BF3 Beta FPS thread

Frenzy · 29 Sep 2011 at 21:05

steven_belfast said:
I noticed a lot of you have not changed the FOV setting,
Is this some thing you all leave a default ?

If you want to change it use Notepad++ and open "PROF_SAVE_body" in Documents\Battlefield 3 Open Beta\settings

Code:

70.000000

About the 3rd line down, i have changed this to 95.000000
When i went to 110.000000 the game failed to load.

Thanks I'll give it a try

Frenzy · 29 Sep 2011 at 21:07

ojgbrown said:
Am I missing something here? I'm running an I5-2500K @stock, 8GB DDR3, 6870 1gb @stock and I am running this at 60FPS with everything maxed out on Ultra.

What was with all this nonsense about needing two 580's?

Yet more evidence of people pushing BS around to justify their unecessary purchases.

No one is pushing "********" as you put it. They are simply going off the performance results posted by other people.
Now I'm pretty sure its just driver/game issues myself but some people want more fps and if they have the money to do so then why stop them.

smogsy · 29 Sep 2011 at 21:09

i expect extra options, in the final release which require faster cards (like tess)

CraigN · 29 Sep 2011 at 21:11

GPU: 6970 crossfire @ stock
CPU: i7 920 @ stock
Resolution: 1920 x 1200
Average FPS: 100fps
Driver version: Current release not installed the previews yet.

I'm surprised im on ultra settings full screen and seeing 100fps. Using fraps seen it drop to 97 and as high as 127.

thought it would be a bit harder considering the graph posted earlier.

TheRealDeal · 29 Sep 2011 at 21:11

ojgbrown said:
Am I missing something here? I'm running an I5-2500K @stock, 8GB DDR3, 6870 1gb @stock and I am running this at 60FPS with everything maxed out on Ultra.

What was with all this nonsense about needing two 580's?

Yet more evidence of people pushing BS around to justify their unecessary purchases.

What resoltuion are you using? Did you restart the game after you changed the settings. At 1920x1200 i cant get 60fps its more 40-50 with everything ultra except shadows on high with 2xmsaa

ojgbrown · 29 Sep 2011 at 21:13

ah so there is another level of graphics settings still to go in the full version of the game?

Pleased about that as whilst it obviously looks good it doesnt blow me away, and looks no better than Crysis 2 or Witcher 2 maxed out in its current form.

Not saying people can't do what they want with their money, my issue comes when people pretend you need more GPU power than ou actually do in order to, as I said, fund their unecessary purchases.

I have said it before here but there was a guy who was insistent that you needed two 560ti's in SLI to run Crysis at max settings 1080p 60fps. Ridiculous.

People can get what they want, but I don't understand people spending half a grand or mroe on some monster SLI setup just to run a single monitor. Nothing that is out now or in the immediate future requires anything close to that.

ojgbrown · 29 Sep 2011 at 21:15

TheRealDeal said:
What resoltuion are you using? Did you restart the game after you changed the settings. At 1920x1200 i cant get 60fps its more 40-50 with everything ultra except shadows on high with 2xmsaa

1080p resolution, everything is on ultra including shadows+ 4XAA. I turned motion blur off but thats not a performance issue its just because it annoys me, I turn it off in every game.

Steady 60fps+. Occasionally drops slightly below but average is definately north of 60.

Higher settings/tesselation will add a bit more stress no doubt but I'm still yet to OC either the CPU or the GPU so plenty of juice left in the tank yet.

smogsy · 29 Sep 2011 at 21:16

ojgbrown said:
ah so there is another level of graphics settings still to go in the full version of the game?

Pleased about that as whilst it obviously looks good it doesnt blow me away, and looks no better than Crysis 2 or Witcher 2 maxed out in its current form.

Not saying people can't do what they want with their money, my issue comes when people pretend you need more GPU power than ou actually do in order to, as I said, fund their unecessary purchases.

I have said it before here but there was a guy who was insistent that you needed two 560ti's in SLI to run Crysis at max settings 1080p 60fps. Ridiculous.

People can get what they want, but I don't understand people spending half a grand or mroe on some monster SLI setup just to run a single monitor. Nothing that is out now or in the immediate future requires anything close to that.

well gjg, youd be slighty wrong with that statement
i have a 30" monitor (2560x1600) now i have a 570GTX yet new games got to the point where i can not get 60fps. the only way to do this is to run SLI or turn the settings down to "Medium" so i downgraded to my 24" which actaully is a better tech H-IPS VS S-PVA, but is only 1920x1200. not 2560x1600

Nymins · 29 Sep 2011 at 21:16

ojgbrown said:
ah so there is another level of graphics settings still to go in the full version of the game?

Pleased about that as whilst it obviously looks good it doesnt blow me away, and looks no better than Crysis 2 or Witcher 2 maxed out in its current form.

Not saying people can't do what they want with their money, my issue comes when people pretend you need more GPU power than ou actually do in order to, as I said, fund their unecessary purchases.

I have said it before here but there was a guy who was insistent that you needed two 560ti's in SLI to run Crysis at max settings 1080p 60fps. Ridiculous.

People can get what they want, but I don't understand people spending half a grand or mroe on some monster SLI setup just to run a single monitor. Nothing that is out now or in the immediate future requires anything close to that.

What resolution are you playing at?

Also as above, make sure you select "Ultra" in the options, exit the game and start it up again.

Just selecting Ultra and clicking apply doesn't work.

CraigN · 29 Sep 2011 at 21:20

I restarted the game and now im getting 55-70 fps with 6970 crossfire.

after applying full screen

edit - its steadied to 67 ish

ojgbrown · 29 Sep 2011 at 21:27

smogsy said:
well gjg, youd be slighty wrong with that statement
i have a 30" monitor (2560x1600) now i have a 570GTX yet new games got to the point where i can not get 60fps. the only way to do this is to run SLI or turn the settings down to "Medium" so i downgraded to my 24" which actaully is a better tech H-IPS VS S-PVA, but is only 1920x1200. not 2560x1600

My statements were made purely on the basis of a 1920x1200 setup-apologies, I should have clarified. Of course, if you are running higher resolutions than that or multiple monitors then you will need more power, my issue is people pretending you need more than you do for 1080p.

MichaelM · 29 Sep 2011 at 21:36

MichaelM said:
From Fraps - Min/Max/Avg

Auto settings Cat 11.8 (Metro Defending) - 36/163/86.252 (66,445 Frames)
Ultra settings Cat 11.8 (Metro Attacking) - 46/117/80.947 (65,280 Frames)

1920x1080
6970 CF with Asus bios (890 core)
955 BE @ 3.4Ghz
4GB ram
Creative sound card.

Restarted the game between settings changed and Cat drivers where all default values. Started benchmarks outside at the start of a map and ended after some time of being inside as the level progressed.
I was going to do 11.10 preview drivers but they just hang on install so far so decided just to post these results.

I downloaded the 11.10's again and tried to install but it froze up at the same spot only this time the drivers seemed to install but the CCC is missing. GPU-Z reports CF to be enabled so I just assume these results are from a bad install.

Ultra settings Cat 11.10 (Metro Attacking) - 44/140/75.733 (51,920 Frames)

Although its lower results than the 11.8's I did feel it was smoother and therefore the visuals looked much better.

Roll on Bulldozer release so I can rebuild and do a fresh install, all these failed beta installs are annoying my tidy system

arc@css · 29 Sep 2011 at 21:47

I only played briefly (gave up due to key mapping problems), but it ran perfectly smooth with everything maxed, which surprised me. I didn't find I needed the beta nVidia driver either. It seemed to be ok with the 280.26 driver.

TheRealDeal · 29 Sep 2011 at 22:00

I just tried every setting from all low to all ultra and my fps never changed. The game did not look any different at any settings i changed to. I restarted the game each time to make sure the settings were correct.

albert · 29 Sep 2011 at 22:03

Some of these charts showing graphics card/fps tables are RUBBISH!!!. I'm getting 60-80FPS on my system. It plays great on Ultra settings ....

CmJared · 29 Sep 2011 at 22:06

I'm not impressed with the screens ultra settings look poor the textures aren't anywhere near high quality. ;\

opethdisciple · 29 Sep 2011 at 22:09

Im still unsure where a cpu upgrade from my current cpu (in sig) to a 8 core BD or a 2500k, will be worth it.

Not just for this game, but gaming in general.

Having only just picked up my 5870 last September, I have to keep it. It is performance 8/10 satisfactory tho.

But will a cpu (ram as well only got 800mhz) push my 5870 to new performance hieghts?

Azarathal · 29 Sep 2011 at 22:24

albert said:
Some of these charts showing graphics card/fps tables are RUBBISH!!!. I'm getting 60-80FPS on my system. It plays great on Ultra settings ....

This puts my mind at ease, still going to get a second 6950 when I can

Martini1991 · 29 Sep 2011 at 22:26

ojgbrown said:
ah so there is another level of graphics settings still to go in the full version of the game?

Pleased about that as whilst it obviously looks good it doesnt blow me away, and looks no better than Crysis 2 or Witcher 2 maxed out in its current form.

Not saying people can't do what they want with their money, my issue comes when people pretend you need more GPU power than ou actually do in order to, as I said, fund their unecessary purchases.

I have said it before here but there was a guy who was insistent that you needed two 560ti's in SLI to run Crysis at max settings 1080p 60fps. Ridiculous.

People can get what they want, but I don't understand people spending half a grand or mroe on some monster SLI setup just to run a single monitor. Nothing that is out now or in the immediate future requires anything close to that.

I doubt it

Fury762 · 29 Sep 2011 at 22:29

Got my beta installed and I'm running somewhere in the region of 40-70FPs constant at high/ultra with 2xAA and 4xAF @1680x1050, even managed over 100fps indoors on Metro. Running 11.9 drivers, about to try 11.10 to see if it makes a positive impact.

FPS seems to drop a lot when going to a new area but it goes up pretty quick afterwards, looks like I don't need an upgrade