• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Battlefield 3 RETAIL Performance Thread

CAP4 is installed (as far as I know). I did try a complete CAP re install prior to installing 11.10 but every removal ended in an 0050 BSOD.

I just set everything to the preset 'high' rather than ultra and the stutter is 100% gone, not really noticed much between high and ultra tbh...
 
pgi947 said:
I noticed that with CF enabled on BF3 it doesn't seem to do very little, my read outs were like this (in SP):

GPU 1: 99%
GPU 2: 4%
Memory: 2154mb
FPS: 75 (avg 70)

Crossfire improvements incoming?
Click to expand...

Using up to 84% across all my GPUs in Quadfire 5970 4GB.
There is a powerplay bug though, that can make some of the GPUs drop clocks but i think i have managed a work around with the preset trick.
 
Found the FPS killer, and it's not Deferred AA, it's Mesh detail. Keep everything on Ultra, but turn Mesh down slowly until you hit low, do this on Caspian Border whilst facing the central bit, you'll see your FPS gain 5-10.
 
bhavv said:
Full HD is 5 years out of date.
Click to expand...

Last time I checked, 1080p is still the standard.

With my 480 it's pretty much flawless on high, post AA high, textures and effects on ultra (big maps). Flawless meaning 60fps most of the time, v-sync enabled. Can't say I'm not pleased.
 
Adster3000 said:
Last time I checked, 1080p is still the standard.
Click to expand...

Just because its a standard, doest mean its not out of date, nor that it is high end.

You can get monitors under £100 with 1080p resolution. Having 1080p resolution alone doesnt mean that a monitor / TV / Plasma screen is high quality.

1080p resolution has been around for a very long time (in fact, 3-4 years ago 1920x1200 was actually the most common standard for PC monitors, until they started 'dumbing them down' to TV / Console standard specifications).

'HD' is a useless term because a 1080p monitor isnt anymore 'high definition' than a 1920x1200, or a 2560x1600 monitor with better screen quality, contrast ratio and brightness.

TheRealDeal said:
but i would say 1080p is affordable compared to 2560x1440 or above. 1080p is probably above the average resolution for pc usage so i would not call it outdated.
Click to expand...

16:9 is simply crap compared to a 16:10 monitor. The only reason why 1080p monitors are affordable is because 1200p was phased out to make them a standard. 3 years ago you could buy 1920x1200 24" monitors for under £230. If 1080p had never become a standard due to TVs and consoles, then 16:10 1200p monitors would have been very common today at the £150-£200 price range.
 
Last edited:
I get where you are coming from as my old crt could run 1920x1200 5 years ago or more but things have not really moved on much, so outdated is the wrong word as most people still dont run it in my experience.

To the above staement my iiyama vison pro master cost me £400 and was excellent for gaming. Silly me spilt cider down the front of it and that was the end. Loved that monitor as there was no need for v-sync. Crt was great tech but it looked like crap Aestheticically wise. Picture was faultless though.
 
Last edited:
wolvers said:
No it's not, it specifically means a 1080p panel that will accept a 1080p signal (and lower resolution signals) and display it with at least 1080 lines.
Click to expand...

And in what way is that full HD? Given we can run higher resolutions.
It's just a moniker to 1920x1080, but that doesn't make it any less of a buzzword.
 
On 17th sept 08 I bought the most expensive TN + Film 1920x1200 monitor - the newly released at the time Acer G24.

Samsung monitors with the same resolution and screen type cost £240-£270, and I'm sure there were other brands that cost a little less.

Fast forward to today, and 1920x1200 has been phased out entirely in the <£250 monitor market, with everysingle model only being 16:9 1080p because this has now become a lame standard.

I have to simply hope that my current monitor never dies now, because to get a new 1200p or better monitor with at least a 400 cd/m2 brightness would cost me a fortune.

Oooooohhh ... or not ...

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MO-001-HS&groupid=17&catid=1120&subcat=

That things like looking for a needle in a haystack now :p
 
Last edited:
around 45FPS on ultra @ 1900x1200

Decided to stick it on High and now get constant 60fps. Will be happy with this till Kepler comes out :)
 
Got an SSD drive and turned off page file to help extend its life. Played some Battlefield 3 and Windows prompted it was running low on memory so BF3 doesn't take more than 4GB but its very close.
 
elrasho said:
Thanks mate, I used this guide and moved it to the first partition of my second drive, I still left 1000MB page file on the SSD because the guide said so? Is that OK?
Click to expand...

Thats with Windows Vista. On Windows 7 I've disabled all page file on my SSD boot drive, and moved it to my Raid 0 HDDs with system managed size. I've never had any problems with this, though 1 Gb page file wont hurt on the SSD.

I just couldnt have 24 Gb reserved on my 64 Gb SSD for Page File :x
 
You should leave the pagefile on your SSD - if there's one file that benefits most from being on the SSD it's the pagefile.

Noob guides get on my nerves dishing out bad information.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom