Star Wars Battlefront Notebook Benchmarks

Eye candy. Casualization or not: “Star Wars Battlefront” is a real highlight in terms of graphics, which makes most competitors look rather outdated. Find out if you can also enjoy the game on notebooks.

Florian Glaser, ✓ Stefanie Voigt (translated by Andreas Osthoff), Published 11/24/2015 🇩🇪 🇵🇱

For the original German article, see here.

Graphics

Similar to the shooter siblings “Battlefield 4” and “Battlefield Hardline”, developer DICE once again uses the Frostbite 3 engine, which has been constantly optimized and improved with new features over the last few years. It does not matter if you look at textures, lighting or effects (water, particles,...): “Star Wars Battlefront” leaves a great impression in almost every aspect. Other strengths of the Frostbite 3 engine are the huge level architectures; hardly any other game offers such large areas. This will often result in annoying walking distances, but the visibility is still more than impressive from a technical point of view.

Now one might think that the quantity affects the quality, but it is actually quite the reverse: There are an extreme number of objects, especially on the forest planet Endor with its bushes, branches and small plants. The other planets look very atmospheric as well - despite desert, mountain and ice environments.

Great: Thanks to the proven technology, “Battlefront” is surprisingly free of bugs. Except for some textures and objects that pop up and the mediocre AI, which can sometimes be annoying, we did not encounter any serious issues during our tests. DICE has created a good overall package, which assists the player with clever tutorials, simple menus and intuitive controls.

The developers also deserve credit for the comprehensive graphics settings. Even though the handling of the corresponding menu is not as comfortable as the “Battlefield” counterpart (much more scrolling), most users will be satisfied. As well as various individual settings, you will find four handy presets under the item "Graphics Quality", which can adjust the graphics in multiple steps. There are also toggles for the depth of view, the intensity of the motion blur and the resolution scale (we always leave the latter at standard).

You can also change the general resolution, the picture mode as well as the refresh rate. If you hate line adjustments, you should definitely activate V-Sync. Without V-Sync, the performance will be capped at 200 fps. The anti-aliasing of ‘Battlefront” deserves some criticism. Unlike “Battlefield 4” and “Hardline”, the game does not support high-quality MSAA, but only the post processing versions FXAA and TAA; at least they do not affect the performance as much.

Nevertheless, “Battlefront” looks pretty good with the medium settings. We could not determine many differences between the High and Ultra preset, which is confirmed by the similar performance. “Battlefront” accepts all changes without a restart, so users of older notebooks can comfortably play with all the settings and enjoy the great soundtrack in the process. Because of the reasonable loading times (at least with SSDs) and skippable videos, the waiting times are pretty short. Around 27 GB is also acceptable for a game from 2015.

Benchmark

As far as we can tell, the forest planet is the most challenging for the hardware. As you can see in the video below, our benchmark takes place in the single-player mission "Hero Battle on Endor", which can also be played with another player (optional). Playing as Darth Vader, you can run, jump and use your “lightsaber” for around 40 seconds on a pre-defined path. Thanks to the mixture of indoor and outdoor environments, we can ensure some fps variations.

Based on our experiences, the benchmark sequence roughly represents the performance of a typical multi-player battle, although there can be differences depending on the level, the GPU and the settings. In any case, an average of 35 fps should be an indicator of a decent gameplay experience.

▶ load Youtube video

Results

If your notebook uses an Intel HD Graphics GPU, then “Battlefront” will not run completely smooth in any setting. The HD 4600, for example, manages only 30 fps at 1024x768 and the "Low" preset. It requires at least a GeForce GT 740M or Intel Iris Graphics, respectively, for a smooth run of the benchmark sequence. 1366x768 pixels and medium details requires at least a GeForce GT 750M, while 1920x1080 pixels and the "High" preset are reserved for powerful gaming chips like the GeForce GTX 960M. Maximum graphic details are possible with a GeForce GTX 870M or faster.

We noticed incorrect light reflections with the Intel Iris Graphics 6100 with medium settings and higher.

Notebook users have to be careful with resolutions higher than 1920x1080. Even the old top model GeForce GTX 980M is not powerful enough for the combination of the "High" preset and 4K (3840x2160). This would require a GTX 980 (we checked the desktop-counterpart) or an SLI combination consisting of two GTX 980M cards. However, the hardware requirements are justified when you consider the great graphics quality.

Like many other games, the processor does not play an important role. As long as the CPU is not very old or from the low-end segment, higher settings will always be limited by the GPU. By the way, graphics cards from AMD perform better than expected against their Nvidia counterparts (see R9 290X vs. GTX 980 @4K).

Star Wars Battlefront
3840x2160 High Preset AA:FX 1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:FX 1920x1080 High Preset AA:FX 1366x768 Medium Preset AA:FX 1024x768 Low Preset
AMD Radeon R9 Fury, 4790K XFX Radeon R9 Fury Pro	50 (43^min) fps ∼38% 119 (100^min) fps ∼60% 129 (85^min) fps ∼65% 150 (91^min) fps ∼75% 166 (103^min) fps ∼81%
AMD Radeon R9 290X, 4790K Sapphire Radeon R9 290X Tri-X OC	43.4 (36^min) fps ∼33% 104 (92^min) fps ∼53% 118 (94^min) fps ∼59% 159 (112^min) fps ∼79% 186 (160^min) fps ∼91%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980, 6700K Desktop PC	40.4 (35^min) fps ∼31% 104.1 (89^min) fps ∼53% 119.2 (104^min) fps ∼60% 199.9 (197^min) fps ∼99% 200 (199^min) fps ∼98%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 4700MQ Schenker W504	27.9 (23^min) fps ∼21% 73.1 (61^min) fps ∼37% 88.3 (71^min) fps ∼44% 145.2 (123^min) fps ∼72% 169.7 (140^min) fps ∼83%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 4700MQ Schenker W504	21.9 (18^min) fps ∼17% 59 (50^min) fps ∼30% 70.8 (61^min) fps ∼35% 136.8 (116^min) fps ∼68% 168.1 (136^min) fps ∼82%
AMD Radeon R7 370, 4790K MSI Gaming R7 370 2GB	19.4 (16^min) fps ∼15% 52 (43^min) fps ∼26% 61 (54^min) fps ∼31% 125 (98^min) fps ∼62% 172 (124^min) fps ∼84%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950, 6700K Desktop PC	17.7 (14^min) fps ∼13% 52 (46^min) fps ∼26% 60.8 (52^min) fps ∼30% 127.4 (104^min) fps ∼63% 197.8 (169^min) fps ∼97%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M, 4700MQ Schenker W504	17.5 (14^min) fps ∼13% 48.7 (38^min) fps ∼25% 55.9 (45^min) fps ∼28% 111.5 (90^min) fps ∼55% 161 (116^min) fps ∼79%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M, 4700MQ Schenker W504	14.2 (12^min) fps ∼11% 40.8 (33^min) fps ∼21% 45.9 (36^min) fps ∼23% 95.4 (76^min) fps ∼47% 149 (108^min) fps ∼73%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 4720HQ Schenker XMG A505	11.6 (9^min) fps ∼9% 34.4 (28^min) fps ∼17% 40.9 (33^min) fps ∼20% 90.2 (76^min) fps ∼45% 151.3 (113^min) fps ∼74%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M, 4700MQ Schenker W504	8.4 (6^min) fps ∼6% 29.8 (26^min) fps ∼15% 31.4 (26^min) fps ∼16% 67.8 (53^min) fps ∼34% 115.7 (84^min) fps ∼57%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M, 4340M Schenker M504	8.3 (6^min) fps ∼6% 24.6 (21^min) fps ∼12% 28.7 (24^min) fps ∼14% 63.8 (49^min) fps ∼32% 103.4 (65^min) fps ∼51%
AMD Radeon R9 M280X, FX-7600P Asus N551ZU-CN007H	19.7 (8^min) fps ∼10% 22 (10^min) fps ∼11% 30 (16^min) fps ∼15% 54.4 (30^min) fps ∼27%
NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M, 4702MQ Schenker M503	13.3 (11^min) fps ∼7% 15.5 (12^min) fps ∼8% 33.6 (27^min) fps ∼17% 55.7 (42^min) fps ∼27%
Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200, 4750HQ SCHENKER S413	13.2 (11^min) fps ∼7% 28.4 (23^min) fps ∼14% 51 (41^min) fps ∼25%
NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M, 4200M HP Envy 15-j011sg	9.4 (8^min) fps ∼5% 11 (9^min) fps ∼6% 23.8 (19^min) fps ∼12% 40.1 (30^min) fps ∼20%
AMD Radeon R7 (Kaveri), FX-7600P Asus N551ZU-CN007H	18 (5^min) fps ∼9% 29.5 (5^min) fps ∼14%
NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M, 4200M MSI CX61-i572M	7.2 (0^min) fps ∼4% 15.2 (0^min) fps ∼8% 25.1 (0^min) fps ∼12%
Intel HD Graphics 4600, 4700MQ Schenker W504	7.9 (6^min) fps ∼4% 16.8 (14^min) fps ∼8% 30.8 (24^min) fps ∼15%

Test Systems

Four of our test models are provided by Schenker Technologies (mysn.de):

W504 (Core i7-4700MQ, 8 GB DDR3, GeForce GTX 860M, GTX 870M, GTX 880M, GTX 970M, GTX 980M)
A505 (Core i7-4720HQ, 8 GB DDR3, GeForce GTX 960M)
M504 (Core i5-4340M, 8 GB DDR3, GeForce GTX 850M)
M503 (Core i7-4702MQ, 8 GB DDR3, GeForce GT 750M)

Three notebooks are provided by Nvidia:

HP Envy 15-j011sg (Core i5-4200M, 12 GB DDR3, GeForce GT 740M)
MSI CX61-i572M281BW7 (Core i5-4200M, 8 GB DDR3, GeForce GT 720M)
Acer Aspire Timeline Ultra M3-581TG (Core i7-2637M, 4 GB DDR3, GeForce GT 640M)

In addition, Intel provided one notebook:

Schenker S413 (Core i7-4750HQ, 8 GB DDR3, Iris Pro Graphics 5200)

The desktop PCs are equipped with CPUs/APUs from Intel and AMD, SSDs from Micron, OCZ, Intel and Samsung, motherboards from Intel and Asus as well as graphics cards from Nvidia, PNY and AMD. We use the monitor Asus PB287Q for our 4K tests.

We used the following GPU drivers: Nvidia 359.00, AMD 15.11.1 Beta, Intel 20.19.15.4300 (Win 10) and Intel 10.18.14.4294 (Win 7), respectively.

Overview

Loading Comments

Comment on this article

Editor of the original article: Florian Glaser - Managing Editor Gaming Laptops - 635 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2009

I discovered my interest in computers in my childhood, growing up with MS-DOS and Windows 3.1 in the early 1990s. I was especially fascinated with computer games, even from an early age. From Monkey Island through Lands of Lore to Doom, I tried every game I could get my hands on. I have been working for Notebookcheck since 2009 with my focus mostly being on high-performance gaming laptops.

Translator: Andreas Osthoff - Managing Editor Business Laptops - 1702 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2013

I grew up with modern consumer electronics and my first computer was a Commodore C64, which encouraged my interest in building my own systems. I started working as a review editor for Notebookcheck during my dual studies at Siemens. Currently, I am mainly responsible for dealing with business laptops and mobile workstations. It’s a great experience to be able to review the latest devices and technologies and then compare them with each other.

contact me via: LinkedIn

Please share our article, every link counts!

> Expert Reviews and News on Laptops, Smartphones and Tech Innovations > Reviews > Archive of our own reviews > Star Wars Battlefront Notebook Benchmarks

Florian Glaser, 2015-11-24 (Update: 2024-11- 4)

Pos	Model	< Prev Next > Star Wars Battlefront (2015)
Pos	Model	low 1024x768 Low Preset	med. 1366x768 Medium Preset FXAA	high 1920x1080 High Preset FXAA	ultra 1920x1080 Ultra Preset FXAA	4K 3840x2160 High Preset FXAA
77	NVIDIA Titan X Pascal	169.6	165.4	162.9	158.6	88.6
95	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Desktop)	200	200	192	171	67
117	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile			183	164	66.2
136	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Desktop)				143ⁿ²	54.85ⁿ²
139	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q			164	144	55.6
141	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile			140ⁿ³	123.8ⁿ³	48.75ⁿ²
162	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti				134	53
164	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q			136	121	44.7
170	AMD Radeon R9 Fury	166	150	129	119	50
171	AMD Radeon R9 Nano				117	48.8
172	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980	200	199.9	119.2	104.1	40.4
184	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop)	200ⁿ²	199.3ⁿ²	121.1ⁿ²	103ⁿ²	40.15ⁿ²
186	AMD Radeon R9 390X	161.2	140.8	117.3	104	42.5
188	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Desktop)	200	200	120	102	37.9
192	AMD Radeon RX 480 (Desktop)				100	38.5
193	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Mobile			102	82.45ⁿ²	33.4
202	AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop)	191	183	112	93.1	35.4
218	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970		188.9	111.45ⁿ²	95.85ⁿ²	34.7
219	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q		188	93	80.9	29.3
Pos	Model	< Prev Next >Star Wars Battlefront
Pos	Model	low	med.	high	ultra	4K
242	AMD Radeon R9 290X	186	159	118	104	43.4
249	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M	182.4ⁿ²	159.5ⁿ³	88.3ⁿ³	75.2ⁿ³	28.05ⁿ²
258	AMD Radeon R9 280X	195	168	92	76	32.4
259	AMD Radeon R9 380	130.6	124.6	68.5	61.3	24.5
260	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960	196.9	144.9	70.1	60.8	21.2
262	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile			72.4	62.7	22.4
263	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)				61	21.6
268	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M	168.1ⁿ³	139.35ⁿ⁴	70.45ⁿ⁴	59.6ⁿ⁴	20.45ⁿ²
272	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680	164	143.9	71.3	61.4	21.9
285	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile	138	124.1	60.2	52.7
288	AMD Radeon R7 370	172	125	61	52	19.4
290	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M	161	111.5	55.9	48.7	17.5
294	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950	197.8	127.4	60.8	52	17.7
306	AMD Radeon RX 460 (Desktop)			57.8	48.6	17.8
309	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M	170.2ⁿ³	116.8ⁿ³	55.9ⁿ³	47.3ⁿ³	15.95ⁿ²
313	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M	149	95.4	45.9	40.8	14.2
315	AMD Radeon HD 8970M	87.2	71	55.8	48.2
324	AMD Radeon R9 M390	161	107	54	45.4	14.9
334	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M	104.8ⁿ³	79.05ⁿ⁴	37.9ⁿ⁵	33.35ⁿ⁴	11.7ⁿ²
352	NVIDIA GeForce MX150	86.4ⁿ²	58ⁿ²	26.9ⁿ²	23.45ⁿ²
Pos	Model	< Prev Next >Star Wars Battlefront
Pos	Model	low	med.	high	ultra	4K
365	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M	115.7	67.8	31.4	29.8	8.4
373	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M	101.2ⁿ³	59.8ⁿ³	26.8ⁿ³	23.3ⁿ³
379	AMD Radeon R9 M385X	34.6	31.4	20.9
381	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M	103.4	63.8	28.7	24.6	8.3
385	AMD Radeon R9 M280X	54.4	30	22	19.7
473	NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M	55.7	33.6	15.5	13.3
476	NVIDIA GeForce 940MX	54.1ⁿ⁵	32.4ⁿ⁵	16ⁿ⁴	13.2ⁿ³
481	NVIDIA GeForce 940M	49.7ⁿ²	30.1ⁿ²	13.4	11.7
483	NVIDIA GeForce 930MX	54	32.5	14.8	12.5
500	AMD Radeon R7 M370	52.1	32.8	16	13.5
519	Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200	51	28.4	13.2
528	NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M	40.1	23.8	11	9.4
530	NVIDIA GeForce 930M	46.2	28.5	12.8	11.2
531	Intel Iris Graphics 550	52.6	29.9
539	Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640	44.7	26.2	12.9
540	NVIDIA GeForce 920MX	42.6	25.5	11.3
541	Intel Iris Graphics 540	40.2	22.9
577*	AMD Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge)	22.9	21.2	10.5
579	AMD Radeon R7 (Carrizo)	21.3	16.3	8.8	8
580	AMD Radeon R7 (Kaveri)	29.5	18
Pos	Model	< Prev Next >Star Wars Battlefront
Pos	Model	low	med.	high	ultra	4K
582*	AMD Radeon R7 M460	35.85ⁿ²	23.7ⁿ²	11ⁿ²	9.1
585	AMD Radeon R7 M360	23.5ⁿ³	21.8ⁿ³	9.9ⁿ³	8.65ⁿ²
587	NVIDIA GeForce 920M	34.7	21	9.6	8.6
592	AMD Radeon R7 M440	25.6	18.6	9.1
599	AMD Radeon R7 M340	23.7	16.1	8.7	5.3
611	Intel HD Graphics 630	34.3	19.5
617	AMD Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge)	22.9	12.7	7.8
619	Intel HD Graphics 620	40.3	22.7	10.2
620	AMD Radeon R6 (Carrizo)	21.05ⁿ²	14.8ⁿ²	8.6	7.5
680	AMD Radeon HD 8650G	21.4
688	AMD Radeon R5 M335	33.7	20.6	9.3	6.1
689	AMD Radeon R5 M330	35.55ⁿ²	21.75ⁿ²	9.8	6.9
690	AMD Radeon R5 M430	36.3	22.2	10.1
691	AMD Radeon R5 M255	32.7	21.9	10.1
694	NVIDIA GeForce 910M	23.2	16.2	7.7	4.3
696	Intel HD Graphics 520	27.95ⁿ⁴	15.55ⁿ⁴
697	Intel Iris Graphics 6100	34.6	20.7	9.8
699	NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M	25.1	15.2	7.2
720	Intel HD Graphics 4600	26.15ⁿ²	14.7ⁿ²	7ⁿ²
755	Intel HD Graphics 615	19.8	11.5
Pos	Model	< Prev Next >Star Wars Battlefront
Pos	Model	low	med.	high	ultra	4K
797	Intel HD Graphics 515	18.7	10.4
800	Intel HD Graphics 4400	24.9	14.3
834	Intel HD Graphics 505	10.9	6.3
835	Intel HD Graphics 5300	13.8	7.4
850	AMD Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L)	18.2	11
855	Intel HD Graphics (Broadwell)	15.3	8.5
856	Intel HD Graphics 4200	19.2	11.5
966	Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail)	8.8	4.8

Legend
5	Stutters – This game is very likely to stutter and have poor frame rates. Based on all known benchmarks using the specified graphical settings, average frame rates are expected to fall below 25fps
	May Stutter – This graphics card has not been explicitly tested on this game. Based on interpolated information from surrounding graphics cards of similar performance levels, stutters and poor frame rates are expected.
30	Fluent – Based on all known benchmarks using the specified graphical settings, this game should run at or above 25fps
40	Fluent – Based on all known benchmarks using the specified graphical settings, this game should run at or above 35fps
60	Fluent – Based on all known benchmarks using the specified graphical settings, this game should run at or above 58fps
	May Run Fluently – This graphics card has not been explicitly tested on this game. Based on interpolated information from surrounding graphics cards of similar performance levels, fluent frame rates are expected.
?	Uncertain – This graphics card experienced unexpected performance issues during testing for this game. A slower card may be able to achieve better and more consistent frame rates than this particular GPU running the same benchmark scene.
	Uncertain – This graphics card has not been explicitly tested on this game and no reliable interpolation can be made based on the performances of surrounding cards of the same class or family.
The value in the fields displays the average frame rate of all values in the database. Move your cursor over the value to see individual results.