Star Wars Jedi: Survivor is a demanding game on PC when maxed out thanks to its ray tracing implementations, somewhat poor optimization at launch (multiple patches have since resulted in much more stellar performance) and it is prone to consume massive amounts of video memory when it comes to the launch build. That being said, subsequent patches have reduced the severity of some of its problems even as most limitations are GPU-bound.

What CPU Specs Do I Need to Run Star Wars Jedi: Survivor?

Electronic Arts' specified minimum for a CPU to run Star Wars Jedi: Survivor is relatively low; The publisher recommends 4 cores and 8 threads as the minimum to play the game. It further goes on to specify the minimum recommended CPU as the Intel Core i7 7700k or the AMD Ryzen 5 1400 while suggesting the Intel Core i5 11600K and AMD Ryzen 5 5600X as recommended specifications.

While the minimum CPU requirements stated by EA are both 4-core, 8-thread CPUs, the recommended CPUs are 6-core, 12-thread offerings by Team Blue and Team Red. That being said, EA's own specifications seem to paint a relatively modest picture when it comes to hardware requirements, at least when it comes to CPU-bound performance restrictions.

What CPU Should I Get To Run Star Wars Jedi: Survivor?

While EA's own recommendations are somewhat modest compared to what we would normally suggest, we would break up our recommendations into 2 different tiers, all of which tend to focus on currently available CPU upgrades (Intel 12th & 13th generation and AMD's 5000 and 7000 series CPUs):

Our Minimum Recommended Specs:

• Intel Core i5-12400F

  $159 $206 Save $47

  The Intel Core i5-12400F 6-Core 12-Thread Processor is no slouch when it comes to delivering on performance, commanding a sweet spot in terms of capability and price point as it generally takes on and defeats AMD's offerings under $200 comprehensively.

  $159 at Amazon $157 at Newegg

• AMD Ryzen 5 5600X CPU

  $155 $310 Save $155

  The AMD Ryzen 5 5600X is a midrange CPU, excellent for gaming setups. This is the fastest six-core processor from AMD and features 12 processing threads. According to the company, the processor can deliver 100-plus FPS performance in the world's most popular games. The processor supports DDR4 RAM up to 3200 MHz. 
  
  Specs include 4.6 GHz max boost clock speed, overclocking capability, and 35 MB of cache. This model comes bundled with a quiet and capable AMD Wraith Stealth cooler. 

  $155 at Amazon $169 at Newegg

Given how modern CPUs have evolved, it is easy to find acceptable performance in most entry-level CPUs. Our picks for minimum performance do far exceed the minimum EA sets for the title but ensure you do not have to deal with CPU-bound issues down the line. Both offer decent single-core performance with Intel offering a slight edge when it comes to gaming performance on the Intel Core i5 12400F as both 6-core, 12-thread CPUs provide capable gaming performance at a price point of ~$150 with AMD offering a better price and Intel offering slightly better performance.

An argument could be made to consider the much cheaper (and to-spec) Intel Core i3 12100F or the slightly pricier 13100F but given that EA's own recommended specifications do push towards 6-core, 12-thread CPUs, we feel these are more rounded, and definitely more future-proof approach at a minimal cost to you as a gamer who will end up playing games beyond Star Wars Jedi: Survivor on your PC.

Our Recommended CPU Bottleneck-Free Specs:

• AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D

  The AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D is AMD's latest and greatest CPU when it comes to gaming. With an excellent and highly efficient gaming performance that tops the charts currently, the Ryzen 7 7800X3D is here to stay and has a crown to claim thanks to its 3D V-Cache-enabled prowess when it comes to gaming on a PC.

  $450 at Amazon $450 at Newegg

• Intel Core i7-13700K

  $350 $420 Save $70

  The Intel Core i7-13700K absolutely dominates the top-tier sector for value. In fact, with the right cooling and overclocking, this top-tier CPU can beat most of the non-X3D AMD competition. Plus, if you have a 600 series motherboard from your previous CPU, this will work - with a bios update in tow
  The processor has 16 cores divided into 8 P-cores and 8 E-cores, and 24 processing threads. The processor comes with an integrated Intel UHD Graphics 770, maximum clock speed is 5.2 GHz.

  $350 at Amazon $391 at Walmart $400 at Best Buy

AMD's 8-Core, 16-Thread Ryzen 7 7800X3D currently features the fastest gaming-centric offering on the market and Intel's 16-Core, 24-Thread i7 13700K doesn't disappoint either. Both of these CPUs can more than handle anything that any modern game, including Star Wars Jedi: Survivor can throw at them with ease.

Both should be able to handle the game at the highest possible resolutions and would not cause a bottleneck, even at the highest frame rates a GPU like the RTX 4090 would be capable of pushing, making them non-essential, but excellent upgrades if you plan to game in the future at a relatively high resolution or foresee yourself gaming in other, more CPU-intensive titles down the line.

Conclusion:

Based on what we see on most benchmarks as well as based on EA's guidance, Star Wars Jedi: Survivor is a much more demanding title when it comes to GPU use than CPU needs, and it might be worth checking out our list of the most popular graphics cards on offer this month to make an informed upgrade decision in that department.

FAQ:

Q: How Much Space Do I Need To Install Star Wars Jedi: Survivor On A PC?

A: Star Wars Jedi: Survivor requires 155GB of space for the game's files. The team at GameRant recommends a minimum of 200 GB of free space to allow for subsequent patches and potential DLC releases and highly encourages using an SSD for storing the game's install data.

Q: What Is The Best Platform To Play Star Wars Jedi: Survivor?

A: Currently the PS5 version offers the most stable gameplay followed by the Xbox Series S/X version. While obviously both are beaten by high-end PCs in terms of raw visual fidelity, the initial launch of the PC version was lacking in terms of optimization with many citing it to be a 'bad port', criticizing its launch build. Subsequent patches since have fixed most of these issues on PC, however.