-
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.
***THE BF4 BENCHMARKS THREAD***
- Thread starter pgi947
- Start date
Caporegime
Didn't he test with one 690 as well and that was fine. Not that having two would make any difference if he was running out of VRAM other than bumping his average slightly. I trust his results and judgement as well.
Edit: Matt - Googaly has got you there mate above :x
He did test on the beta and Matt said his results were not acceptable because he looked at the sky or something
Caporegime
I would say that is about right for this game and your CPU clocks. The first one I have seen that proper uses the CPU
Associate
How do you see a GPU usage in this game?
Caporegime
If Kaaps can play this on his 690's with no VRAM issues that is good enough for me and should be good enough for everyone on this forum. He has red and green and has no allegiance to either brand and if anyone would give a fair reflection of the game, it would be Kaap.
I have Aero disabled when gaming. I don't care what the background looks like when I can't see it
If Kaap tested with one 690 id be happy to accept his results. No good adding more gpu's to the mix and saying it won't affect results. Either keep it the same as we agreed or not at all.
Didn't he test with one 690 as well and that was fine. Not that having two would make any difference if he was running out of VRAM other than bumping his average slightly. I trust his results and judgement as well.
Edit: Matt - Googaly has got you there mate above :x
Googaly failed to realise that all of those posts were in a joking manner. Pretty obvious for all to see tbh for anyone that knows me. No he only tested with 2x690's. One or two cards, not four. Keep it the same or not at all.
You all only make a big deal of Kaap results because they back up what you believe despite me providing a fair bit of evidence from multiple different sites that show otherwise.
I love how you use GameGPU graphs to prove how much VRAM the games uses, as it agrees with you and then dismiss their other graphs that don't agree with you!
And just the other day you were saying you didn't agree to anything regards the bet, now you expect to claim the winnings?
Really?
Never?
Ever?
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=24913712&postcount=10
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=24914608&postcount=64
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=24914926&postcount=80
Lol. I can't believe you spent time looking through the thread for that. You need to get out more lad.
All of those replies were banter. Hence the 'might' and smiley faces with tongues.
GameGPU is good for vram statistics. But they tested the single player campaign which is not reflective of multiplayer performance or vram usage when it comes to Battlefield 4. Everyone knows that. For most games its ok but BF4 is a special case, as was BF3.
Caporegime
Hah! Well spotted Tommy. Now watch and wait for them all to find excuses again like before. At this stage its becoming clear that nothing is going to change their mind. Probably best to just give up now, as you predicted.
Look at those low minimums again on the 2gb cards at 1600P Ultra. It even affects the 2gb 270X in crossfire as well!
Good man Tommy. Yet more proof LOL.
Last edited:
Soldato
Same applies to what you said: those results are only being taken as gospel because they back up your own views. I don't care either way but I'll just trust Kaapstad's calls over any review site. I've found that a fair few of them actually haven't got a clue anyway. The only thing they're useful for is their fancy capture equipment .
.
Caporegime
Well they can't all be wrong. Kaaps results don't count for the reasons mentioned. My work here is done. I'll leave it for Tone to decide. HardOCP will back up these findings as they did with the Beta in due course.
Soldato
lol Kaapstad's results do count at least in my eyes.
The problem with the results shown by dear Tommybhoy is that their 760 SLI results have a massively higher minimum than 770 SLI (4x AA). Not reliable IMO.
The problem with the results shown by dear Tommybhoy is that their 760 SLI results have a massively higher minimum than 770 SLI (4x AA). Not reliable IMO.
Last edited:
Caporegime
Because thats all you've got to cling on to. Kaaps two minute test from the beta which he admits he was crap at. Good luck with that Rusty.
Soldato
Because thats all you've got to cling on to. Kaaps two minute test from the beta which he admits he was crap at. Good luck with that Rusty.
Not really - there's plenty of other sources suggesting it's fine at 2560 as long as you've got the grunt to get decent frame rates. But that isn't the point. Kaapstad said he was crap at the game, not benchmarking. Being crap at the game doesn't affect your GPUs ability to stream textures
. What the 256 bit bus cards are probably seeing is bandwidth related issues at that resolution, especially with AA applied. Unless FB 3.0 has changed dramatically from FB 2.0 then running out of VRAM would produce single digit frame rates. I can't say if it has/hasn't changed but exceeding the VRAM available in BF3 tanked FPS completely. I could replicate that quite easily at triple screen resolutions with my 680s in BF3 if I left Aero enabled. I can't imagine BF4 is going to be too different in that respect.
Maybe RetrogamerX can help with testing? He has SLI 770s
Last edited:
Permabanned
Those beta 8 drovers are AWESOME.
Played conquest 64 maps last night 5 hours.
No game crash bsod or anything.
Only once stuck at loading screen
Played conquest 64 maps last night 5 hours.
No game crash bsod or anything.
Only once stuck at loading screen
i wouldnt run a 2gig card at that res if its proven or not
and ever thought a 690 might get less lows just because all the vram is on one card, it doesnt have to try force it on 2, then check 2, so its not really the same as running two 2gb cards
thats best i can come up with this early
and ever thought a 690 might get less lows just because all the vram is on one card, it doesnt have to try force it on 2, then check 2, so its not really the same as running two 2gb cards
thats best i can come up with this early
Soldato
I wouldn't either but it depends what your expectations are at that resolution. I don't play with MSAA on generally at 2560 unless I've got massively high frame rates as the difference in IQ isn't massive. But if you do there's clearly better options than 256 bit bus cards on just raw FPS values.
Nah the game engine sees only 2GB and the data is duplicated across both sets of memory.
Nah the game engine sees only 2GB and the data is duplicated across both sets of memory.
Caporegime
Not really - there's plenty of other sources suggesting it's fine at 2560 as long as you've got the grunt to get decent frame rates. But that isn't the point. Kaapstad said he was crap at the game, not benchmarking. Being crap at the game doesn't affect your GPUs ability to stream textures
What the 256 bit bus cards are probably seeing is bandwidth related issues at that resolution, especially with AA applied. Unless FB 3.0 has changed dramatically from FB 2.0 then running out of VRAM would produce single digit frame rates. I can't say if it has/hasn't changed but exceeding the VRAM available in BF3 tanked FPS completely. I could replicate that quite easily at triple screen resolutions with my 680s in BF3 if I left Aero enabled. I can't imagine BF4 is going to be too different in that respect.
Maybe RetrogamerX can help with testing? He has SLI 770s
If you read the sweclockers review it sounds like something that occurs, the performance loss, the longer you play. Picking it up to play for a few minutes might not be enough. Plus the fact hes using four gpu's might skew the results somehow. This is why they cannot be taken as gospel. You either match it up like for like or don't bother. Its pretty easy to run the same test with the same cards, if you want. Doesn't matter how you think performance will show itself when vram runs out. Multiple sites are saying it shows itself as a performance drop (much lower minimums than 3gb+ cards Sweclocks+HardOCP) and others are saying it presents itself as stuttering (HARDOCP+PCPER). Only you or Greg are saying the only way it shows itself is you drop down to single digit fps. As neither of you are able to test a 2gb card now, maybe things have changed somewhat regarding the way it works thanks to driver/OS improvements, faster DRAM and faster SSD pagefiles. If it was one site saying it fair enough, but too many decent sites are singing the same tune now.
Last edited:
Soldato
Excellent.
Associate
hey guys, i know you lot have been testing bf4 with your systems and optimizing it to get more FPs etc etc.
im getting the game tonight, and i have the rig in my sig.
do you think it will play fine ?
bf3 plays like a charme at 70+ fps
so im hoping bf4 will be around the same ?
i only play at 1366x768 as i play on my 42" tv, and thats its native res
any suggestions for a amd setup will gladly goto use
thanks fella's (ladies if any)
im getting the game tonight, and i have the rig in my sig.
do you think it will play fine ?
bf3 plays like a charme at 70+ fps
so im hoping bf4 will be around the same ?
i only play at 1366x768 as i play on my 42" tv, and thats its native res
any suggestions for a amd setup will gladly goto use
thanks fella's (ladies if any)
but wouldnt the stutter still be twice as bad with 2 cards running out of memory rather than just a single card running out, like a 690
i dont think kaap testing a 690 is the same as someone on two 680's, nothing is perfect like that, there is going to be differences
and yeh even a ssd/system memory might make a difference
i dont think kaap testing a 690 is the same as someone on two 680's, nothing is perfect like that, there is going to be differences
and yeh even a ssd/system memory might make a difference
Caporegime
What i said in the last link was based on what we knew at the time. It was based on Alpha benchmarks and official recommendations. Notice how the only links he has are dated Sept 9th.
They share memory, so technically it shouldn't make a difference. However Kaap was running 2x690's so in essence four cards. The original bet (if you can call it that) myself and Tone had was one or two cards exceeding 2gb at 1440/1600p and still able to provide playable fps 60fps.
Last edited: