Star Wars Outlaws Performance Benchmark

[AusWolf]

Sounds more like tedious than fun but I don't get into Stealth games very much. Not my thing.

Same here. I finished Assassin's Creed 1-3 because the story was mostly interesting enough, and because I could fight my way out of situations when my stealth skills weren't enough (or when I just couldn't give a damn to make an effort). I don't think I can say the same about this game.

 

[Corvette987]

What's your definition of fun?

Based on reviews I've watched, it's mostly a stealth game with instant game over upon detection, and with a crapton of random things that can trigger it. It doesn't suit my definition of fun, unfortunately.

I haven't played very much of the main story yet but this is sort of true? The story missions have seemed to open up slightly more with each one, like the first main mission after the intro area auto-fails if any of the enemies see you but the second larger mission they have to actually activate an alarm for the mission to be failed. If someone sees you then you can still kill or incapacitate them before they can set off an alarm (which are all physical objects in the world that you can disable or sabotage) and you won't fail the mission. You can also interrupt the enemies as they're activating the alarm and if you do so before they finish then the mission doesn't fail. There wasn't anything random that triggered the detection either, it's all based on what the NPCs can see and/or hear (this includes cameras and surveillance droids).

The optional missions I've done so far haven't had any restrictions like that and don't fail if you're detected but you do run the risk of damaging your reputation with factions if you're spotted.

 

[AusWolf]

I haven't played very much of the main story yet but this is sort of true? The story missions have seemed to open up slightly more with each one, like the first main mission after the intro area auto-fails if any of the enemies see you but the second larger mission they have to actually activate an alarm for the mission to be failed. If someone sees you then you can still kill or incapacitate them before they can set off an alarm (which are all physical objects in the world that you can disable or sabotage) and you won't fail the mission. You can also interrupt the enemies as they're activating the alarm and if you do so before they finish then the mission doesn't fail. There wasn't anything random that triggered the detection either, it's all based on what the NPCs can see and/or hear (this includes cameras and surveillance droids).

The optional missions I've done so far haven't had any restrictions like that and don't fail if you're detected but you do run the risk of damaging your reputation with factions if you're spotted.

That sounds just a touch better than the review I watched portrayed it, but still not my cup of tea. I don't like stealth, so I'd best limit my exposure to it to a minimum. I also don't get why an open world game limits you to one play style. Is it really "open" this way?

By the way, the review mentioned cameras that trigger an auto game over, and if an enemy sees you, the game doesn't give you any time to react, it's game over. There's explosive barrels, too, which seem to serve no function, just instant detection by the enemy, instant game over. I don't like it when a game doesn't let you correct your mistakes, like it was my daily job or something.

 

[AvrageGamr]

Is this game fun?

I would recommend waiting since the game is a bug fest currently. Me and other users have issues with textures not loading, and for Win11 pro 24h2 users it's a crash fest. I have the 23h2 version at least I don't get crashes.

 

[harm9963]

Hell blade 2 has set a standard, that will be hard to meet, what's amazing is no issues and no RT.

 

[Wasteland]

Hell blade 2 has set a standard, that will be hard to meet, what's amazing is no issues and no RT.

Eh, there are much better movies out there.

 

[Ryrynz]

Haha no. Even 8GB cards are doing well.

8GB is "doing well" if you keep your details low enough to stay well enough under 8GB allocation.
Go over that and you're going to have gameplay that stutters in areas.
There have been so many videos on this posted online it's not even funny.

 

[las]

8GB is "doing well" if you keep your details low enough to stay well enough under 8GB allocation.
Go over that and you're going to have gameplay that stutters in areas.
There have been so many videos on this posted online it's not even funny.

Wrong, any stutter would be seen in minimum fps testing and 3070 8GB has higher minimum fps even than Radeon 6800 16GB in Star Wars at 4K maxed out. Not that any of the cards can do it, yet VRAM is not the problem for 3070 here.

Besides, like in all games, DLSS beats FSR and upscaling matters alot in pretty much all new games at this point - It's replacing AA completely, because it has both AA and sharpening built in. Even in the AMD sponsored Starfield, FSR2 was default AA solution on launch and TAA was crap. Modded DLSS/DLAA beat FSR with ease in this game (TPU tested this, go read), which got real DLSS support soon after launch because 9 out of 10 players used Nvidia and wanted it, since FSR was meh.

Also take a look at 6700XT 12GB which loses to 3060 Ti 8GB.

Are you refering to those AMD sponsored rushed console ports like TLOU and RE4 that was fixed long ago? Pointless to keep bringing them up, they have been fixed and they had memory leaks going on. They ran bad even on AMD hardware. Thats a rushed port for you.

Reality is that most new PC games just run better on Nvidia cards. How do I know? Because I had 6800XT before my 4090 and it was a very mixed experience, with high hotspot temps but AMD says 110C hot spot temps are "within expected range" haha

 

[Ryrynz]

Wrong, any stutter would be seen in minimum fps testing and 3070 8GB has higher minimum fps even than Radeon 6800 16GB in Star Wars at 4K maxed out. Not that any of the cards can do it, yet VRAM is not the problem for 3070 here.

Besides, like in all games, DLSS beats FSR and upscaling matters alot in pretty much all new games at this point - It's replacing AA completely, because it has both AA and sharpening built in. Even in the AMD sponsored Starfield, FSR2 was default AA solution on launch and TAA was crap. Modded DLSS/DLAA beat FSR with ease in this game (TPU tested this, go read), which got real DLSS support soon after launch because 9 out of 10 players used Nvidia and wanted it, since FSR was meh.

Also take a look at 6700XT 12GB which loses to 3060 Ti 8GB.

Are you refering to those AMD sponsored rushed console ports like TLOU and RE4 that was fixed long ago? Pointless to keep bringing them up, they have been fixed and they had memory leaks going on. They ran bad even on AMD hardware. Thats a rushed port for you.

Reality is that most new PC games just run better on Nvidia cards. How do I know? Because I had 6800XT before my 4090 and it was a very mixed experience, with high hotspot temps but AMD says 110C hot spot temps are "within expected range" haha

It's not "wrong"

While the RTX 3070 performs better than the Radeon 6800 in Star Wars Outlaws at 4K, this doesn't invalidate what I said about VRAM limitations. The RTX 3070’s 8GB of VRAM may be sufficient for certain games and scenarios, but as games demand more VRAM especially at higher resolutions and settings, the limitations of 8GB become increasingly apparent.

While the 3060 Ti may outperform the 6700 XT in this particular benchmark, this is an exception rather than the rule. Generally, the 6700 XT's 12GB of VRAM provides an advantage in many modern games.
The fact that the 6700 XT didn't win here is more about game-specific optimizations, architectural efficiency or driver optimization and less about the VRAM capacity itself.

 

[las]

It's not "wrong"

While the RTX 3070 performs better than the Radeon 6800 in Star Wars Outlaws at 4K, this doesn't invalidate what I said about VRAM limitations. The RTX 3070’s 8GB of VRAM may be sufficient for certain games and scenarios, but as games demand more VRAM especially at higher resolutions and settings, the limitations of 8GB become increasingly apparent.

While the 3060 Ti may outperform the 6700 XT in this particular benchmark, this is an exception rather than the rule. Generally, the 6700 XT's 12GB of VRAM provides an advantage in many modern games.
The fact that the 6700 XT didn't win here is more about game-specific optimizations, architectural efficiency or driver optimization and less about the VRAM capacity itself.

Who uses 3070 for high resolution gaming tho, maxing out AAA games in 2024? I'll take a wild guess: None.

Ah, so 6700XT 12GB beats 3070 8GB? Lets see.

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Super Founders Edition Review - Savings of $200

NVIDIA's new GeForce RTX 4080 Super introduces a noteworthy $200 price reduction compared to the non-Super 4080, placing significant pricing pressure on AMD's RX 7900 XTX. Despite this, the performance gains vs RTX 4080 non-Super are only marginal, we expected more.

www.techpowerup.com

3070 performs around 20% better than 6700XT in 4K/UHD when looking at minimum fps. In like 25 different and popular titles.
Also, DLSS is going to help massively for longevity, and DLSS beats FSR with ease.

 

[KLMR]

I must be getting blind. In the comparison screenshots in number 1 and 4 I would rather stay on LOW than RTX. Yes, the lightning/shadowing is better, but LOW doesn't look blur and the contrast is better.
There's also seem to be a tendency of "wet surfaces" in all games, maybe to justify RT reflections, a waste of resources.

What is wrong with ambient occlusion with a "next next next gen" game like this?
IMHO all what RT should be about is global illumination.

 

[Silkysmooth]

Not only that but apparently the 3060 Ti is beating the 6700 XT in both average and 1% lows regardless of the +4GB Vram on the 6700 XT.
This is yet another case where you will run out of raw performance than run into Vram issues anyway. 'I keep saying this that this is my experience with the latest games and my 3060 Ti that it simply runs out of performance and not the Vram in the latest games, by the time I run out of Vram I already have to lower the settings anyway AND use DLSS on top to keep things decently playable'

That is cope , this uses RT always you can't disable it and it's a nvidia sponsored title go see sony ports how well do the 8gb ampere cards do , spoiler alert no so well at the highest texture settings .

Haha no. Even 8GB cards are doing well.

Look at the 4K/UHD testing, minimum fps. RTX 3070 8GB beats RX 6800 16GB.

None of these cards are able to run the game at these settings but 3070 8GB has higher average and minimum fps, meaning 8GB is plenty.

Game developers are not stupid. Like 80-90% of PC gamers have 8GB or less.
Even XSX and PS5 have 16GB total RAM, shared between OS, system and graphics.

Pretty much no games need massive amounts of VRAM, unless you absolute max out the games with RT or Path Tracing and then most GPUs will buckle anyway. GPU power is a problem long before VRAM in 99.9% of games. Ray Tracing and Path Tracing will eat alot of VRAM but most GPUs with "low VRAM" won't be able to do RT/PT well anyway.

Wrong , textures at what eat Vram the most and they're basically the most important visual aspect of the game , and they have no performance cost if you have enough vram .

 

[Sithaer]

That is cope , this uses RT always you can't disable it and it's a nvidia sponsored title go see sony ports how well do the 8gb ampere cards do , spoiler alert no so well at the highest texture settings .


Wrong , textures at what eat Vram the most and they're basically the most important visual aspect of the game , and they have no performance cost if you have enough vram .

So you've registered just to post that? Thats cute but hey welcome to TPU!

I guess you've completely missed the point and did not read the further replies.
Both the 3060 Ti and the 6700 XT are like a 1080p cards nowadays and at that res the extra Vram wont save you since you will run out of raster performance anyway so both cards will struggle at about the same time and the only difference will be is that you can have higher Textures with the 6700 but at the end of the day both card will run the said game like crap so its time to upgrade probably.
This is also proven by the exclusive tests of the 8 and 16 GB 4060 Ti on this very site, sure there are some edge cases but in general the extra Vram hardly helps a card of that performance caliber for its intended resolution and when you go over that res the card itself will struggle so its a moot point.

I'm a daily user of a 3060 Ti since 2022 and I do play new games on a 2560x1080 Ultrawide monitor so I'm very well familiar with how thing are and in the latest and most demanding games its not my Vram thats limiting me but the raster performance of my card and if it wasn't for DLSS I would have a bad time.
Finished Hellblade 2 with maxed textures and ~rest on high and the Vram was a non issue and apparently its the same with Black Myth Wukong so ye UE 5 is crazy GPU heavy but not yet Vram heavy regardless if you run in with UE 5's Lumen,etc or RT on top, the card is simply too weak to really make use of more Vram with decent settings. 'Btw in both games the 3060 Ti is performing better than the 6700 XT and they both kinda need upscaling too'
The only new-ish game where I've had to drop textures from max to 1 notch lower was Forbidden West and even there its such a minimal difference that unless you lick walls and trees you will never notice the difference let alone during actual gameplay.

Also cope really? Sorry but such troll-ish 'reddit/twitter' terms are not exactly welcome here on TPU so keep that 'style' to yourself cause I have a hard time taking anyone serious with such 'slang'.

 

[Lew Zealand]

Tim at HUB has a video out today showing the problems with lower VRAM cards in SW Outlaws (early discussion in the SWO optimization guide), short summary is:

Even 12GB cards show more pop-in at close distances and missing textures than 16GB cards. The game manages this automatically, there's no Texture quality setting.

Dipping into the argument above: while the 6700 XT delivers lower fps than the 3070, it delivers a better picture. Same goes for the 3090 over the 4070 Ti. All due to VRAM buffer and how this game manages it.

 

[Sithaer]

Tim at HUB has a video out today showing the problems with lower VRAM cards in SW Outlaws (early discussion in the SWO optimization guide), short summary is:

Even 12GB cards show more pop-in at close distances and missing textures than 16GB cards. The game manages this automatically, there's no Texture quality setting.

Dipping into the argument above: while the 6700 XT delivers lower fps than the 3070, it delivers a better picture. Same goes for the 3090 over the 4070 Ti. All due to VRAM buffer and how this game manages it.

Whatched it and ye its another 300% zoom 25% slowed video just to barely notice anything.
During actual gameplay when you play the game yourself, good luck noticing any of that. 'same happened with the Avatar game btw since its the same engine'

Besides if the game fails all the same on a 12GB card according to HuB then yet again its no better than the 8GB card that delivers better performance isnt it?

 

[Lew Zealand]

Whatched it and ye its another 300% zoom 25% slowed video just to barely notice anything.
During actual gameplay when you play the game yourself, good luck noticing any of that. 'same happened with the Avatar game btw since its the same engine'

I don't mind lower textures here and there but pop-in calls attention to itself and breaks immersion. How much that matters to anyone is an individual experience.

Besides if the game fails all the same on a 12GB card according to HuB then yet again its no better than the 8GB card that delivers better performance isnt it?

Nobody claimed that 8GB and 12GB cards fail the same and it's likely that the problem happens more often and is more noticeable on 8GB cards. If you prefer higher FPS over fewer visual distractions then that's great but one isn't necessarily better than the other.

 

[Sithaer]

I don't mind lower textures here and there but pop-in calls attention to itself and breaks immersion. How much that matters to anyone is an individual experience.



Nobody claimed that 8GB and 12GB cards fail the same and it's likely that the problem happens more often and is more noticeable on 8GB cards. If you prefer higher FPS over fewer visual distractions then that's great but one isn't necessarily better than the other.

Exactly my point, both cards will fail and run short about the same time depending on your preferences, hence why I've mentioned the 'time to upgrade' part.
Both 8 and 12 GB card can be used and the performance is similar cause both cards are pushed to their limits anyway. Some new games don't care about Vram and some do, depends on what you play but the new UE 5 engine games are yet to be Vram hogs but crazy raster or RT heavy instead. 'Hellblade 2 and Wukong like mentioned before'
Btw the pop in is hardly noticeable and that actually used to happen in UE 3-4 on a common basis regardless of your specs, simply engine related stuff so for me who played tons of games using UE 3-4 its a non issue cause I'm more than used to it. 'Borderlands 1-3 for example had serious pop in texture loading issue by default with UE 3 and 4'

 

[AVATARAT]

Tim at HUB has a video out today showing the problems with lower VRAM cards in SW Outlaws (early discussion in the SWO optimization guide), short summary is:

Even 12GB cards show more pop-in at close distances and missing textures than 16GB cards. The game manages this automatically, there's no Texture quality setting.

Dipping into the argument above: while the 6700 XT delivers lower fps than the 3070, it delivers a better picture. Same goes for the 3090 over the 4070 Ti. All due to VRAM buffer and how this game manages it.

Is this with the missing textures from the game settings or just Nvidia "cheating" with the driver?

 

[Lew Zealand]

Is this with the missing textures from the game settings or just Nvidia "cheating" with the driver?

Hard to know the true answer for sure but:

game is happy to use 20GB VRAM or more
there is no Texture Detail setting
HUB tested a 3090 vs a 4070 Super

IMO it's very likely the game which is managing the VRAM and textures this way, and taking advantage of whatever the video card can supply.

 

[Sithaer]

Hard to know the true answer for sure but:

game is happy to use 20GB VRAM or more
there is no Texture Detail setting
HUB tested a 3090 vs a 4070 Super

IMO it's very likely the game which is managing the VRAM and textures this way, and taking advantage of whatever the video card can supply.

I've did some research about the same thing regarding the Avatar game using the same engine and I couldn't find any real proof that its actually loading in lower res close up textures that you see during gameplay.
Only difference was the distance pop in and I mean real distance that you would only notice while flying around and such. 'the same was mentioned in the TPU review btw'

I guess the only way to tell would be to own both type of a GPU and test with both and take pics but at point its kind of moot no? 'I mean if you have such a hard time telling then eh what does it matter..'

 

[AvrageGamr]

I've did some research about the same thing regarding the Avatar game using the same engine and I couldn't find any real proof that its actually loading in lower res close up textures that you see during gameplay.
Only difference was the distance pop in and I mean real distance that you would only notice while flying around and such. 'the same was mentioned in the TPU review btw'

I guess the only way to tell would be to own both type of a GPU and test with both and take pics but at point its kind of moot no? 'I mean if you have such a hard time telling then eh what does it matter..'

This game has texture-loading issues even on cards with more than 12 gigs of vram. Today's patch with vram improvements have not fixed it. I did not have this issue with Avatar.

 

[Sithaer]

This game has texture-loading issues even on cards with more than 12 gigs of vram. Today's patch with vram improvements have not fixed it. I did not have this issue with Avatar.

Thats a 4k image no?
Ofc game optimization always comes first but forcing a game to break is also not exactly a realistic scenario imo. 'since Avatar did not have it, most likely its an issue on their end'

 

[AvrageGamr]

Thats a 4k image no?
Ofc game optimization always comes first but forcing a game to break is also not exactly a realistic scenario imo. 'since Avatar did not have it, most likely its an issue on their end'

It's 4k and at less than recommended graphic settings. Even at 1440p I still have it though not as much. It is a game bug that's been well-reported. I even with users with more than 12 gigs of vram. Not everyone has this issue.

 

[Sithaer]

It's 4k and at less than recommended graphic settings. Even at 1440p I still have it though not as much. It is a game bug that's been well-reported. I even with users with more than 12 gigs of vram. Not everyone has this issue.

Reminds me when Horizon Zero Dawn was relased on Pc.
I've had a RX 570 4 GB at the time and I was seriously hyped for the game since I don't own a console so I have to wait for the PC port.
Anyway, turns out it was completely unplayable on my card due to its 4 GB Vram and yet it was totally fine on my bro's GTX 970 which is a 3.5.+0.5 GB Vram card.. 'makes sense huh? and ye AMD cards do use more VRAm but still'
Forspoken had the same issue btw along with Last of Us but both of those games were fixed more or less in regard of Vram usage and nowadays even 8GB cards can run those games just fine.

 

[Lew Zealand]

Reminds me when Horizon Zero Dawn was relased on Pc.
I've had a RX 570 4 GB at the time and I was seriously hyped for the game since I don't own a console so I have to wait for the PC port.
Anyway, turns out it was completely unplayable on my card due to its 4 GB Vram and yet it was totally fine on my bro's GTX 970 which is a 3.5.+0.5 GB Vram card.. 'makes sense huh? and ye AMD cards do use more VRAm but still'
Forspoken had the same issue btw along with Last of Us but both of those games were fixed more or less in regard of Vram usage and nowadays even 8GB cards can run those games just fine.

FWIW Hogwarts Legacy still has this same problem. Forspoken's VRAM hog issue resulting in low-rez textures didn't kill 1% lows so kudos there I guess? But TLOU's VRAM problems did before the fix and Hogwarts still does. Lowering textures fixes those framedrops nicely at least and really: the game doesn't look all that great so lowering textures is a non-issue and the occasional bugged low texture area is quickly ignored.