***THE BF4 BENCHMARKS THREAD***

[LtMatt]

Overclocking my CF7970GHZ makes no difference to FPS in game, any ideas ([email protected]).

Have you got the power limit at +20%?

 

[gpuerrilla]

Well this is interesting...
Yet at the end of it all they say the 280X provides the superior gaming experience.

 

[Gregster]

Can anyone here get a mins of above 55 on single card?

Max settings 1080p

My lowest mins is 57 and this is with 3, 5 minute tests. Lots going on, with big explosions.

 

[gpuerrilla]

My lowest mins is 57 and this is with 3, 5 minute tests. Lots going on, with big explosions.

TBF you need to play the whole round not 5 mins..

 

[Silent_Scone]

Interesting conclusion. Does that also apply to Crossfire, though?

 

[MyBrainz]

TBF you need to play the whole round not 5 mins..

Yeah this is true.. my benches are all around the centre of the map before and after the building is down.. in the thick of the action as they say

 

[Gregster]

TBF you need to play the whole round not 5 mins..

Well I could play the whole round as a sniper from base or sitting on rooftops and get much higher fps but I would feel that 3 different 5 min benches would about cover it but I guess we can pick fault with every bench if we wanted. Another point is this is a beta and not the finished article, so nothing should be conclusive or taken as fact.

 

[LtMatt]

Even a titan with nothing going on in an empty server at 1080p drops to 44fps. This is just sitting in a tank and firing the main gun twice. The firing of the gun into a pillar will be what causes the minimum fps in this bench video/bench results.


1080P Ultra Preset+x4AA

GameGPU Bench Video

Even with AA off it still drops to 55


1080P Ultra Preset+x0AA

 

[Silent_Scone]

I was AFK for almost an entire round on the first build and the logs said average was 197 FPS .

It's like people are trying to bump their scores! It's a beta anyway so it's no reflection

 

[LtMatt]

I was AFK for almost an entire round on the first build and the logs said average was 197 FPS .

It's like people are trying to bump their scores! It's a beta anyway so it's no reflection

I'd take a bump in FPS at 1440p Ultra+x4AA gladly Frosty.

I have to say though its very smooth but more fps is always nice. To be honest Mantle is looking like my best hope now. I'd like to average 100fps or thereabouts at 1440. Currently on about 75fps with my 7950's at 1125/1500.

 

[LtMatt]

Another thing to note. If you stay on foot you'll have higher minimum fps and averages. If you spend a whole round in a tank (tanking) your fps will be lower on both minimums and averages. If you spend the round chooper whoring, you'll have higher minimum and averages than on the ground or in a tank. Seasoned BF3+BF4 player, knows all the tricks of the trade.

 

[Phixsator]

Well this is interesting. I'm trying to get my head round these results. I'm looking at H's performance take on Battlefield 4 using a 280X and a 770.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/10/10/battlefield_4_beta_performance_preview#.Uleqj1A_t1k

Now according to all their benchmarking and tests, the 770 blows the 280X away in pure fps terms with and without AA, at 1080p and 1600p. Yet at the end of it all they say the 280X provides the superior gaming experience.

The thing i don't understand is all other sites ive checked have the 7970/280X trading blows with the 770. Check the link above and see for yourself.

Here are some other results from other sites regarding 7970/770/280X.


1440p - TechReport

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Moving on to H's conclusion.

Guess my not too heavily overclocked 7950 matches their 770 @ 1080p then..

Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
96631, 1633559, 42, 132, 59.154

I wont be buying any new hardware for this game but then im probably not gona be buying this game lol

I'll wait for the videos on Youtube of the full games other maps

I call BS on that review. My 7950@1080p matches that 770 almost perfectly using the ultra preset with everything it sets. My friends i play with are all on i5s and i7s and a few of them are using 770 or 680 OCed and im matching their performance or beating it sometimes. It does their head in as they are all hardcore nvidia/intel fans(im not trying to start another war here).

Some of them asked me what to buy for BF4 and i said the best thing was to wait and if they couldnt get the 7970 ghz cause it was so dirt cheap and offered the best performance for the buck spent. I'm laughing my ass off whenever they complain about lag and stuttering cause i have none. That is what you get when you do not listen to the almighty Phixsator... okay rant is over

 

[Silent_Scone]

I'd like to see 1440p again gladly ...

Mantle is going to be something you need to see in person much like Glide was. Just wish it was available come game release.

Another thing to note. If you stay on foot you'll have higher minimum fps and averages. If you spend a whole round in a tank (tanking) your fps will be lower on both minimums and averages. If you spend the round chooper whoring, you'll have higher minimum and averages than on the ground or in a tank. Seasoned BF3+BF4 player, knows all the tricks of the trade.

That didn't occur to me when I was screaming at the Rusky chopper pilot hovering above the Earth's atmosphere... lol. Lamer.

 

[Rusty0611]

Not much point having that much FPS on a 60 Hz panel. Some people say that even on 60 Hz panels they can discern an increase in smoothness at higher FPS than 60 but I'm doubtful as to it's real term effect. Don't doubt there's something to be gained but I think it's quite minor.

 

[LtMatt]

Yeah i can't really tell any difference unless fps drops below 40 but that could be as a result of frame pacing. The reason why i said 100 was for the fact that the higher the averages, the higher the minimums. I'd like to see as few drops below 60 as possible, if possible. Massive tank explosions (when you get blown up in a tank and you watch kill cam) will see fps drop to the low 40's at 1440p Ultra. Sometimes though all the smoke and mist can see fps drop below 60 briefly.

 

[Silent_Scone]

I think that's placebo. You can see an increase in motion speed but it's definitely not smoother. If TN panels weren't so crummy I'd happily go back to a 120hz. It's lush

 

[LtMatt]

I think that's placebo. You can see an increase in motion speed but it's definitely not smoother. If TN panels weren't so crummy I'd happily go back to a 120hz. It's lush

I've never tried 120hz so i can be blissfully ignorant to it and not miss the benefits. I intend to keep it that way until i eventually get a new 120hz 1600p or higher monitor, but that won't be for sometime as ive only had this one a short while.

 

[imginy]

My lowest mins is 57 and this is with 3, 5 minute tests. Lots going on, with big explosions.

Thanks

Just trying to some up which graphics card to get next week.

I think it's going to be either the 780 or 290.

 

[Silent_Scone]

I kid myself when I got shot of my ASUS 3D monitor that I wouldn't miss 120hz but I do. IPS is still king for clarity / colour. The screen being able to actually sync 120 frames does make it much, much smoother . Even if the human eye apparently can't tell the difference. Gaming > Science

If you can cope with the abundance of dead pixels and general crappy panel quality that comes with it ¬_¬.

 

[~>Dg<~]

and now it shifts gear to fps debate

it is easy to tell the fps differences if you play with high fps all the time. depends how much you play and what you play.