• 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 V performance

I've played it with RTX and it looks nice, seemed to run ok at 1080p widescreen with RTX set to medium along with everything else. Also played it with everything on ultra and no RTX at 1440p widescreen which also looked nice. RTX high absolutely murders the game though so that one is pointless.

It's not worth getting a 2080 for it imho, let's hope it gets better.
 
I like RT but fully understand why those without an RTX card are dismissing it. When you actually play it with RT, it looks stunning and does add to the IQ but with RT on max, it does come at a massive cost of frames. I quite happily play with it on low and running G-Sync at 3440x1440, it keeps everything smooth enough for my liking. But yer, those without an RTX card are quite right :D
 
AthlonXP1800 said:
I am not sure why you are laughing.

I spend £450 2 years ago on GTX 1070 to play games with graphics options maxed out at 1080p on 8700K CPU. Will do the same with RTX 2080 at 1080p so nothing wrong with that. Just about everybody play games at 1080p resolution accorded to Steam hardware survey, 64.29% of steam users playing games at 1920x1080 which is the majority, the 2nd largest is 12.62% play at 1366X768 which usually found on cheap tablets and low cost laptops at £200. 2560X1440 is the third largest with 3.52% steam users, 0.41% steam users playing games with super wide 3440X1440 monitors and 1.31% steam users playing games with 4K HDTV or 4K monitors.

1080p is still the most popular resolution and still has plenty of life in it I used it for 8 years now. I been played few games at 4K resolution but the biggest issue is texts in games are really very small to read and sometime unreadable. Wished every games come with UI scaling option just like Star Trek Online did which seemed is the only game with UI scaling support I played at 4K with large icons and texts. I remembered played Half Life very long time ago at 640X480 on 3dfx Voodoo Banshee, the texts was easy to read but 10 years passed, the resolution increased to 1280X1024 on LCD TV, the texts on Half Life was awful so bloody very tiny to read. Now on 1080p HDTV the texts finally readable at maximum UI scaling in patch update years ago but unfortunately at 4K and 8K DSR the texts was just totally impossible to read so Valve will not increase UI scaling further at 4K and beyond. Any mod or hack will not fix UI scaling.

I think you will definitely not laugh if Battlefield V had DXR fallback support to see your Titan XP struggling at 3.5 fps slideshow at 1080p.

Upcoming Ray Tracing 3DMark demo should have DXR fallback support that will show how bad Pascal will run at 3.5 fps slideshow at 1080p just like old time with 3DMark 06 back in 2006 ran like 3.5 fps slideshow at 1024X768 on dual core Athlon 64 X2 4400+ and Geforce 7900 GTX.

It would be much better to run ray tracing games sub 60 fps at 1080p rather than 3.5 fps slideshow at 1080p. Actually the first and last time a game I experienced ran so badly 3.5 fps slideshow at 1280X1024 was GTA IV 10 years ago back in 2008 on Athlon 64 X2 4400+ and brand new Geforce 8800 GTX. I ran GTA IV for the first time and shocked to see it was so unplayable and stopped played after 15 mins then ordered a new Socket 939 motherboard, DDR3 memory and Phenom X4 9950 quad core CPU then installed new hardware and ran GTA IV then BOOM it finally playable at 45 fps on 1280X1024 with all graphics settings maxed out. Not surprised it turned out that very expensive dual core Athlon 64 X2 4400+ I bought for £400 back in 2005 was the bottleneck.
Click to expand...

I don’t think it’s the fact that many still game at 1080p it’s from my experience 1080p and 1440p especially at high refresh perform very closely. While 1440p being quite a nice step up in visuals.

For example on bf1 all ultra without dxr I’m at a constant 120-165hz with the norm being 144-165hz with a 2080Ti.

My preference still is high refresh over everything. Especially on fps K+M games. 60hz-144/165hz is a massive difference in game fluidity and overall realism.

I have a 4k OLED for my controller based games. But could never game on it with a K+M.
 
Gregster said:
I like RT but fully understand why those without an RTX card are dismissing it. When you actually play it with RT, it looks stunning and does add to the IQ but with RT on max, it does come at a massive cost of frames. I quite happily play with it on low and running G-Sync at 3440x1440, it keeps everything smooth enough for my liking. But yer, those without an RTX card are quite right :D
Click to expand...

Yeah , don’t feel I’m missing out so will wait and hammer my 1080ti
 
Gregster said:
I like RT but fully understand why those without an RTX card are dismissing it. When you actually play it with RT, it looks stunning and does add to the IQ but with RT on max, it does come at a massive cost of frames. I quite happily play with it on low and running G-Sync at 3440x1440, it keeps everything smooth enough for my liking. But yer, those without an RTX card are quite right :D
Click to expand...
That's what I've used too, low RT with mostly everything else on High is giving me close to 60FPS at 1440P with a 2080. Would be good to get a DLSS boost tho. I was only getting 73 FPS from a 1070 Ti in DX11 FarCry 5, albeit of course with a cheaper card, so if it got closer to 70 with the 2080 and RT on low that'd be great.
The game is so buggy even MP doesn't work for me if I switch DXR off. Gives the impression I'm banned from MP but works fine if I put use the old settings again (DXR on)

easyrider said:
Yeah , don’t feel I’m missing out so will wait and hammer my 1080ti
Click to expand...
You can remove the GPU from your PC and hold it up to a light and use your fingers to create shadows to see RT in action on the GPU too :).
Still glad I went for the 2080 but did strongly consider the 1080 Ti but wanted a lower price. At £500 I think I would have gone for it. Nice to try RT but I'm not sure how many RT games I'll be playing in the near future - usually pick games up when they're much cheaper.
 
Last edited:
easyrider said:
Yeah , don’t feel I’m missing out so will wait and hammer my 1080ti
Click to expand...

It basically comes down to this. If there more games with it and implementation was solid rather than hit and miss like in battlefield 5, then even with silly price, I may feel like I was missing out. But I don’t feel that way at all from what I have seen and I love image quality.

I have never been into battlefield or cod type games. The only one I remember enjoying back in the day was CSS. With battlefield and cod are essentially recreating a low point in humanity where we were killing each other (sadly enjoying it too).

Hopefully we will have games where RT feels less tacked on in the last minute in a year or so. Looking forward to those :)
 
DarrenM343 said:
That's what I've used too, low RT with mostly everything else on High is giving me close to 60FPS at 1440P with a 2080. Would be good to get a DLSS boost tho.
Click to expand...
Wondering if this is actually a thing. Hardware unboxed video on bfv rtx performance concludes that rt cores are the bottleneck and cuda cores are not fully utilised. If this is the case then will dlss actually give a frame rate increase? Not sure at minute.
 
kevman said:
Wondering if this is actually a thing. Hardware unboxed video on bfv rtx performance concludes that rt cores are the bottleneck and cuda cores are not fully utilised. If this is the case then will dlss actually give a frame rate increase? Not sure at minute.
Click to expand...
Hopefully it will,if they add it. Also hoping DLSS can be used with and without RT to gain an additional non-RT DX12 FPS boost if users prefer that.
Some seem to think DLSS will be added, others not. I found something where DICE said it should be there from day 1. If not day 1 then I'm hoping it does get added fairly soon. NV also need this too to help prove the 20 series.
Actually this was the quote(nothing about day 1 - must have got that elsewhere):
'We are however most likely supporting DLSS, which for the lucky few with a card to utilize that will save performance. Of course, as with everything – if there is still more issues with eye strain post-launch we’ll be fixing them too'
 
I'm dying (it's either man flu or dengue fever) and can't be bothered to read through the entire thread, but I know RT performance is abysmal but is there any indication of what it's like with DLSS?
 
Malevolence said:
I'm dying (it's either man flu or dengue fever) and can't be bothered to read through the entire thread, but I know RT performance is abysmal but is there any indication of what it's like with DLSS?
Click to expand...

With DLSS it will add 40% performance increase in frame rate on any resolution like DXR Ultra at 1080p 60 fps for example, add 40% DLSS with 24 fps boost to increase DXR Ultra 1080p DLSS at 84 fps.
 
How has the AMD driver improved performance for this game?

Got a 1700 3200mhz ram and Vega 64 Nitro at 1440p wondering what kind of FPS I will see?
 
Shaz12 said:
Just bought an RTX 2080. Is it playable with RT on low at 1440P? Or just not worth it?
Click to expand...

Yes it will be very playable with RT on Low at 1440p but don't know the frame performance so it will be probably over 80 or 100 fps.

Found a video on youtube from someone ran Battlefield V on RTX 2080 with DXR Ultra at 1440p smoothly at 60 fps. :)

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom