 1080, and he said he ended up returning the game because after the first level, the game started playing with much worse performance.

You may not have that problem on a RX 6800, but my 1080 doesn't even have mesh shader capability. He was trying it and I believe returned it before these latest patches though, and I seem to recall him saying he wondered if his spec would handle it now.

 

[Order 66]

How's it playing on your spec? I ask because I put a comment in on a video I saw on YT of a guy who tried in on a GTX 1080, and he said he ended up returning the game because after the first level, the game started playing with much worse performance.

You may not have that problem on a RX 6800, but my 1080 doesn't even have mesh shader capability. He was trying it and I believe returned it before these latest patches though, and I seem to recall him saying he wondered if his spec would handle it now.

I will tell you when I play it, I have been meaning to play it, but I have not had time.

 

[Frag Maniac]

I will tell you when I play it, I have been meaning to play it, but I have not had time.

OK, I was wondering if that was the case. Please report back here after you've played beyond the first level when you get the time to do so. I mainly want to know how much more demanding the levels after the first one are.

 

[Order 66]

OK, I was wondering if that was the case. Please report back here after you've played beyond the first level when you get the time to do so. I mainly want to know how much more demanding the levels after the first one are.

I was shocked that the game was 133GB. it took 7 hours to download on my 50 MB/s internet. I know that my internet is slow, but I don't really have any other options because of annoying contract agreements.

 

[Order 66]

OK, I was wondering if that was the case. Please report back here after you've played beyond the first level when you get the time to do so. I mainly want to know how much more demanding the levels after the first one are.

I am about 90 minutes in, performance (outside of a few first launch stutters) has been great. 60+ most of the time, it does drop into the mid 50s in heavy combat, but totally enjoyable.

 

[Frag Maniac]

I am about 90 minutes in, performance (outside of a few first launch stutters) has been great. 60+ most of the time, it does drop into the mid 50s in heavy combat, but totally enjoyable.

And at what graphics settings, max on your spec? Also, are you past the first level then, and did the performance drop much on the levels after? From what I've seen, 55-60 is very playable on this game, and I'm hoping my GTX 1080 can manage that on High at 1080p.

 

[Order 66]

And at what graphics settings, max on your spec?

yes, 1080p max, although it is weird, I should be getting 90 fps at 1440p max, maybe it is just because it was the first launch. I will try it tonight when I get home. And no, it is not because of Vsync. I already had someone suggest that and I know for a fact that it is off.

 

[Frag Maniac]

And no, it is not because of Vsync. I already had someone suggest that and I know for a fact that it is off.

But is there also a frame limiting setting you may have overlooked?

 

[Order 66]

But is there also a frame limiting setting you may have overlooked?

I don't think so because it gets more than 60-70 fps depending on where I am looking.

 

[Frag Maniac]

I don't think so because it gets more than 60-70 fps depending on where I am looking.

Then maybe the benches you're comparing to didn't have ALL settings at max? And of course any overclocking they may have done would affect it as well.

 

[Order 66]

Then maybe the benches you're comparing to didn't have ALL settings at max?

Maybe, but it just seems strange that I'm getting only 60 fps at 1080p.

 

[Order 66]

Then maybe the benches you're comparing to didn't have ALL settings at max? And of course any overclocking they may have done would affect it as well.

The metric I am comparing it to ran it a 1440p high, but you would think that 1080p max would be less demanding.

 

[Frag Maniac]

The metric I am comparing it to ran it a 1440p high, but you would think that 1080p max would be less demanding.

Not necessarily, max graphics settings are often like difficulty modes in games. You play on the next to hardest mode and things go well, but on the hardest mode it's a considerably bigger leap than from say Normal to Hard. Similarly graphic's settings can be fine on 2nd to highest setting, then the highest one is a leap much farther than from Med to High.

This is why you ALWAYS have to compare apples to apples when measuring your results against online benches. The devil is in the detail.

 

[Frag Maniac]

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but this tech analysis video I just watched of the game doesn't look promising. Basically the game's animation problems are much more severe than I thought, as they affect frame times dramatically, which is why the game still has stutters even after patch 7.

Also, it appears their built in shader complier is bugged and not even fully compiling them.

This is all rather shocking to me, because I always thought of Respawn as one of the top dev teams. Now I'm wondering if even the next Titanfall game will be plagued with problems.

It seems it's only a matter of time before even the best dev teams under EA end up having problems, and it's usually because they aren't given enough freedom, time, or funding to do things the right way.

 

[Order 66]

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but this tech analysis video I just watched of the game doesn't look promising. Basically the game's animation problems are much more severe than I thought, as they affect frame times dramatically, which is why the game still has stutters even after patch 7.

Also, it appears their built in shader complier is bugged and not even fully compiling them.

I will say, I was getting stutters, (although infrequent) sometimes when the scene would change, but it was still playable. I discovered that since I had frame gen on in the driver, that it had automatically enabled. I was wondering why there was so much input lag. I turned it off and still got over 60 fps most of the time.

 

[Frag Maniac]

I will say, I was getting stutters, (although infrequent) sometimes when the scene would change, but it was still playable. I discovered that since I had frame gen on in the driver, that it had automatically enabled. I was wondering why there was so much input lag. I turned it off and still got over 60 fps most of the time.

If you haven't watched the whole video I just posted, check it out when you have time. It explains things much better than I can.

 

[Order 66]

And at what graphics settings, max on your spec? Also, are you past the first level then, and did the performance drop much on the levels after? From what I've seen, 55-60 is very playable on this game, and I'm hoping my GTX 1080 can manage that on High at 1080p.

I generally get about 55-60 fps. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but my 6800 which is 192% of the performance of your 1080, gets about 55-60 fps at 1080p max. I don’t think there is any way you are going to be able to get 60 fps even at high.

 

[Frag Maniac]

I generally get about 55-60 fps. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but my 6800 which is 192% of the performance of your 1080, gets about 55-60 fps at 1080p max. I don’t think there is any way you are going to be able to get 60 fps even at high.

I'm OK with some settings at Med, like the ones that are more resource hungry like shadows. I'd like to be able to keep textures at High though.

Quite frankly though after hearing the details from DF as to why they think this game is still a dumpster fire, there are many other games I've been considering that will likely play much better on my spec.

 

[Order 66]

I'm OK with some settings at Med, like the ones that are more resource hungry like shadows. I'd like to be able to keep textures at High though.

Quite frankly though after hearing the details from DF as to why they think this game is still a dumpster fire, there are many other games I've been considering that will likely play much better on my spec.

The frame rate went from 55-60 to 65-70 on second launch. I think most of my stutters were because of the first launch. YMMV though.

 

[Frag Maniac]

The frame rate went from 55-60 to 65-70 on second launch. I think most of my stutters were because of the first launch. YMMV though.

NOPE, the mileage is the same for everyone, regardless of spec. I can tell you didn't watch that video I posted because it thoroughly explains why that is.

The shader compiler that you have to wait through EVERY time you launch the game DOES NOT compile ALL shaders. Therefore you will NOT get any chance of a smooth playthrough until the shader cache file is written. It also (I assume) does a better job of compiling the 2nd time through the game because with a shader cache file now previously written, it can have a better chance of compiling any shaders it may have missed the first time.

However you will NEVER get a completely smooth experience due to the animation bug in the game. Alex of DF tried his best to give the game every chance he could to avoid animation related hitching, but despite his settings yielding perfectly flat FPS and frame times, with zero spikes or drops, it still hitched in the exact same spots every time. It's a strange bug that results in a skipped frame every so often, which makes it look like the protagonist is lurching forward as he runs.

 

[Order 66]

I can tell you didn't watch that video I posted because it thoroughly explains why that is.

You're right, I was too busy playing the game and forgot to watch the video.

The shader compiler that you have to wait through EVERY time you launch the game DOES NOT compile ALL shaders. Therefore you will NOT get any chance of a smooth playthrough until the shader cache file is written. It also (I assume) does a better job of compiling the 2nd time through the game because with a shader cache file now previously written, it can have a better chance of compiling any shaders it may have missed the first time.

So how many times will it have to compile the shaders before it is able to compile all of them?