-
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
Perhaps related to the frame pace method that some had to tweak in the console?
This made me LOL
I think I know that bug, happens in hardcore when I get revived, my dude just starts shaking like a ******* dog until I switch weapons
Christ that's some difference in frame rate. I know frame times have been the hot topic for a while now, but I honestly ddon't believe the end user will notice much change going from ~7ms to ~11ms (as in those screens). Especially in comparison to the frames lost.
Can't wait either, the ultimate test too in dropping 120hz for 60hz.
Hopefully I'll get one of the early batch in august (if it happens) as I would guess I was one of the first 5 to get a pre-order in
Most of my testing will be focused at the '3gb is useless for 4k' crowd
Hopefully I'll get one of the early batch in august (if it happens) as I would guess I was one of the first 5 to get a pre-order in
Most of my testing will be focused at the '3gb is useless for 4k' crowd
Looking forward to that, being a 4gb user.
Just did a little test using the res scale at 200% (4K) and logging peak GPU memory usage, 64 man SoS, Custom ultra, no AA, SBAO, high post and everything else ultra, peaked at 2660mb according to GPU-Z. Frames averaged somewhere between 75-90fps, highs in the low 100's and lows in the high 60's. Tbh the game didn't look any better/worse then it does at 1080 4xmsaa.
So in reality I think BF4 will be fine with 4K, throw in the monumental PPI gain of going from 1080 over 24" and 4k over 28" and I doubt I'd notice any reduced settings.
As a rough guess for Vram at 4K with todays titles (sleeping dogs excluded as its complete BS of a game and code); Were back at the grunt to drive playable frames at said vram requirement again. Anything from dual 280/770-4GB should hold up pretty well.
Some people just need to loose the idea of "must have max ultra super-dooper settings on EVERYTHING!!!!!" and get their heads around the resolution being pumped into a sub 30" screen basically wipes out the immediate need for masses of AA.
Tbh I would go for a single 290/780-6gb now then see how the new cards shape up if and when they arrive.
100fps+ on a single card should be easy done, you may need to shuffle around the odd setting, but nothing that should really harm the eye candy.
100fps+ on a single card should be easy done, you may need to shuffle around the odd setting, but nothing that should really harm the eye candy.
I'll try explain what these frame time readings actually mean later, some of you are either getting confused or making it up as you go along as to what they actually mean and how to distinguish good readings from bad, it gos far far deeper then lower = better, as its not always the case.
It is indeed, I'll post up some explanations later today/tomorrow of how to decypher the good from the bad.
Short example, vsync 60hz constant 60fps will give a constant ~16ms frame time giving that as an average, vsync off if I'm going 40-140fps all over the shop might give a significantly lower average frame time (some would see this as better) but the consistency of frames would be all over the shop, going anywhere from 6ms up to ~30ms.
All the averages flac show in the main window is basically another way of showing your average frame rate.
This is pretty much the point of gsync/freesync as it matches the frame time to the refresh rather then pushing too many/not enough frames at the required refresh frame time.