BF V(5) MP CPU ulilization

[gavinh87]

the stuttering goes through the roof at 100% usage though, at least in my experience. I would consider bf5 unplayable with an i5 (4c/4t) or lower, might look okay on the graphs but not during gameplay

old i7s like the 2600k seem to be doing pretty well though and shows how poor VFM the 7600k was

+1 You don't want 100% CPU utilisation in a game. A discord notification or anything else going off at that time will cause the game to hang.

 

[Lokken86]

the stuttering goes through the roof at 100% usage though, at least in my experience. I would consider bf5 unplayable with an i5 (4c/4t) or lower, might look okay on the graphs but not during gameplay

old i7s like the 2600k seem to be doing pretty well though and shows how poor VFM the 7600k was

But the guys performance was stellar with with 4 cores albeit at 720p, however it was at 100% constantly. I thought it would be a stuttering mess before I saw it but seemed OK.

 

[jigger]

So the big question. Is the game worth buying?

 

[Deleted member 66701]

If you like the Battlefield series, yeah.

But not at the rrp of 55 quid though! Wait for the first sale.

 

[Troezar]

If you like the Battlefield series, yeah.

But not at the rrp of 55 quid though! Wait for the first sale.

Someone at EA must think we're jealous of console game prices lol

 

[sandys]

I recorded with shadowplay, leaving afterburner running. The options for graphs are in there, under monitoring you choose what to display in the OSD. From there you select text and graph.
In the options there is also a benchmark tab, bind that to a key and that will give you the FPS highs and lows etc.

Cool worked a treat, can't seem to make my overlay look as good as yours with benchmark time etc. All comes up tiny but I am getting somewhere, now just have to learn how to play

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzGeRIY3JUk

 

[gavinh87]

I think I have found the reason why the big disparity in results.
Normal, regular conquest runs as good as bf1 does. Very smooth and consistent.

Grand operations mode is like a different game. I'm guessing this is where people are seeing issues. It runs considerably worse.

 

[gavinh87]

Cool worked a treat, can't seem to make my overlay look as good as yours with benchmark time etc. All comes up tiny but I am getting somewhere, now just have to learn how to play

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzGeRIY3JUk

Yeah I think that might be down to the order they are displayed in. Keep playing with it

 

[jigger]

If you like the Battlefield series, yeah.

But not at the rrp of 55 quid though! Wait for the first sale.

I loved the games upto 2. 4 was ok ish and the others I didn't really think much of.

 

[AndreiD]

I think I have found the reason why the big disparity in results.
Normal, regular conquest runs as good as bf1 does. Very smooth and consistent.

Grand operations mode is like a different game. I'm guessing this is where people are seeing issues. It runs considerably worse.

Noticed that too, not sure why that happens.

 

[Phixsator]

I loved the games upto 2. 4 was ok ish and the others I didn't really think much of.

I am personally a big fan of BC2 and BF4 and too me the series as taken a nosedive since starting with hardline. BF5 to me has great gunplay, good looking visuals and atleast the rotterdam map is bloody well done but thats where it goes sour for me. The customisation system is certainly not what i had hoped for and the amount of weaponry available seems limited to, the later could have course change in the full game but i think i read somewhere that it would be around 6 weapons per class.

I think I have found the reason why the big disparity in results.
Normal, regular conquest runs as good as bf1 does. Very smooth and consistent.

Grand operations mode is like a different game. I'm guessing this is where people are seeing issues. It runs considerably worse.

Interesting, that would explain why ive started seeing stuttering as the first few games i played was fine. Ty for sharing