Trending

Star Wars Battlefront II Performance Review

By

CPU, RAM & VRAM Resources

Processor Utilization

Does the Frostbite 3 engine make efficient use of host processing resources in Star Wars Battlefront II? These measurements were gathered in the same benchmark sequence, at 1920x1080 and 2560x1440, using the same Ultra quality preset.

1080p

Image 1 of 4

Image 2 of 4

Image 3 of 4

Image 4 of 4

Using our Radeon RX 580, Frostbite 3 doesn't seem very well-threaded at all. It really only utilizes a single CPU core.

Meanwhile, the opposite is true when we plug in our GeForce GTX 1060 6GB. All of the cores, physical and logical, are active.

Yet, in the end, both cards perform similarly.

1440p

Image 1 of 4

Image 2 of 4

Image 3 of 4

Image 4 of 4

The same holds true at 2560x1440, though overall processor utilization is slightly lower (which we'd expect).

System and Video Memory Utilization

Image 1 of 2

Image 2 of 2

System memory use is similar at 1080p and 1440p, though the game consumes almost 2GB more with a GeForce installed.

As for graphics memory, the Frostbite engine ties up more of it as resolution increases, not surprisingly. We also see GDDR5 use higher on the Radeon than the GeForce card.


MORE: Wolfenstein II Performance Review


MORE: Destiny 2 Performance Review


MORE: DiRT 4 Performance Review

Star Wars Battlefront II - PCView Deal
22 Comments Comment from the forums
  • AgentLozen 07 December 2017 15:51
    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 07 December 2017 15:57
    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_ 07 December 2017 16:42
    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 07 December 2017 17:11
    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 07 December 2017 17:13
    I do wish the game used SLI. I end up with one GPU running at 99% and the second at 1%.
    Reply
  • derekullo 07 December 2017 17:13
    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 07 December 2017 19:05
    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 07 December 2017 22:01
    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 07 December 2017 23:30
    CPU/GPU goes to the RX 580 while your benches is saying the contrary.

    I will check on another site then...
    Reply
  • matthew_258 08 December 2017 00:16
    So no 1080ti, 1070ti or 1080? 4k? no...no lemon pledge...
    Reply