• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Star Wars Battlefront 2 Benchmarks

JediFragger said:
Tbf, considering AMD have a fraction of the budget nVidia have I don't think they're doing too badly at all :)

Hell, with a bigger driver team I bet it'd be better!!
Click to expand...
No, AMD are not doing badly at all.
They did have 14 months longer to get Vega right though. I wonder what state it was in 14 months before it was released and if it would've been competitive.
If Volta releases in the next 10 months(?) it'll have released closer to Vega than Pascal did, so might be a fairer comparison, or at least no less unfair.
 
Brazo said:
I’m sure your capable of checking both benches against each other and seeing the disparity. For example the Guru3d bench has the 1080 ahead of the 56, whereas the cherry picked one Matt posted shows it behind.
Click to expand...
Exactly, I posted 3 links to 3 other sites with different outcome:
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Star-...s/Star-Wars-Battlefront-2-Benchmarks-1243213/
http://gamegpu.com/action-/-fps-/-tps/star-wars-battlefront-ii-test-gpu-cpu
https://overclock3d.net/reviews/software/star_wars_battlefront_ii_trial_pc_performance_review/9
 
I suspect it comes down to which area is tested, which API is used and whether it is single player and multiplayer, there are a lot of variables at play. DX11 is much faster on our products in this game.

I doubt any result posted is false, just testing different areas and scenarios.

The results in the OP were taken from a demanding part of the single player campaign.

A demanding benchmark sequence from the campaign was used. The new sequence no longer plays on Endor, but in the second part of the chapter "The Dauntless", in which the player is on the planet Pillio as Luke Skywalker. The new benchmark consists of a walk through a cave and shows various smoke effects, elaborate object surfaces, particle effects, some stormtroopers and also a shootout. The scene tends towards worst-case scenario.
Click to expand...

Whereas if you look at the GameGPU test sequence (they have a video showing it) they shoot the ground and then walk forward a bit and the sequence takes 30 seconds, there is no action taking place so perhaps not the best representation of gameplay performance.

Those are just two examples.
 
AMDMatt said:
I suspect it comes down to which area is tested, which API is used and whether it is single player and multiplayer, there are a lot of variables at play. DX11 is much faster on our products in this game.

I doubt any result posted is false, just testing different areas and scenarios.

The results in the OP were taken from a demanding part of the single player campaign.



Whereas if you look at the GameGPU test sequence (they have a video showing it) they shoot the ground and then walk forward a bit and the sequence takes 30 seconds, there is no action taking place so perhaps not the best representation of gameplay performance.

Those are just two examples.
Click to expand...

I was going to post this last night about there benchmark run. But I just couldn't be bothered trying to explain.

There test run is completely stupid and has you said doesn't show the game to its potential.

Just another weak website trying to get results out fast for views.
Poor show

Just another reason why video footage will always be my go to for game benchmarks. Least you get to see the game tested.
 
shankly1985 said:
I was going to post this last night about there benchmark run. But I just couldn't be bothered trying to explain.

There test run is completely stupid and has you said doesn't show the game to its potential.

Just another weak website trying to get results out fast for views.
Poor show

Just another reason why video footage will always be my go to for game benchmarks. Least you get to see the game tested.
Click to expand...
The overclock 3D results don't even bench any RX500 series or Vega GPUs. :confused:
 
Brazo said:
And I suggest you posting a more representative suite of benches!
Click to expand...
With respect, the thread title is "Star Wars Battlefront 2 Benchmarks". There is nothing to stop you or anyone else posting benchmarks from anywhere they please. I'm not quite sure why you've got such a bee in your bonnet about this.
 
Gregster said:
You know him too well :D If AMD not winning, site is rubbish and not to be trusted :D
Click to expand...
Gregster said:
Ahhh ok but I stand by what I said :p
Click to expand...
I said the opposite.
AMDMatt said:
I suspect it comes down to which area is tested, which API is used and whether it is single player and multiplayer, there are a lot of variables at play. DX11 is much faster on our products in this game.

I doubt any result posted is false, just testing different areas and scenarios.
Click to expand...
 
I believe there is also a bandwagon un-pre-ordering going on due to heros being either grindable or you can skip the grind by paying up more cash.

This is not new, also the values being asked are not special.

If you look at a disgustingly popular game like world of tanks you can pay over £50 for a tank which may or may not be better than regular tanks and it will be one out of hundreds of others.

But EA is an evil piece of **** for wanting in on that delicious micro transaction pie and wanting to farm the surplus money that people have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom