Destiny 2 Performance Review

The first Destiny, released in 2014, was a console-only title, much to the chagrin of PC gamers. With Destiny 2, Activision and Bungie correct this faux-pas by offering a multi-platform experience for the Xbox One, PlayStation 4, and Windows PCs.

PC gamers enjoy the benefit of native 4K support and uncapped frame rates (almost, that is; in reality, there's a 200 FPS ceiling), while consoles are limited to only 30 FPS.

Bungie uses, as it did for the first Destiny, a home-grown graphics engine derived from the technology found in Halo: Reach. Consequently, it's only DirectX 11-compatible. But enough rambling. Let's see how Destiny 2 runs on our test hardware...

Minimum & Recommended System Requirements

Bungie's website gives us an idea of what the minimum and recommended configurations are for a good gaming experience in Destiny 2. On paper, the game is not very resource-intensive. Its host processing, graphics, and memory demands appear fairly light. The minimum configuration shows that even several-year-old systems should be able to achieve playable frame rates. The recommended configuration also seems quite reasonable.

Configuration
Minimum
Recommended
Processor
Intel Core i3-3250
or Pentium G4560
or AMD FX-4350
Intel Core i5-2400
or Core i5-7400
or AMD Ryzen 5 1600X
Memory
6GB
8GB
Graphics Card
GeForce GTX 660 2GB
or GTX 1050 2GB
or Radeon HD 7850 2GB
GeForce GTX 970 4GB
or GTX 1060 6 GB
or Radeon R9 390 8GB
Operating System
Windows 7, 8.1, 10 (64-bit only)
Windows 7, 8.1, 10 (64-bit only)
Disk Space
68GB
68GB

Graphics Options

There are a number of graphics options available for Destiny 2 (anti-aliasing, texture and shadow quality, ambient occlusion, detail distance for the environment, characters, and foliage). Without going into excessive detail, the game can be configured as you see fit. It is also possible to choose one of four presets: Low, Medium, High, and Highest.

Field of view is adjustable, as are v-sync and lighting quality. There is also an HDR option, for those with monitors that support this feature.

Low/Highest

Rendering differences between the lowest and highest quality preset stand out: leaves are more detailed (especially at a distance), shadows look better, and the anti-aliasing is readily apparent. Surprisingly, the vegetation and textures still sport acceptable quality at close distances when we select the Low setting.

As far as we can tell, the output from GeForce and Radeon cards is identical. That's something we always like to see.

MORE: DiRT 4 Performance Review

MORE: Prey Performance Review

MORE: Mass Effect Andromeda Performance Review

MORE: Ghost Recon Wildlands Performance Review

Create a new thread in the Reviews comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
15 comments
Comment from the forums
    Your comment
  • NinjaNerd56
    I’m running a GTX960 on High, and never get below 40-50fps in D2. Most of the time, I’m exceeding 100.

    I have 32GB of RAM, and have my whole house on a realtime SNMP/WMI monitor.

    D2 uses 10-12GB of RAM and drives the 4 cores in my I5 at 40-50% CPU.

    Looks awesome....
    -1
  • SumTingW0ng
    Do you recommend this game? Should I get one?

    My setup is i7 4790k @ 4.5Ghz, 32GB DDR3 RAM, and ASUS Strix GTX 970.
    1
  • firerod1
    My evga 1060 3gb sc doesn't keep stable 60 fps on mixed medium/high settings and I have an i5-2500 that runs around 75-85% utilization with 6.5gb of RAM out of my 8 being used, Its been annoying.... to say the least. Probably going to upgrade to zen+ or i5-8600 h370 when it comes out.
    0
  • AnimeMania
    Will clearing out 68 Gig of SSD space to run the game provide any benefit or should it be run off the hard drive.
    0
  • clonazepam
    Disabling Depth of Field can give you back 10-20 fps average. I don't miss the effect in a first person shooter. I run it off of a normal hard drive. Once I figured out my normal overclock settings on the GPU just weren't going to work (I'm down to just +100 on both core and mem), it runs like a dream.

    The gunplay is just top notch. For normal play, you can 100% rely on the weapons, and add in the various abilities as you go. They aren't essential until you're in the harder modes and really looking to maximize teamwork and efficiency. It's a great game.
    0
  • nick sottiaux
    Anonymous said:
    Will clearing out 68 Gig of SSD space to run the game provide any benefit or should it be run off the hard drive.
    Loading times are significantly improved while on my SSD. Running a 6700 paired with 16gb and a 1060. Takes from 20-25 seconds to load a map on SSD and close to a minute on my SSHD.

    Hope that helps
    0
  • Blytz
    Why does the iv card list say Vega 56 and the benchmarks are 64's ?
    0
  • lordsabathaan
    Why the hell did you use so old drivers for Nvidia since 388.31 give up to 53% performance increase in Destiny 2? And you update with trying new amd drivers , but you even dont use up to date drivers from Nvidia..
    -1
  • cpt.pants
    These benchmarks are way off. I run a Ryzen 1700x and a RX 480 8gb. On 1080p with highest settings I average well above 100fps while playing solo and see a low of 80 fps during Public events or raids/crucible. Either toms is using bad drivers on amd hardware or they are just bias as usual towards nvidia.
    0
  • Yannick_G_THFR
    Anonymous said:
    Why the hell did you use so old drivers for Nvidia since 388.31 give up to 53% performance increase in Destiny 2? And you update with trying new amd drivers , but you even dont use up to date drivers from Nvidia..


    388.00 was the last public version when all the benchs were done.

    Anonymous said:
    These benchmarks are way off. I run a Ryzen 1700x and a RX 480 8gb. On 1080p with highest settings I average well above 100fps while playing solo and see a low of 80 fps during Public events or raids/crucible. Either toms is using bad drivers on amd hardware or they are just bias as usual towards nvidia.


    We always try to find some demanding areas for the benchmark sequence. Of course (and like you), our RX480 show better results - like all the others GPUs, so the final ranking doesn't change globally - in some places :)
    1
  • photonboy
    http://www.pcgamer.com/our-testing-confirms-that-nvidias-38831-drivers-boost-destiny-2-performance-by-over-30-percent/

    CPT.PANTS
    Well, they apparently weren't even using the latest NVidia drivers that gained 34 to 53%, so hardly biased towards NVidia.

    Maybe they used older AMD drivers too?

    Do you actually have PROOF that Tomshardware is "biased" towards NVidia? Seriously, please link the PROOF.
    2
  • Olle P
    First:
    Why is CPU utilisation only given as a total percentage?
    I'm far more interested in how the game make use the available threads.
    There's quite a difference if the game runs in two threads at 100% load or if it runs in eight threads á 25% load...

    Second:
    I'd like to see the performance of GeForce GTX 1050Ti, which right now seems to be the "best buy", rather than the Radeon RX 470, which is known to be pretty much the same as 570.
    0
  • Yannick_G_THFR
    Anonymous said:
    First:
    Why is CPU utilisation only given as a total percentage?
    I'm far more interested in how the game make use the available threads.
    There's quite a difference if the game runs in two threads at 100% load or if it runs in eight threads á 25% load...

    Second:
    I'd like to see the performance of GeForce GTX 1050Ti, which right now seems to be the "best buy", rather than the Radeon RX 470, which is known to be pretty much the same as 570.


    First & Second :
    I think you'll be happy with our next game review ;)
    1
  • zthomas
    I got the game its just another shooter without a purpose.. pretty scenery, done a couple of missions ya get a few guns and ammo which runs almost out on each mission and the missions are solo and boring..
    0
  • dalauder
    Is it me, or does this game not look any better than Skyrim?

    Console port?
    0