Star Wars Jedi: Survivor Benchmark Test & Performance Analysis

[nguyen]

FSR is the right answer. DLSS does, when it's given extra special attention and tuning from both Nvidia and the developers, sometimes look a lot better than FSR. But it only runs on some of one brand of GPU and it looks as bad (or worse) than FSR in a few scenarios so while it's a better solution when showcased and cherry-picked, it's often not great; All upscaling is a garbage crutch to hide the fact that RT is too demanding for the resolutions gamers expect, and if a developer has to put upscaling tech into their game I'd rather it be a platform-agnostic scaler that doesn't further divide the PC gaming market.

Funny to say when the 4090 is the only GPU capable of consistent 4K60 in this game without RT, Upscaling is pretty much a must for enjoyable experience at 4K

Yes let block out superior options, so everyone can enjoy subpar visual/performance, that's only fair right?

 

[AusWolf]

The game is a turd right now. Maybe it will get fixed or partially fixed. We'll see. Yes the blame lies with EA as always. EA, the Developer killer. It is well known that Star Wars games sell pretty well even though many are subpar imo just because a lot of people love Star Wars.

I really enjoyed KOTOR. Great game, but where did Star Wars games of that caliber go to? Publishers/Developers make a half-assed attempt on Star Wars games after that and count on the Star Wars theme to sell units and it does.

It's not that simple. Star Wars games, just like films and series, have been running on a steep downhill slope ever since Disney bought the rights. Many people have been disillusioned by the franchise, its bleak, pointless stories, faceless characters, bad writing, etc. Jedi: Fallen Order was the first Star Wars game in years that wasn't utter garbage. You can argue that it wasn't perfect, and I would agree, but it was a bright glimmer of hope that Star Wars isn't dead, yet. No wonder fans (myself included) want the sequel to succeed. In fact, I want it to succeed so much that I'm not gonna buy it until it's fixed. Star Wars or not, it's still a game, and I'm certainly not gonna enable EA in their lazy approach. The game deserves better.

 

[chrcoluk]

There's a lot to unpack here but let's go.

18GB VRAM for 1440p usage seems to be a bug/memory-leak maybe with some clickbaity sensastionalism thrown in. W1zzard's testing is a bit more thorough than one site uploading a clip to Youtube without controlled testing.

Performance is horrible and it cannot be blamed on Denuvo entirely, The PS5 is the least-bad release but still has plenty of issues and the Series X is broken as hell, possibly even more broken than the PC version given that the majority of the Series X issues are in cutscenes and this is a story-driven game.

FSR is the right answer. DLSS does, when it's given extra special attention and tuning from both Nvidia and the developers, sometimes look a lot better than FSR. But it only runs on some of one brand of GPU and it looks as bad (or worse) than FSR in a few scenarios so while it's a better solution when showcased and cherry-picked, it's often not great; All upscaling is a garbage crutch to hide the fact that RT is too demanding for the resolutions gamers expect, and if a developer has to put upscaling tech into their game I'd rather it be a platform-agnostic scaler that doesn't further divide the PC gaming market.


This is the way.

The VRAM usage is likely explained by them porting over the unified memory code from console, something I mentioned in other threads will become more and more common in new games going forward. System RAM becoming less important, Video RAM becoming more important.

On FF7 Remake it needs over 2 gigs of VRAM just to get to the title screen.

Consoles are the base line, so I would expect a budget GPU to have at least as much memory as a Xbox Series S, and mid range GPU's to have 16 gigs, high range GPU's more. A £250 console which includes optical drive, nand drive, motherboard, CPU, GPU (APU) and VRAM, and case, and controller. Has more VRAM than a 4050 LOL.

So low end 8 gigs RTX 4050/4060
Mid to high range 16 gigs 4070/4070TI/4080
Enthusiast 24+ gigs 4090

 

[AusWolf]

Funny to say when the 4090 is the only GPU capable of consistent 4K60 in this game without RT
View attachment 293809View attachment 293810

Yes let block out superior options, so everyone can enjoy subpar visual/performance, that's only fair right?

If it's capable of 4K 60 without upscaling, then what the F are you crying about DLSS for?

 

[64K]

It's not that simple. Star Wars games, just like films and series, have been running on a steep downhill slope ever since Disney bought the rights. Many people have been disillusioned by the franchise, its bleak, pointless stories, faceless characters, bad writing, etc. Jedi: Fallen Order was the first Star Wars game in years that wasn't utter garbage. You can argue that it wasn't perfect, and I would agree, but it was a bright glimmer of hope that Star Wars isn't dead, yet. No wonder fans (myself included) want the sequel to succeed. In fact, I want it to succeed so much that I'm not gonna buy it until it's fixed. Star Wars or not, it's still a game, and I'm certainly not gonna enable EA in their lazy approach. The game deserves better.

Star Wars games won't die because a lot of gamers won't let it happen. They will keep buying them anyway.

I'm not arguing that the game isn't perfect. I'm arguing that it's a damn turd in it's present state and I'm sticking to my guns on this for now.

 

[AusWolf]

Star Wars games won't die because a lot of gamers won't let it happen. They will keep buying them anyway.

I don't think so. The Star Wars brand isn't profitable in its present state.

I'm not arguing that the game isn't perfect. I'm arguing that it's a damn turd in it's present state and I'm sticking to my guns on this for now.

Are you saying that because of the game as a whole, or because of its performance issues?

 

[64K]

Are you saying that because of the game as a whole, or because of its performance issues?

Performance issues. I'm not going to bother with looking at the game quality until the performance issues get addressed. There's no point in bothering if the game doesn't get patched properly imo.

 

[AusWolf]

Performance issues. I'm not going to bother with looking at the game quality until the performance issues get addressed. There's no point in bothering if the game doesn't get patched properly imo.

Then you can't say that "the game" is trash. It will most definitely get patched.

 

[Bomby569]

1. if you tested the game on all those cards, why not get vram usage on the different cards and not just on the 4090? it isn't the same to test 1080p on a 24GB card and a 8GB card. It becomes very misleading, especially now.

2. Why test everything at max settings? Like i said before most people are using lower end cards, just look at steam reviews. There is countless more people playing this game in a gtx 1060 then a rtx 4090, especially at 1080p. It becomes absolutely irrelevant for a game review to test the game at 1080p in a 4090.
I get you do this on a gpu review, but this is a game review. No one games at max settings.

3. There are countless cards that don't even feature on the review and would be much more relevant then the ones featured. Is this to make people upgrade? to make the high end gpu's look good?

 

[Keivz]

If it's capable of 4K 60 without upscaling, then what the F are you crying about DLSS for?

With a 4090 it is… only. Not everyone has a 4090. A decent upscaling solution would be welcomed. On top of that, dlss can look better than native sometimes and the TAA in this game is lacking so this could be one of those instances. It will at least look comparable but with better performance (once the cpu issues are ironed out). I know it’ll never happen though (out side of a mod) because F AMD.

 

[AusWolf]

With a 4090 it is… only. Not everyone has a 4090. A decent upscaling solution would be welcomed. On top of that, dlss can look better than native sometimes and the TAA in this game is lacking so this could be one of those instances. It will at least look comparable but with better performance (once the cpu issues are ironed out). I know it’ll never happen though (out side of a mod) because F AMD.

If a game gets released with only DLSS (that runs only on Nvidia hardware), it's a lovely new technology being included by the nice developers out of the kindness of their hearts. No one cares about AMD anyway.
If a game gets released with only FSR (that runs on everything), then F AMD, they're limiting our choices!

Can't you see the bias? Do you really think that AMD instructed the developers not to work together with Nvidia on a DLSS implementation? I'm smelling some far-fetched conspiracy theory here.

 

[Keivz]

If a game gets released with only DLSS (that runs only on Nvidia hardware), it's a lovely new technology being included by the nice developers out of the kindness of their hearts. No one cares about AMD anyway.
If a game gets released with only FSR (that runs on everything), then F AMD, they're limiting our choices!

Can't you see the bias? Do you really think that AMD instructed the developers not to work together with Nvidia on a DLSS implementation? I'm smelling some far-fetched conspiracy theory here.

Seriously, when is the last time that happened? Fsr 2 hasn’t been around as long as I think you think it has (it’s been less than a year!). Correct me if I’m wrong but that just doesn’t happen anymore—if ever. I’d consider it equally unfair and perhaps more so if fsr was excluded from a game that had dlss. Both things can be wrong.

 

[basco]

no one games at max settings
this made me rofl

 

[john_]

So much hate for the FSR support that works on all cards.
I guess a DLSS only game where DLSS only works on RTX cards will be OK, because, yeah, DLSS is great, so the rest of you just go and buy an RTX card.

 

[AusWolf]

Seriously, when is the last time that happened? Fsr 2 hasn’t been around as long as I think you think it has (it’s been less than a year!). Correct me if I’m wrong but that just doesn’t happen anymore—if ever. I’d consider it equally unfair and perhaps more so if fsr was excluded from a game that had dlss. Both things can be wrong.

My point stands: FRS runs on everything and the game supports it. There can be various reasons why the developer decided to work with an open source platform and not with a proprietary Nvidia one (licensing fees, maybe). If you don't like it, don't turn it on. There are various other ways to tweak game performance to suit your hardware. You can't expect every single game developer to be knee deep up Nvidia's back side begging them for their DLSS goodness. If Nvidia made DLSS open source, that would be a different story.

I can say the game is a mess because it is a mess. There is no guarantee that the game will get properly patched either. Not every game does get completely patched.

The game? Including its story, gameplay, etc? You're writing it down just because it currently has issues on current hardware. If this was a fair assumption, then we could say that Crysis is a bad game.

 

[Gucky]

With a 60FPS Cap (via NV Settings) and with RT maxed in 4k and FSR2 Q, my 4090 only uses 140-170W of power. Which is strangely low...
I use the FPS Cap, since I have a 5800X3D and FPS are limited by it not far above 60FPS.

I also have constantly DXGI Hung crashes on the third Planet Jedah, making it literally unplayable.

 

[64K]

The game? Including its story, gameplay, etc? You're writing it down just because it currently has issues on current hardware. If this was a fair assumption, then we could say that Crysis is a bad game.

I'm putting it down because EA decided to push this turd out the door before it was finished and has the gall to ask $70 for it. I'm fed up with Publishers doing this. Even if the game does get completely patched most gamers will already have spent their money and played the game and moved on to something else before the game does get properly patched. The game reviewer sites that are credible are also pointing out that the game is really bad because of performance issues on release. Here is a quote from W1zzard at the end of the Conclusion Page on the review here:

"We're now paying $70 to beta-test an unpolished turd that they call an AAA game—not the first time this year."

This is an example of why I trust W1zzard's reviews.

 

[john_]

I also have constantly DXGI Hung crashes on the third Planet Jedah, making it literally unplayable.

How is this possible? Because based on the review

While gaming on NVIDIA was crash-free, I've encountered several display driver crashes on AMD

 

[AusWolf]

I'm putting it down because EA decided to push this turd out the door before it was finished and has the gall to ask $70 for it. I'm fed up with Publishers doing this.

I completely agree with this, and I'm not buying the game for full price - just like I'm not buying any AAA game for full price these days. I'm not only sick of games being released in basically beta state. I'm also sick of games being released for such enormous prices, even if they're okay otherwise. $70 was the price of an entry-level GPU or CPU not so long ago.

Even if the game does get completely patched most gamers will already have spent their money and played the game and moved on to something else before the game does get properly patched.

That's on them. If spending 70 bucks for a beta is not a problem for someone, be my guest. If "gamers" put up with such behaviour, then who am I to complain? All I can do is not buy the game.

The game reviewer sites that are credible are also pointing out that the game is really bad because of performance issues on release.

I still wouldn't say that "the game" is bad just yet. It very well might be a good game that has performance issues and a price that makes it not worth buying at the moment.

 

[64K]

I completely agree with this, and I'm not buying the game for full price - just like I'm not buying any AAA game for full price these days. I'm not only sick of games being released in basically beta state. I'm also sick of games being released for such enormous prices, even if they're okay otherwise. $70 was the price of an entry-level GPU or CPU not so long ago.


That's on them. If spending 70 bucks for a beta is not a problem for someone, be my guest. If "gamers" put up with such behaviour, then who am I to complain? All I can do is not buy the game.


I still wouldn't say that "the game" is bad just yet. It very well might be a good game that has performance issues and a price that makes it not worth buying at the moment.

All of this doesn't affect me. I'm not going to buy the game until it is properly patched and polished (if it ever is) and available for $20 on a big Steam Sale but it does affect a lot of gamers right now and I suspect it will continue to do so for months. I see PC gaming as a hobby and fellow PC gamers as part of our hobby and I have no qualms in standing up for them when they are obviously getting screwed by asshole Publishers like EA

 

[AusWolf]

All of this doesn't affect me. I'm not going to buy the game until it is properly patched and polished (if it ever is) and available for $20 on a big Steam Sale but it does affect a lot of gamers right now and I suspect it will continue to do so for months. I see PC gaming as a hobby and fellow PC gamers as part of our hobby and I have no qualms in standing up for them when they are obviously getting screwed by asshole Publishers like EA

I agree. Luckily, for those suckers gamers who buy games on or before day one, refund plans exist.

 

[Redwoodz]

I'm putting it down because EA decided to push this turd out the door before it was finished and has the gall to ask $70 for it. I'm fed up with Publishers doing this. Even if the game does get completely patched most gamers will already have spent their money and played the game and moved on to something else before the game does get properly patched. The game reviewer sites that are credible are also pointing out that the game is really bad because of performance issues on release. Here is a quote from W1zzard at the end of the Conclusion Page on the review here:

"We're now paying $70 to beta-test an unpolished turd that they call an AAA game—not the first time this year."

This is an example of why I trust W1zzard's reviews.

Just wondering, how many test sytems would you need to configure to test every cpu/gpu/OS/driver combination that every user might have to do this "proper" development? You think it's easy?

Let's get real. The only people crying over this game release are Jensen's sheep, it's really plain as day.

 

[64K]

I agree. Luckily, for those suckers gamers who buy games on or before day one, refund plans exist.

Those refund plans are underutilized from what I've seen. Using Cyberpunk 2077 as an example which was also a mess on launch got 8 million pre-orders but CDPR reported in it's Financial Statement that only 30,000 of those requested a refund. That's 1 out of 267 requests for a refund.

 

[Keivz]

My point stands: FRS runs on everything and the game supports it. There can be various reasons why the developer decided to work with an open source platform and not with a proprietary Nvidia one (licensing fees, maybe). If you don't like it, don't turn it on. There are various other ways to tweak game performance to suit your hardware. You can't expect every single game developer to be knee deep up Nvidia's back side begging them for their DLSS goodness. If Nvidia made DLSS open source, that would be a different story.

Haha, your point that I was responding to was that people were biased against amd because nvidia does the same thing—which, as I pointed out, isn’t true.

And dlss has been free for developers to use since 2021. Why a developer wouldn’t include it in an unreal engine 4 title that has fsr 2 would only be truly known to the developers. But anyone who doesn’t think amd is restricting the use of a superior upscaling tech in their sponsored games has blinders on and/or has trouble recognizing patterns. So yeah, my point stands: F amd.

 

[dyonoctis]

FSR is the right answer. DLSS does, when it's given extra special attention and tuning from both Nvidia and the developers, sometimes look a lot better than FSR. But it only runs on some of one brand of GPU and it looks as bad (or worse) than FSR in a few scenarios so while it's a better solution when showcased and cherry-picked, it's often not great; All upscaling is a garbage crutch to hide the fact that RT is too demanding for the resolutions gamers expect, and if a developer has to put upscaling tech into their game I'd rather it be a platform-agnostic scaler that doesn't further divide the PC gaming market.


This is the way.

So much hate for the FSR support that works on all cards.
I guess a DLSS only game where DLSS only works on RTX cards will be OK, because, yeah, DLSS is great, so the rest of you just go and buy an RTX card.

My point stands: FRS runs on everything and the game supports it. There can be various reasons why the developer decided to work with an open source platform and not with a proprietary Nvidia one (licensing fees, maybe). If you don't like it, don't turn it on. There are various other ways to tweak game performance to suit your hardware. You can't expect every single game developer to be knee deep up Nvidia's back side begging them for their DLSS goodness. If Nvidia made DLSS open source, that would be a different story.


The game? Including its story, gameplay, etc? You're writing it down just because it currently has issues on current hardware. If this was a fair assumption, then we could say that Crysis is a bad game.

If you are going to implement only one upscaling on the premise that it can work for everyone, then you have at least the opportunity to focus on it so it could be well implemented. Wich isn't the case here, where it not only looks bad, but also have trouble to give you more performance reliably. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, an acquaintance with all AMD system (7600+ RX7900xt + 6000Cl30) had no increase from using it.
That kind of janky implementation doesn't help anyone. It doesn't bring mindshare about the technical qualities of FSR, and it doesn't help the players. You want people to forget about DLSS ? then make sure that your product either equal it, or beat it every time. An AMD partnered game should be the best showing of the tech, not one of its worse representation.