Star Wars Battlefront II Performance Review

Status
Not open for further replies.

AgentLozen

Distinguished
May 2, 2011
516
2
19,015
22
The screen shots make this game look terrific. If EA would rethink it's micro transaction policies, this game be could terrific as a whole.

EA owns so many popular IPs but they take this aggressively toxic approach to charging for bits and pieces of the game that should be part of the whole experience from the start. Their fingers poison everything they touch. Imagine the beautiful garden they could cultivate if they only turned the steering wheel a little bit. EA could be an American Nintendo.
 
MP tests? MP tests! MP TESTS!!!

Also, weird thing about the core distribution. It would be interesting to hear what the devs have to say about it, specially with the Radeons performing right on par with the GeForces.

Nice findings, as usual. Keep up the great work.

Cheers!
 

Som1_

Commendable
Jan 7, 2017
1
0
1,510
0
These benchmarks only test gpu, if you have anything lower than a 6600k all the way to an i5-46** with a 1060/rx570 you WILL run the game at a smooth 60 fps.
 

Mike2015

Reputable
Jul 6, 2015
20
0
4,520
1
Just curious, but would this game still run (be playable) running on a system with 8 GB RAM, an Intel i3 6100 (dual core) and a GTX 750 Ti 2GB GPU with the detail settings turned down to say medium or low? I'm considering this option for my Son who's very interested in the game. Don't want to have to upgrade the CPU just for this game if I don't have to.
 

derekullo

Distinguished


Did you skip "Page 7: Multi-Core Performance"?

They even tested a ryzen brought down to 2 threads

 

spdragoo

Splendid
Herald


Based on the multi-core testing they did, 2C/4T CPUs should do OK (almost no difference in testing on their Ryzen CPU from 6C/12 all the way down to 2C/4T; it was only when they dipped to 2C/2T that they saw a drop).

GPU-wise, you're kind of on the edge. The 750TI is just behind the 660 or 7850 in performance (the minimum GPUs listed). Given that the 1050 & RX 460/560 (themselves a step up from minimum) were below 50FPS on Ultra, I think you should plan on turning it down to Medium on the quality settings (or turning the resolution down).
 

phobicsq

Prominent
Sep 1, 2017
81
0
640
3
It's really a shame that they didn't use a newer engine for this. These games are becoming so expensive yet the R&D is a joke. Using old engines for these huge titles is stupid.
 

Fluffy_Hedgehog

Commendable
Mar 11, 2016
12
0
1,510
0
the game looks nice ... too bad ea is too greedy

if it is still the same engine then it still is horrible for dx12. no real performance gain only some theoretical threading advantages but (what articles like these that only run a short test never show) a metric f*-ton of instability. frostbyte on dx12 is the windows ME of 3d engines. very colorful ... but not really useable.

the game also has a next to nonexistant single player campaign that was obviously cut short after three missions to squeeze even more money out of the customers for less game.

lastly, of course not part of a performance review but still worht mentioning: the pay to win mechanic is ... well if anyone interested in gaming does not know about that by now they must have been living under a rock.

how great this could have been if this game was developed by a studio with any resemblence of decency.
 

BulkZerker

Distinguished
Apr 19, 2010
841
7
18,995
2
SPDRAGOO at this time a dual thread computer processor (anything with an older i3 is almost certainly 2c2t) will be a hindrance for games as the move to 4 threads as the minimum requirement. That test of should have continued to 1c2t or the multi-threading should have been disabled to fully expand how this game will perform on budget systems.

But the again I'm of the opinion that anyone who buys this game instead of the origional Battlefront 2, or Jedi academy with the movie battles mod deserves the disappointment that will come their way.
 

spdragoo

Splendid
Herald


As already pointed out, the Core i3 CPUs have never been 2C/2T CPUs. The old Core 2 Duos were aptly named because they were 2C/2T CPUs, but they predate the Core i3/i5/i7/i9 CPUs. The early Core-based Pentiums were 2C/2T CPUs, but with Kaby Lake they've now moved up to a 2C/4T model. Pre-Coffee Lake Core i3s were all 2C/4T models (even on the mobile side), with the Coffee Lake models now 4C/4T CPUs.

I'll grant you, in more & more games a 2C/4T CPU is going to underperform compared to a 4C/4T or higher CPU. But @Mike2015 was asking about this specific game...as in he wanted to know if he absolutely had to upgrade to even have a chance of playing. Tom's Hardware's testing clearly showed he doesn't need to for this game, but whether he wants to in general for other games is a completely different question.
 

rush21hit

Honorable
Mar 5, 2012
580
0
11,160
81
Aside from its micro-transaction fiasco, I still can't accept they still cant nail lightsaber fight right.

I mean, most of their developer team had to have an experience with Jedi Academy at some point of their life. Is that duel mechanic that friggin hard to achieve?
 

Mike2015

Reputable
Jul 6, 2015
20
0
4,520
1


Thanks! Based on your feedback, I pulled the trigger and purchased it. I can confirm, it runs okay at the Medium settings in the campaign mode. I tried switching the game over to DX12, and that was a disaster. It wouldn't even start after that and I had to edit a config file to put it back to DX11.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS