BF3 WITH 2500K 560Ti 8GB RAM @

[ALXAndy]

Thanks, hmmm, that doesn't justify a 448 at my current res.

Most of those min FPS problems are down to 1gb Vram, I guarantee it.

The 560TI by all rights is faster than a 6950 and by quite a ways too. The min FPS on the 1gb cards is way lower than that of the 2gb in the ultra settings on BF3. That is rather telling.

If you are going to get a TI it will have enough graphical grunt, just make sure you get 2gb Vram if you're into BF3 and you'll be fine

 

[[WU-TANG]GZA]

Most of those min FPS problems are down to 1gb Vram, I guarantee it.

The 560TI by all rights is faster than a 6950 and by quite a ways too. The min FPS on the 1gb cards is way lower than that of the 2gb in the ultra settings on BF3. That is rather telling.

If you are going to get a TI it will have enough graphical grunt, just make sure you get 2gb Vram if you're into BF3 and you'll be fine

It's more to do with the amount of MSAA that is being applied - that's what kills your FPS in BF3, not the textures or shadow details.

 

[ALXAndy]

It's more to do with the amount of MSAA that is being applied - that's what kills your FPS in BF3, not the textures or shadow details.

Yes, because more AA means more VRAM.

Each image needs to be smoothed out.

BF3's problems are not "grunt" related. I know that because my quad SLI setup whacks out over 32k P score in Vantage and my 6970L does 24k at best.

However, BF3 isn't even playable on the quad SLI setup. Not because of power, because the GPUs are scaling, but because 896mb Vram is not enough.

It's kinda like how the GTX 470 I had was pretty much on par with the 6970 I replaced it with. Yet if I ran BF3 on ultra on the 470 it would barely manage 30FPS sometimes, and dip to single figures.

Run it on the 6970? no problems. Smooth as butter

 

[Nexus18]

Look at the graphs above, the 560TI 448 edition performs better than a 6970 2GB, not just average FPS but also min FPS, yet it doesn't have 2GB of VRAM and therefore makes the whole debate about 1GB VS 2GB for 1080P is worthless as there are more important things to take into consideration.

Not too sure if you are talking about the normal 560TI with regards to it being better than the 6950 2GB, if you are talking about the normal 560TI, then that most certainly isn't the case, the 6950 1GB/2GB is better than a normal 560TI, the 560TI 448 edition is better than a 6950 2GB/6970 2GB and pretty much on par with the 570, but can beat a 570 when overclocked.

VRAM on a single GPU set up does not matter one bit when it comes to a res. of 1920x1200 or below (maybe on the less powerful cards like the 560TI 1GB etc. when everything is FULLY maxed out, but a card like the 560TI is not meant to run the game at those settings and at a res of 1080/1200, you need either a 570 or 580 or a dual GPU setup at 1080/1200).

Emmm, what?

A 6970 2GB on par with the 470?

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Prod...0.213.216.219.221.238.228.229.231.232.234.235

Again a single 470 is not meant to run BF 3 maxed out (maybe if it had more VRAM, it would have helped with min FPS when you have 4xAA set). The reason it is smoother than your 470 is not because of VRAM but due to the 6970 being a more powerful card in nearly every area and the 6970 is capable of running BF 3 pretty much maxed out at 1080P.

Also the reason it may have been terrible on your quad SLI setup is because drivers/game isn't optimized well enough, just like many other games out there that are crap on systems that have more than 2GPUs.

I have seen plenty of people with 6870 crossfire and 470 SLI that run BF 3 perfectly fine at 1080 all on ultra with AA set to 2.

EDIT:

And one last thing, benchmarks mean nothing when it comes to real world performance.

 

[joem1983]

I run a 6870 at 1080p. Most presets are medium. Get a decent fps. Graphics are way better than xbox so to me its fine!
I fancy crossfire but not sure it would improve my experience enough

there is a bf3 benchmark thread in this forum. May not be benchmarks as not controlled but useful info.