• 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

JaffAWood said:
Cheers for your reply. So do you reckon the Phenom 965 will be enough to keep up with the 6950's?
Click to expand...

i wouldn't like to say, no idea how it compares to the Q9xxx cpu's as thats not much slower than the Q6600 and Irish_hawk is seeing problems with his. I wanted to get another 5870 but am pretty worried my cpu wont be up to it either :(

i would get the 6 core if you could to be safe.
 
spookywillow said:
i wouldn't like to say, no idea how it compares to the Q9xxx cpu's as thats not much slower than the Q6600 and Irish_hawk is seeing problems with his. I wanted to get another 5870 but am pretty worried my cpu wont be up to it either :(

i would get the 6 core if you could to be safe.
Click to expand...

Agree 100%.
 
Tried to find it in this thread but can't.

Any idea if my lappy will play this, specs in sig or for those that can't be bothered:

Core i5 450m and mobile 5650.

I'm thinking it will play on all low?
 
tommybhoy said:
8 page Battlefield 3 Single Player Performance and IQ Review is up at HardOCP:

[H]

http://i42.tinypic.com/nvcgie.gif[/IM]

[IMG]http://i39.tinypic.com/21ch501.gif[/IM]

93.6% Scaling in Battlefield 3 with 6970 CrossFireX :eek:

Can't really fault the performance of any card really! :D[/QUOTE]

I see you are now towing a diffeent line to what you were claiming a week or so ago, ironic that the cards with less Vram are performing better;)
Click to expand...
 
Nvidiot said:
I see you are now towing a diffeent line to what you were claiming a week or so ago, ironic that the cards with less Vram are performing better;)
Click to expand...

In what way? The 6970 is performing better than a gtx570. The 6950 is performing better than a ti560. It depends on what way you look at it.

Vram does not appear to be a problem though.
 
Right so, have the game running all high on multiplayer with my single 5850 and Q6600 at 3.2ghz.
1920x1080, AA off, V-Sync on, FOV 75 and HBAO. fps not going below 30 on Caspian.
Hard to actually see enemies, looks a bit too jagged on Caspian, but that may be just me!

Have an overclock of 1150 on my memory and getting the core up, at the moment I have it at 750.
 
This is on my pair of 6950s where GPU usage is good I reckon - game plays really smooth and generally above 70 fps. Have played for about 3 hours now with no crashes apart from when I changed my settings !! (ALT+Enter sorts that out :D) Cat 11.10 Official + CAP 4

msiablog.jpg


Game Settings

Uploaded with ImageShack.us
 
Running this on the following specs:

Q6700 @ 3GHZ
4GB DDR2 @ 1066mhz
120gb OCZ Vertex SSD
GTX 560Ti 1GB
1680*1050 @120hz

Getting 60-70 fps on all maps average maxed out graphics
 
Just tried out Afterburner and I'm getting 35-45 fps with everything set to high, AA deferrred off, motion blur @ 70 and ambient occlusion set to HBAO.
 
El Jimben said:
Just tried out Afterburner and I'm getting 35-45 fps with everything set to high, AA deferrred off, motion blur @ 70 and ambient occlusion set to HBAO.
Click to expand...

I am running all ultra settings with aa deferred off, high aa post, motion blur off and ambient occlusion off @ 1920 x 1200. I think the game would look better for you and run much smoother at these settings. My frame rate is usually around 60 with the odd drop to the 40's when there is heavy smoke around. Seeing as high as 80 now and then.
 
I game at 1920x1200 too and it runs silky smooth with these settings. I don't get why you think it'll run better by turning up the eye candy though bearing in mind I don't have as good a CPU and GFX card as you. I did just have a play however and I have upped effects and terrain quality to ultra with seemingly no fps hit so I'm happy about that :D
 
El Jimben said:
I game at 1920x1200 too and it runs silky smooth with these settings. I don't get why you think it'll run better by turning up the eye candy though bearing in mind I don't have as good a CPU and GFX card as you. I did just have a play however and I have upped effects and terrain quality to ultra with seemingly no fps hit so I'm happy about that :D
Click to expand...

I turned up the eye candy but also turned off motion blur which i dont really like and also turned off ambient occlusion which i dont think makes a big difference. With these settings off i get really good fps and have nearly full ultra settings.

The settings i am using are the same ones that Hardocp say are the highest playable settings for my card. I reckon a 5850 can overclock a good bit past my 6870 stock speeds, so should be able to run these settings no probs.
 
Last edited:
Random Guy said:
But will Afterburner not be graphing the values in the background e.g. Windows desktop?

After which, eyeballing the graph or doing a bit of fancy spreadsheet work, should yield a value for average FPS?
Click to expand...

Why on earth would you do that when Fraps can do all of the work for you?

Tracking the Avg (and Min/Max) over a period of time is exactly what Fraps is used for.

You *can* use afterburner but unless you use the logging ability it won't be as accurate as Fraps.

Penfold - I am gaming at 3560x1920 (portrait eyefinity), which is similar overall to 5760x1200 in terms of performance. On a single HD6970 I am netting between 30 and 45fps depending on how much is going on at any one time. This is all at a mixture of High and medium settings with FXAA set to medium. HBAO, MSAA and Motion Blur are all off.
 
running with the steam overlay actually causes me to BSOD :/
Not had any other crashing issues apart from that though.
 
TheRealDeal said:
In what way? The 6970 is performing better than a gtx570. The 6950 is performing better than a ti560. It depends on what way you look at it.

Vram does not appear to be a problem though.
Click to expand...

Hi there,

It seems you missed the other thread where he was convinced a ATI would be better due to the larger Vram and also wouldnt accept any other source apart from [H] as proof to the contrary

Here - http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18332915

And now according to [H] the GTX580 is performing better than the 6970, the GTX570 is performing better than the 6950 and ditto for the GTX560ti/6870.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom