Apex Legends Performance Tested

AlphaAtlas

[H]ard|Gawd
Staff member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
1,713
For a game that wasn't even announced until the day it launched, Apex Legends is doing very well. As EA pointed out last week, the game has already breached 1 million concurrent players, though they didn't break down the split between PC and Consoles. Yesterday Digital Foundry put Respawn's newest title under their microscope, and analyzed the performance of the Source Engine game on the PC and the current generation consoles. Console performance in particular is hard to pin down, as the dynamic resolution system tends to keep the game locked around 60 FPS. But on the PC, they found that even the RTX 2080 TI can't sustain 60fps at 4K with max settings without dynamic resolution enabled, but still looks great with it turned on, while the relatively dimunitive Ryzen 3 2200G can still run the game at 60 FPS.

Check out the analysis here.

Establishing the upper and lower bounds for DRS is challenging, but taking PlayStation 4 Pro as an example, Titanfall 2 seemed to operate mostly in a 1080p to 1440p range. We think that the upper bounds is similar for Apex Legends, but resolution tends spend more time in the 1080p area and we've even seen the 'supercharged PS4' hit 900p too. Xbox One X follows the same principles but offers a step up, spending more time in 1296p territory, while also delivering extended draw distance. As expected, the base consoles take a further hit, to the point where we've even noted resolutions as low as 720p on the PlayStation 4 and 648p on Xbox One... Visually, Apex Legends is a triumph of smart art direction over technology. The enhanced Source Engine here does feel pushed to its limits bearing in mind its hardware requirements, but the geometric density of the world, the quality of the artwork (in particular materials) looks great.
 
My kids are playing this at 1920x1200 on X58 rigs with RX580's. One has a stock Core i7 920, the other is on a Xeon W3580 oc'd to like 3.8Ghz. 12GB of ram each. Looks to run great.(read: they ain't complainin'!)
 
Would it be possible for links from the forum version of the article to point to the original URL instead of the HardOCP news page?

We always link the source(s) in our news articles, and technically this is a discussion thread for the front page article.

Reading the front page article is also part of what keeps our site online.
 
I have a 2080 and playing on high 4k, I would stay between 50fps and 65fps which just wasn't good enough. However, putting on dynamic resolution and setting it to 70fps was actually pretty good. Very smooth framerate and in most cases tough to tell the resolution was even changing.
 
It’s nice to see the SourceEngine getting some love. Recently replayed HL2 and I think it holds up nicely even without mods. Textures aren’t great but oh well.
 
I am divided between being happy with the possible "fall" of Fortnite and being sad with EA having another blockbuster in their hands.

Technically speaking, I LOVE to see software that scales well from some meager specs to the highest end. At least the game is not being defined by the lowest common denominator (usually last-gen consoles), and even if not having the most optimal code, if you add more modern hardware you'll see improvements.
 
My system does not like playing it at 1440, I have to play at 1080p to keep the better textures and good frame rates.
 
TIL, Apex Legends was built using Source Engine.

Wow, I think the game looks and runs great, at least for me on at 1080p on a GTX 970. I'm really really surprised that it's Source Engine. Am I just clueless? Have the Titanfall games been Source Engine also?
 
TIL, Apex Legends was built using Source Engine.

Wow, I think the game looks and runs great, at least for me on at 1080p on a GTX 970. I'm really really surprised that it's Source Engine. Am I just clueless? Have the Titanfall games been Source Engine also?
Yup both Titanfall games were also based off the Source Engine.
 
Back
Top