*** The Official Battlefield 2042 thread***
- Thread starter jonneymendoza
- Start date
Caporegime
- Joined
- 22 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 28,314
- Location
- Boston, Lincolnshire
Battlefield 2042 is REALLY heavy on the CPU, even on my I7 4790k at 4.8 with an RTX it still chugs at times although playable, I've put in for an upgrade
Yours will suffer badly!
A 4790k is what 8 years old now.
. My 7700K is getting on 5 years itself but still just about manageable.
I get 95% CPU usage on 128 player servers
i7 7700k 4.8.
Its not a normal CPU limited scenario where cranking graphics settings puts the bottleneck on the GPU.That just results in inconsistent frame rates and stutter because the CPU can't drive the GPU most of the time. Only thing I could do to get it playable was lower some settings and limit the frame rate to 60 so the CPU had time to do its thing with the server and the GPU (3070)was amost doing nothing.
i7 7700k 4.8.
Its not a normal CPU limited scenario where cranking graphics settings puts the bottleneck on the GPU.That just results in inconsistent frame rates and stutter because the CPU can't drive the GPU most of the time. Only thing I could do to get it playable was lower some settings and limit the frame rate to 60 so the CPU had time to do its thing with the server and the GPU (3070)was amost doing nothing.
Associate
- Joined
- 22 Jul 2009
- Posts
- 356
- Location
- United Kingdom
On the free weekend I got pretty good results between 60 and 90 fps on a 11400f and 1080ti with 16gb 3600 ram. (A mixture of settings around medium)
my old i5-6600 couldn't cope with BFV after one year of patches and was maxed at 100% cpu usage ( this is the min spec for BF2042 and is two gens removed from yours )
so not even remotely surprised you cant run it when you don't meet the spec to run it
my i5-10400f and rx6700xt gets 110 av 1440p on a mix of low and medium
can crank everything up to high and get 80-90 but it doesn't look much better
What's everyone preferred secondary right now? I've not really swapped away from the Glock but got absolutely domed by a bloke using the magnum revolver thing earlier today.
Closing in on a few tier 1's now as well, about 200 kills off with the M5A3, PBX-45 and AC42 - then a little further off getting to tier 1 with a specialist.
Also - re: performance, 120-180fps at 1080p low/medium settings with a 5800x and 3070 FE.
Closing in on a few tier 1's now as well, about 200 kills off with the M5A3, PBX-45 and AC42 - then a little further off getting to tier 1 with a specialist.
Also - re: performance, 120-180fps at 1080p low/medium settings with a 5800x and 3070 FE.
Last edited:
I didn't have any issues with BFv tbh, but I missed out four.
BFv at least looked decent and played well
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 7,438
BF 5 looks like a cartoon compared to BF1. Still the best looking Battlefield game by miles, a lot better than 5 in my opinion too.
Think it's all downhill from 5 onwards for DICE.
Think it's all downhill from 5 onwards for DICE.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 16 Jul 2009
- Posts
- 8,724
- Location
- Edinburgh
I think it says a lot that I've probably had more fun in some of the BF3 portal modes than playing BF2042 itself
1440p rx6700xt i5-10400f mix of low and medium 110-125 average depending on the session and map some perform better than others
can put everything on high and it was 85-90 av but it just doesnt feel right not revisited this since week one
dont know if 32gb of ram helps it feel smoother but at times it does use 20+gb could be a memory leak
#
its a fun aim trainer and really helps you learn how a gun/attachments work reminiscent of my old CS days where I would play 5 hours with just one weapon or pistols only for a few days