Skip to main content

Star Wars Battlefront II Performance Review

Benchmarks: FPS, Frame Time & Smoothness

Performance at 1080p

We start our benchmarks at 1920x1080 with this game's graphics settings pushed all the way up to Ultra. These tests were performed in DirectX 11 mode, since activating DirectX 12 triggers an in-game warning of partial support and possible stability issues. Don't forget that the Frostbite 3 engine originally ran exclusively on DirectX 11.

Image 1 of 6

Image 2 of 6

Image 3 of 6

Image 4 of 6

Image 5 of 6

Image 6 of 6

At the bottom of the charts, AMD's Radeon RX 460 and 560 struggle, unable to maintain a consistent frame rate. Our perceived smoothness measurements confirm the game is only moderately playable with those cards. Just above, Nvidia's GeForce GTX 1050 and 1050 Ti are at the limit of acceptable.

But starting with Radeon RX 570, Star Wars Battlefront II is perfectly playable at Full HD with Ultra settings. Half of our cards keep their noses above 60 FPS through this taxing benchmark, even.

Notice also that our fastest cards seem to hit a performance ceiling, with only eight frames per second (on average) separating the top five boards.

Performance at 1440p

Using the same Ultra quality preset, we now move to 2560x1440.

Image 1 of 6

Image 2 of 6

Image 3 of 6

Image 4 of 6

Image 5 of 6

Image 6 of 6

It's no surprise that the GeForce GTX 1050 and 1050 Ti join AMD's Radeon RX 460/560 down at the bottom in unplayable territory.

The GeForce GTX 1060 3GB falls behind the Radeon RX 580 and R9 390, while AMD's Radeon RX 570 trades blows with GeForce GTX 970.

Only the RX 580 and GTX 1060 6GB average more than 50 FPS.


MORE: Wolfenstein II Performance Review


MORE: Destiny 2 Performance Review


MORE: DiRT 4 Performance Review

Star Wars Battlefront II - PCView Deal
  • AgentLozen
    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.
    Reply
  • Yuka
    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!
    Reply
  • Som1_
    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.
    Reply
  • Mike2015
    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.
    Reply
  • Derren001
    I do wish the game used SLI. I end up with one GPU running at 99% and the second at 1%.
    Reply
  • derekullo
    20458376 said:
    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.

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

    They even tested a ryzen brought down to 2 threads

    Reply
  • spdragoo
    20458485 said:
    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.

    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).
    Reply
  • phobicsq
    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.
    Reply
  • redgarl
    CPU/GPU goes to the RX 580 while your benches is saying the contrary.

    I will check on another site then...
    Reply
  • matthew_258
    So no 1080ti, 1070ti or 1080? 4k? no...no lemon pledge...
    Reply