• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Battlefront beta - PC Performance Benchmarks

D

Dictator93

Member
Core i7 930 @ 4.2 Ghz and a heavily OC'd Titan X. 24 GB RAM

1080p, ultra, TAA offline mode is basically a constant 120
starwarsbattlefront_2ywunt.png


edit: I am using the wrong set of drivers. I shall try out the newest ones.
 
J

j-wood

Member
I'm curious how my rig will do, as my processor is getting up there in age. Only run games in 1080p, so hoping I can still pull ultra settings.

GTX 970
2600k (stock)
8GB DDR3
 
B

belmonkey

Member
I don't think his driver's have been updated for like a month, but I tried out the game on my mate's PC:

GTX 760 4GB
Intel i3 2100
8GB RAM

At 1080p high settings (55 FOV), fps seems to hover around 60, dipping into the 50s. Sometimes GPU usage is at max, sometimes the CPU is at max; the old i3 was definitely a bottleneck in BF4, perhaps a bit less so in this game it seems.

Does the new set of drivers help much?
 
GavinUK86

GavinUK86

Member
j-wood said:
I'm curious how my rig will do, as my processor is getting up there in age. Only run games in 1080p, so hoping I can still pull ultra settings.

GTX 970
2600k (stock)
8GB DDR3
Click to expand...

You'll be fine. I have the same system except my CPU is overclocked, and it's a solid 1080/60 on Ultra.
 
L

Luigiv

Member
Hip Hop said:
I'm getting anywhere from 55-80 FPS normally

and explosions do bring it down to around 30fps, but it gets over that quick.

GTX 670
i5 3570k

Everything Ultra with medium post process and ambient occlusion
low FXAA

Thought I was gonna around 30fps with my setup tbh. But nah, game has great performance in the beta.
Click to expand...

Not bad at all and I have nearly the same set up.
 
Irobot82

Irobot82

Member
Kinthalis said:
I find it weird. Never saw something like this before, usually, if you go to RAM while rendering, you get stutters, not just a few frame rate drops.
Click to expand...

Oh it just dawned on me why this is the case. It's use a new CPU made for DDR4 support right? Isn't the new Z170's quad channel instead of dual channel like DDR3 mobo's (socket 2011 aside) so it would make sense that that it is faster. I'm willing to bet is 2GB DDR4 existed that 4 of those would provide better framtime then 2 4gb sticks.
 
H

Haribi

Why isn't there a Star Wars RPG? And wouldn't James Bond make for a pretty good FPS?
With an i5 4460 - r9 380 - 8 GB Ram I run the game on Ultra/1080p at around 50fps.

Haven't tried the 40 player map tho.
 
M

metsallica

Member
Should I even bother? I have a GTX 570, i7-2600K, and 8 GB of ram. I am long past due for an upgrade and this might be the game that forces it... How can I expect it to run at 1200p?
 
H

Herne

Member
It's playing well on my 390X with ultra settings on 1440P. but it's crashing occasionally with the following -

DirectX function "hr1" failed with DXGI_ERROR_DEVICE_REMOVED

Have updated from the 15.8 beta to the 15.9.1, but getting the same result.
 
K

Kezen

Banned
Herne said:
It's playing well on my 390X with ultra settings on 1440P. but it's crashing occasionally with the following -

DirectX function "hr1" failed with DXGI_ERROR_DEVICE_REMOVED

Have updated from the 15.8 beta to the 15.9.1, but getting the same result.
Click to expand...

Usually this is the sign of a card overheating.
 
Se_7_eN

Se_7_eN

Member
Hip Hop said:
I'm getting anywhere from 55-80 FPS normally

and explosions do bring it down to around 30fps, but it gets over that quick.

GTX 670
i5 3570k

Everything Ultra with medium post process and ambient occlusion
low FXAA

Thought I was gonna around 30fps with my setup tbh. But nah, game has great performance in the beta.
Click to expand...

Par Score said:
Damn. This is encouraging for my ageing OC'd 680 / 2500K combo, can't wait to try it out tonight!
Click to expand...
kinggroin said:
Insane how easily a 670 chomps through this game.
Click to expand...


Great news for my 4GB 680... Thanks guys!
 
H

Herne

Member
Kezen said:
Usually this is the sign of a card overheating.
Click to expand...

Hrm. My card usually never overheats - I've never seen it go above 63 degrees. I've turned up the case fans though - will try it now.

Also, my flatmate doesn't care about graphics, so he didn't even bother to change any of them, but the game is running well on his i5 2500, 8GB and GeForce 460 1GB.
 
D

dmr87

Member
Ran pretty good maxed out at 1440p in horde mode, just did a quick run. 50-60 fps on 16GB RAM780ti/4670k 4.5ghz. Dropped a bit more when lots where going on. Hopefully my new mobo, RAM and 6700k drops in tomorrow for a weekend of fun.
 
K

Kezen

Banned
GavinUK86 said:
Low, Medium, High and Ultra.
Click to expand...

It's impressive that even the lowest settings retain the core asset work, which means those with entry level gaming PCs will still get to play a decent looking game at 60fps.

Now I'd like to see detailed benches for each of those presets.
 
Ennosuke

Ennosuke

Member
Not playing on this system, but I wanted to test what happens if I run this with my 5850. And you know what? Nothing, when starting it, the screen stays black.
 
T

Tain

Member
Real curious to see how my 2600k + 8gb + 980 does. If I see stutter I'll take it as a sign to finally get more RAM.
 
N

NewVegasDog

Member
Oh man can't wait to test my build with the beta.

GTX 970
i7 4790K (4.0 GHz)
16 GB DDR3 RAM

I'll mostly be playing in 1080. But we'll see how good it is on High to Ultra settings.
 
mr stroke

mr stroke

Member
Dictator93 said:
You should have way more FPS @ 4k... a flat 60!

Are you using the latest drivers? Does not seem like SLI is kicking in.
Click to expand...

yep just put latest drivers, you would think I would get 60 locked(turning off AA/AF locks 50 though) :\

I hope once game releases it will be better/stable
 
LQX

LQX

Member
I get constant 50-60 on my 970 with Ultra settings and screen rendering at about 150. Looks and plays great. Thought for sure even a 970 would buckle for this game. I was so intent on doing a new Skylake system build but shit, if this game is running so well on my i5-3570K I may just have to put that money to better use.
 
E

Einchy

semen stains the mountaintops
GTX980

Getting 90-120 FPS at 1080p with everything at max.

Set the oversampling setting to about 140 percent and was getting 57-80 FPS.
 
T

The Omega Man

Member
LQX said:
I get constant 50-60 on my 970 with Ultra settings and screen rendering at about 150. Looks and plays great. Thought for sure even a 970 would buckle for this game. I was so intent on doing a new Skylake system build but shit, if this game is running so well on my i5-3570K I may just have to put that money to better use.
Click to expand...
I have the same specs, I was worried for my processor, glad to hear this.
 
mr stroke

mr stroke

Member
Dictator93 said:
Is your GPU utilization rather low? I get about 40-50 with one titan x @ 4k!
Click to expand...

Oh snap, I forgot NVIDIA disables SLI when you down load new drivers. Thanks for the heads up. With SLI enabled getting 60fps maxed @4k (still dips into high 40's during heavy multi player though)
 
P

Phil4000

Member
The game's system requirements are a joke
Game runs 45-60fps Ultra 1080p

6gb DDR3
GTX 780
i7 920 2.6ghz
7200rpm HDD
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Switch benchmarked running PC games Natively - GoW, DMC5, GTAV, Genshin, PSV, PS2. Cinebench, 3DMark, Geekbench scores vs Snapdragon - Full breakdown
Analysis Hardware Platform 2
54
6K
justiceiro replied
Homeworld 3 | Review Thread
Analysis Review
20
2K
P:axMagellanic replied
Helldivers II | Review Thread
Analysis Review 2 3
127
13K
DaleinCalgary replied
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War PC Trailer
Trailer
0
806
Grand Theft Scratchy replied
  • Locked
Notebookcheck.net: No, the PS5 won’t offer anywhere near the graphics performance of Xbox Series X: Navi benchmarks prove it
2
78
4K
Mod of War replied
Top Bottom