News Star Wars Jedi: Survivor Patched Performance — AMD and Nvidia GPUs Tested

[Admin]

Star Wars Jedi: Survivor released to widespread complaints about poor performance. The latest patch supposedly fixes many of the underlying problems, and we've tested the game on a collection of GPUs to see how it runs.

Star Wars Jedi: Survivor Patched Performance — AMD and Nvidia GPUs Tested : Read more

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

So, a few quick notes here, in case anyone skims the article.

1. No area represents the whole game, and it's impossible to test every hardware and software combination people are running. On our "extreme" test PC, the game generally runs fine. We don't have a bunch of other background tasks running, we don't have esoteric hardware and drivers installed, etc. This is a clean Windows install — not clean as in "brand new" but clean as in I don't install a bunch of cruft. Windows Defender is off, Virtualization Based Security is off, etc.
2. Because I run through an area multiple times while testing, stuttering caused by loading in new data isn't really an issue. The first run (that's discarded) gets everything into memory, the subsequent runs generally don't stutter. If you're playing the game and running around between areas, you'll still get some stutters — how bad they are depends at least in part on your storage speed and other hardware.
3. "You didn't test on different CPUs!" I know. I'm not our CPU tester. This is only a look at GPUs while using a system that should remove all other bottlenecks as much as possible. (Yeah, Ryzen 7 7800X3D or Ryzen 9 7950X3D might be faster; I don't have one of those for testing either.)
4. "What about graphics card XYZ!?" I'll tell you what, if you post a GPU you want tested and get five people to like the comment (one GPU per comment!) I'll see about adding it to my test list. (Don't try to game the system.) The DRM means I can't possibly test more than eight GPUs per day, and honestly I don't want to do a ton more testing of this game. It's not going into my staple of benchmarks, in other words. Plus, give it another week and we'll probably have another patch that alters performance, hopefully for the better, which means these results are a snapshot in time.

That's all for now. Happy Star Warsing and May the Fourth be with you, alwayth.

 

[luissantos]

The most interesting thing for me would've been to see a chart comparing the pre-patch and post-patch performance, TBH. Right now I'm just looking at the numbers in a vacuum.

Also, I've seen some videos online (from Hardware Unboxed and others) where they show nVidia cards suffering from severe texture popping, meaning that raw FPS numbers no longer paint an accurate picture just by themselves, particularly when VRAM becomes the limiting factor. Would love to see this addressed in future performance comparison articles as well.

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

The most interesting thing for me would've been to see a chart comparing the pre-patch and post-patch performance, TBH. Right now I'm just looking at the numbers in a vacuum.

Also, I've seen some videos online (from Hardware Unboxed and others) where they show nVidia cards suffering from severe texture popping, meaning that raw FPS numbers no longer paint an accurate picture just by themselves, particularly when VRAM becomes the limiting factor. Would love to see this addressed in future performance comparison articles as well.

I chalk some of that up to guerilla marketing. AMD has pushed multiple games with higher than usual VRAM requirements, and often you'll get major outcry about poor performance on Nvidia (especially at launch) when that happens — anything to paint Intel or Nvidia in a bad light. The Last of Us Part 1, some of the Resident Evil games, Godfall, God of War... The list goes on. There are a lot of games where I can't help but question the "need" to push VRAM use beyond 8GB, particularly when the visual upgrades provided aren't actually noticeable.

That an AMD-promoted game had issues with Nvidia hardware at launch, and then those issues got (mostly/partially) fixed with driver and game updates within a week, is the real story IMO. We've seen the reverse as well, though not so much recently that I can think of unless you count Cyberpunk 2077 RT Overdrive. Actually, you could probably make the claim of Nvidia pushing stuff that tanks performance on AMD GPUs for any game that uses a lot of ray tracing, though in some cases the rendering does look clearly improved.

Part of this is probably also a rush to release the game head of May the 4th. Or at least that's the only thing that I can come up with. Was there any good reason to ship the game in a poorly running state, rather than spend a few more weeks? Or maybe EA just didn't realize how bad things were, and releasing it to the public provided the needed feedback. Whatever.

I did not get early access or launch access, so the first time I tried the game was with the patches already available (and there's no way with Steam/EA to stay with the original launch version). Aaron however has been playing on an RTX 2060 Super at 3440x1440 with FSR2 Quality and a mix of ~high settings since launch and hasn't had too many issues. If you try maxing out settings on hardware that can't really handle those settings, don't be surprised if performance is poor.

 

[KyaraM]

Which patch are you refering to and which area of Koboh if I may ask? Unfortunately, with the patch from Monday, Koboh is still not running all that well on my system with a 4070Ti so these results surprise me. Really can't confirm getting such high FPS anywhere near the settlement. Though the result for the 3070 with RT in 1080p looks a little lower what I got pre-patch on my 3070Ti (55-56 FPS average around Koboh settlement, same for the 4070Ti in 1440p, ironically, even though that one also has a stronger CPU partner).

As for GPUs, personally I would have liked to see the 4070Ti. Ada has a big enough segmentation to warrant dropping a low-end card for, imho.

 

[kerberos_20]

fps looking fine, can confirm with rx6800 (non XT) 60 fps with vsync running fine 1440p epic no rt, there maybe few areas which drops fps a little to 50s, but that is cpu bottleneck (2 cpu threads maxed, 3rd thread with denuvo still have spare resources), most areas runs fine up to 8core load, but some just doesnt want to scale up

 

[jeremyj_83]

Is it just me or do newer RT games seem to not have the massive performance drop on Radeon GPUs as they did earlier? AMD's RT implementation isn't as fast as nVidia's but to me it doesn't look as bad as it did in 2020 when the 6000 series launched.

 

[atomicWAR]

Which patch are you refering to and which area of Koboh if I may ask? Unfortunately, with the patch from Monday, Koboh is still not running all that well on my system with a 4070Ti so these results surprise me. Really can't confirm getting such high FPS anywhere near the settlement. Though the result for the 3070 with RT in 1080p looks a little lower what I got pre-patch on my 3070Ti (55-56 FPS average around Koboh settlement, same for the 4070Ti in 1440p, ironically, even though that one also has a stronger CPU partner).

As for GPUs, personally I would have liked to see the 4070Ti. Ada has a big enough segmentation to warrant dropping a low-end card for, imho.

I think there is some luck of the draw in hardware configs. I am running a RTX 4090 on a X670E Taichi with a 7950X, 64GB of DDR5 6000 CL 30 and my numbers match up well with Jarred's. Yet when I poke around the Steam forums there are still users having issues with low frame rates and/or bad frame times. Regardless many of us saw an over doubling of frame rate with frame times smoothing out as well in just three days time. While the game never should have been released in the fashion it was, how the fast they released a patch that fixed many of the most glaring issues gamers were facing was nothing short of impressive. Now they need to focus on making these fixes work with more hardware configs.

 

[cknobman]

I really annoys me how everyone always complains about EA, their business practices, and crap product releases; YET THEY STILL BUY THE GAMES AT RELEASE (or shortly after).
Companies could care less about people who complain but still buy products.
Its insanity TBH. Complain, still buy, then hope for change.
Change will only happen when consumers voice with their wallet.

 

[Makaveli]

"If you liked the previous installment, Star Wars Jedi: Outcast"

I do not believe this was the last game in this series.

Should be this below.

Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order

 

[Deleted member 2838871]

"You didn't test on different CPUs!" I know. I'm not our CPU tester. This is only a look at GPUs while using a system that should remove all other bottlenecks as much as possible. (Yeah, Ryzen 7 7800X3D or Ryzen 7950X3D might be faster; I don't have one of those for testing either.)

Star Wars Jedi: Survivor Closing Thoughts​

Launch performance for Star Wars Jedi: Survivor was more than a bit questionable. Even with the latest patch in place, this is a demanding game. Don't go into it expecting to get 60 fps at 4K native with maxed-out settings and ray tracing, unless (maybe) you have an RTX 4090.

It has performed exceptionally on my 7950x3D with 4090... epic preset with RT. 60 fps at 4K native and any frame drops I've seen were down to like 55... nothing big.

Haven't played in a couple days so I have to download the patch but I haven't had any complaints thusfar.

I think there is some luck of the draw in hardware configs. I am running a RTX 4090 on a X670E Taichi with a 7950X, 64GB of DDR5 6000 CL 30 and my numbers match up well with Jarred's.
Now they need to focus on making these fixes work with more hardware configs.

Yeah we have similar configs. Hopefully they'll get it squared away for lesser systems.

 

[Deleted member 2838871]

I really annoys me how everyone always complains about EA, their business practices, and crap product releases; YET THEY STILL BUY THE GAMES AT RELEASE (or shortly after).

Got it for free with the Ryzen purchase... and Redfall with the 4090 purchase. I'd have bought neither... but since they were free...

 

[Deleted member 1353997]

The charts mention "No MB", but what does MB mean in this context?

 

[criticaloftom]

I instantly saw the draconian hardware locked drm (with change of GPU) and completely lost interest.
You upgrade your motherboard for a new ryzen & the Cpu burns out, that Gpu from 5 years ago suddenly gives up the ghost that's 3 of the four allowed installs gone already.
That is insane!

 

[kerberos_20]

I instantly saw the draconian hardware locked drm (with change of GPU) and completely lost interest.
You upgrade your motherboard for a new ryzen & the Cpu burns out, that Gpu from 5 years ago suddenly gives up the ghost that's 3 of the four allowed installs gone already.
That is insane!

its even worst than you think it is, example from EA forum complain: installed game on laptop, game unplayable, installed on PC and got locked with too many PC used with this account

 

[10tacle]

Since my former high end gaming rig (as of a year ago LOL) won't play this at 4K/60FPS-Hz, I was hoping that my PS5, the latest updated version, would play it fine. Based on reviews on PS5 forums (and even on places like Amazon), it's also a broken s-show on that console. Terrible graphics, slide show frame rates in some scenes, etc.

EA just apparently can't NOT screw up games. They ruined the F1 series that Codemasters who they bought out had done well with for many years.

 

[Order 66]

It would be great if you would test the rx 6600

 

[BeedooX]

I chalk some of that up to guerilla marketing. HUB is very much AMD-centric, so anything that paints Intel or Nvidia in a bad light is right up their alley

I wouldn't necessarily agree with that. They've done plenty of AMD bashing - yet rather hypocritically, some have said that Toms Hardware is rather biased themselves.

 

[thisisaname]

I wonder how bad the crunch was to get this patch out?

 

[zx128k]

The charts mention "No MB", but what does MB mean in this context?

Would guess motion blur.

 

[Cliff3.141592653589793238]

As a stubborn Linux gamer I had a hard time getting it to run.
Fortunately I got it free with my newegg purchase. I got it through EA and had to install the launcher wouldn't run in wine. Tried adding the EA installer in steam as a non steam game. Got it going played for an hour and a half, loved it and it ran great even on my GTX 3060. Went to play it again and the only way I could get it to launch was ad a non steam game and point to the installer wait several hours and re-download it. Since I didn't want to fill up my hard drive with multiple copies and wait hours to re-download it I'm messing with the latest VKD3d on wine and will probably just give up wait ten years and then try it again on max settings with a new PC and a newer version of wine.

 

[sitehostplus]

It has performed exceptionally on my 7950x3D with 4090... epic preset with RT. 60 fps at 4K native and any frame drops I've seen were down to like 55... nothing big.

Haven't played in a couple days so I have to download the patch but I haven't had any complaints thusfar.




Yeah we have similar configs. Hopefully they'll get it squared away for lesser systems.

I'm running mine on a 50" 4ktv with a 4080 card same setting you got and I'm getting 60 fps as well. I just wish there were more instructions to this game. I don't think alt f4 is how you are supposed to leave the game, but it's all I know to do! 🤣

 

[kerberos_20]

I'm running mine on a 50" 4ktv with a 4080 card same setting you got and I'm getting 60 fps as well. I just wish there were more instructions to this game. I don't think alt f4 is how you are supposed to leave the game, but it's all I know to do! 🤣

open menu, go to settings and there you can quit xD

 

[sitehostplus]

open menu, go to settings and there you can quit xD

Now how do you open the menu in game?

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

Which patch are you refering to and which area of Koboh if I may ask? Unfortunately, with the patch from Monday, Koboh is still not running all that well on my system with a 4070Ti so these results surprise me. Really can't confirm getting such high FPS anywhere near the settlement. Though the result for the 3070 with RT in 1080p looks a little lower what I got pre-patch on my 3070Ti (55-56 FPS average around Koboh settlement, same for the 4070Ti in 1440p, ironically, even though that one also has a stronger CPU partner).

As for GPUs, personally I would have liked to see the 4070Ti. Ada has a big enough segmentation to warrant dropping a low-end card for, imho.

The "PC Patch 3.5" that dropped on late May 1 or early May 2. At least, I think that's the patch version.

Testing was right at the start of the level, the first time you arrive. I picked that spot because there was nothing else around (meaning, respawning enemies that would attack during my test sequence), and my FPS counter in the corner seemed to indicate a reasonably demanding area — not the most demanding at all, but also more demanding than some of the earlier scenes (i.e. on Coruscant).

This is the difficulty with benchmarking: Where do you test? Playing further into the game to find a more demanding area just takes away from testing time. Also, the village area on Koboh is known to be more (extremely) taxing, in part because it doesn't have any enemies around and has some wide open scenes that can be particularly hard on performance.

I retested one of the cards while running around in the village to see how my original test sequence compared to a potentially more demanding area. The results: Super poor minimum fps, like 30 fps on 1080p medium and epic, as well as 1440p epic, while using an RTX 3080. Average fps was way down for 1080p medium (from ~193 fps to ~101 fps), but the drop at epic was less severe (from ~107 fps to ~86 fps).

I was going to try and grab some better individual settings screenshots as well... but that just proved problematic. I loaded into the game, set the Epic preset, then loaded my save and grabbed a screenshot. Then I exited to the menu and tried changing just one setting (texture quality), followed by reloading the save. That didn't seem to change things at all, even though swapping presets would work. So then I exited the game, relaunched, and loaded the save. Texture quality was definitely lower now, but it seemed like a lot of other stuff was lower as well — almost like using the Texture Quality Low setting ended up making the game behave as though it was on the Low preset! I tried a few other settings (View Distance, Shadow Quality), and ultimately determined that I don't trust changing the individual settings at all right now.

As for performance, I suspect a lot of it comes down to PC hardware. I have a more or less top-end system. Core i9-13900K, 32GB DDR5-6600, MSI MEG Ace Z790 mobo, 4TB Sabrent Plus-G SSD. It's also running "clean" so there aren't a bunch of background tasks potentially causing problems. If you have 16GB RAM, a Core i5 or Ryzen 5 CPU, slower SSD, and some background tasks running, maybe things are worse. Ask @PaulAlcorn to test a bunch of CPUs. (He'll say no. )

Okay... I have access to the game again. I'm going to try it on a Core i9-9900K. I bet it runs a lot worse! Back in a bit...

Okay, quick update: i9-9900K is substantially slower in the most demanding parts of the game. Here are 4070 Ti testing results (because that's what's in my 9900K PC right now):

RTX 4070 Ti 9900K KobohWilds (1080pMed) - AVG: 147.8   1%Low: 109.7
RTX 4070 Ti 9900K KobohWilds (1080pEpic) - AVG: 133.6   1%Low:  95.8
RTX 4070 Ti 9900K KobohWilds (1440pEpic) - AVG:  91.6   1%Low:  64.6

RTX 4070 Ti 9900K KobohTown (1080pMed) - AVG:  74.7   1%Low:  37.0
RTX 4070 Ti 9900K KobohTown (1080pEpic) - AVG:  68.4   1%Low:  32.8
RTX 4070 Ti 9900K KobohTown (1440pEpic) - AVG:  60.9   1%Low:  32.3

Again, I note that a LOT of the game does not run anywhere nearly as poorly as in the Koboh village area. That's the "just wandering around talking to people" part of the game, where smooth performance isn't quite as important.