When DICE and EA revealed Star Wars: Battlefront, the first thing we told ourselves was that the final version would never come close to the visuals that were showcased. See, Star Wars: Battlefront looked incredible and it was really hard to believe that DICE would pull it off. Well, today we are happy to report that we were wrong. Star Wars: Battlefront is a phenomenally optimized game, looks just as good as its reveal trailer, and could very well be the most optimized game of 2015.
As always, we used an Intel i7 4930K (turbo boosted at 4.0Ghz) with 8GB RAM, NVIDIA’s GTX690, Windows 8.1 64-bit and the latest WHQL version of the GeForce drivers. NVIDIA has already included an SLI profile for this title that offers amazing SLI scaling, meaning that you will not have to mess around with third-party tools – such as NVIDIA Inspector Tool – in order to enable it.
In order to find out how the game performs on modern-day dual-cores, we simulated one. And to our surprise, a dual-core system (with Hyper Threading enabled) can maintain above 60fps at all times, even on 40-person servers. This is pretty amazing considering the chaos that occurs in such matches. As said, DICE did an incredible work.
Furthermore, the game scales incredibly well on more than four CPU cores. As we can see above, all of our six CPU cores were used. The performance difference between a dual-core and a hexa-core is noteworthy (around 20fps-40fps), however the good news is that the game is fully playable and enjoyable even on dual-core CPUs.
As a result of the amazing CPU scaling, Star Wars: Battlefront can be considered a GPU bound title. In Single GPU mode, our GTX690 ran the game with 40fps-50fps at 1080p with Ultra settings. With SLI enabled, our GTX690 was delivering an amazing experience. SLI scaling is brilliant in this title and the game never dropped below 70fps, no matter what was happening on screen.
Not only does Star Wars: Battlefront run amazingly well on the PC platform, it also looks ridiculously beautiful. Star Wars: Battlefront features the best environments we’ve seen this far in a first-person game, topping even those powered by CRYENGINE. Thanks to Photogrammetry and Physically Based Rendering, the game sports visuals that are simply too good to be true. And that’s because Star Wars: Battlefront looks amazing and does not require a top of the line PC as other triple-A titles do (without even coming close to this game’s visuals). We’ve seen Photogrammetry in The Vanishing of Ethan Carter too, but Star Wars: Battlefront takes that tech one step further. The game sports incredibly detailed textures that fit in just 2GB of VRAM. Ubisoft and Rocksteady, take notes!
As always, there are some small gripes with the game’s visuals, but we’re simply nitpicking here. For example, there is noticeable pop-in even with Ultra settings. Furthermore, while most characters are highly detailed and better than those featured in pretty much all other games, they are not as lifelike as those of Black Ops III (or at least in our opinion). Yes, we’re comparing different models here, however Black Ops III did feature some of the best human characters we’ve ever seen.
All in all, Star Wars: Battlefront is one of the most optimized games of 2015. The game comes with a Field of View slider, a respectable amount of options to tweak, is not plagued by mouse acceleration/smoothing issues, and has a rock solid netcode. We did not experience any lag or any connectivity issues at all during our tests, so kudos to DICE for offering a better MP experience than BF4 on launch day.
Enjoy!
John is the founder and Editor in Chief at DSOGaming. He is a PC gaming fan and highly supports the modding and indie communities. Before creating DSOGaming, John worked on numerous gaming websites. While he is a die-hard PC gamer, his gaming roots can be found on consoles. John loved – and still does – the 16-bit consoles, and considers SNES to be one of the best consoles. Still, the PC platform won him over consoles. That was mainly due to 3DFX and its iconic dedicated 3D accelerator graphics card, Voodoo 2. John has also written a higher degree thesis on the “The Evolution of PC graphics cards.”
Contact: Email
This game has everything minus the game-play depth. I can NOT wait to see what DiCE will now do with the next Battlefield title and DX 12 (this is still DX 10/11).
Mass Effect: Andromeda is what you are looking for then.
I’m not interested in this title due to me falling out with fps multiplayer games in general. But it’s kinda amazing how few people are playing this, I assume it’ll have a boost when it gets closer to movie time, but still.
Lol better call it 3rd person shooter, only morons use first person as it’s a huge disadvantage.
Yeah third person, just meant shooters in general.
Looks good, sounds good, crap gameplay.
and EA
You think ea will close down dice?
😀
Corporate greed of EA and Disney killed this game.
g.e.n.e.r.i.c s.h.i.t
On top of not being deep, lacking server browser, no campaign, 60$ + 50$ season pass, shallow amount of content… it is Origin only.
It is dead Jim.
But it runs well and looks good so is at least something right? ¯(?)/¯
If by dead you mean millions of sales then yes it’s dead.
Nope.
That is a massive flop. Asking $120 for a tech demo. Can’t say I am surprised.
Although to be fair it launched alongside Fallout 4 so there’s another factor. And it still a fair amount of players but it is definitely not that great.
Those are Indie game numbers for a massive AAA, heavily marketed game. EA execs would be in panic mode right now.
love those numbers, hope they drop below 10k on all platforms soon >:D
On PC I can see it happening (just like BF:Hardline), not so sure on the can’tsoles though.
Thats what deciding to go with no campaign gets you, EA.
FYI.
Meanwhile, over 600,000 PC Counter Strike players just don’t care. :p
Did you just pull that millions of sales from your @ss? They haven’t announced the sales yet
Did you just pull that millions of sales from your a*s? They haven’t announced the sales yet
People will go back to playing BF4 or Counterstrike within a month, if that.
Already have… It definitely has its moments, but the overall experience is pretty lacking. Will probably come back when the season pass is 20$.
Nope they will go back to counter strike. BF4 is dead also.
millions ? it’s not even close to half of a million till now.
Half? I only see a quarter of a million in total.
:)) true
Maybe next years Battlefront will be worth a damn; then of course we only have a year to play it before the third one comes out.
i use a gtx 880 still…lol it runs 1080p/60fps for me high/ultra textures.not bad for an old card.
I get about the same on my GTX 680 SLI setup.
Frostbite engine really needs to get texture popin sorted.At ultra setting there should be no noticeable popin in a modern engine.
Sad that its EA
They want a lot of money for a game that has a lot of missing content
It’s amazing how well games run when you don’t have Gamesworks in them.
Really? Find out what Gameworks really do before trolling. Or this is some kind of mental illness? 🙂
Yeah, it’s getting predictable like Silviu’s The Witcher 3 hating and bigoted comments, Definitely some kind of mental illness. :p
My plan worked. Hello sweet prince.
I’m sure you have something better to do than trolling your fellow PC gamers.
https://i.imgur.com/n8umjWj.png
Why bother replying LOL.
It has the nvidia made HBAO in it. Lol
no single player and I dont care. Why just why!
Looking at it mate, it seems this game is a small project compared to eas usual games.
That’s EA trying to ‘pull one over’ on pc gamers, and charging full price.
Problem is, the devs now making these stupid decisions are all console-minded developers. They’re not nearly smart enough, thus EA loses money.
if this was on pc, it will be early acess for a low price. Steam only.
All I want from EA and DICE, is Battlefield Bad Company 3, and have the same team who made 2, make it.
Oh, and mod tools for Bad Company 2 would be nice, for xmas.
And to that i want to add a bc1 singleplayer with stupid jokes and golf carts.
That sounds like an episode of Jackass.
yup thats how bc1 was.
Simple, generic Star Wars MP only game, more expensive than Fallout 4, no mod support, £40 for the season pass alone, £54.99 for a MP only game LOL
and looks like it flopped like hard line, it’s doing a little bit better than HL but less than 350k players peak on all platforms combined.
Just a note…. If the game is perfectly playable on dual cores, the scaling on up to more cores doesn’t matter a lick. So hexa core scaling is not “amazing”, it’s wasted power.
so…
we can finally say that this has better graphics than crysis
If only it had Crysis level of gameplay, SP and immersion factor, then yes it would be better than Crysis, but as it stands it is nowhere near the level of Crysis.
I prefer this version.
It’s clear that you are new to this site.
For all its technical marvel, this game is hollow and has very little content for its price tag, and then EA has the audacity to charge almost double for the “complete” experience… Thank you, but no thank you!
its got as much content as any shooter out. this its a great game. im having a blast on console. stop living in the past and stop comparing it to a 10 year old game. MOVE ON pc gamer. it has a good amount of modes at launch.
fyi cod has less content and sold for $60 and made a killing while having a bad pc launch. stop comparing it to battlefront 2. more people play it on the xbox one in 720p then pc does… lol
the game is a sucess on consoles and should show them that they dont need pc. i just hope next time they work more on consoles to push 1080p.
Basically every AMD sponsored game is a marvel of optimization (especially since AMD helps developers to use the least amount of CPU power as possible)
AMD GPUs need more CPU grunt than nvidia’s GPUs…
Which is exactly why AMD makes these games use as few CPU cycles as possible. The less CPU power needed, the more every GPU, be it Nvidia or AMD (especially AMD) can stretch their legs.