Battlefield 3 Beta Performance Thread

cannondale06 said:
you must have a ton of other stuff open because the game does not use anywhere near half that much ram. min to play is 2gb and 4gb is recommended.
Click to expand...

That's an exact! Ram reading during play.....no guesses. Very little open except for the browser, battlelog, Origin, and the usual apps that run in the background.

The Ram useage is almost exactly the same as BC2.

Right now, if you have over 4GB of Ram, both these games push just over 4 in game play. If you have less ram.............well, duh, then it will use less Ram...

.
 
So far Metro is buttery smooth on one GTX580 at Ultra, but then again it could be High, i can't tell the difference at all...
 
TexasAg05 said:
XPS M1730 notebook
T9500 C2D 2.6GHz dual core
3 GB RAM
8800M GTX w/1GB

Verdict: Playable! On low, sure, but playable! I was really only seeing lag when the rest of the server was seeing it. There was one time when I turned around right in front of a flame; that made it chug a little.

This means I can get along until I can get the money to build a new home system. Huzzah!
Click to expand...

That... is impressive
 
dekruyter said:
That's an exact! Ram reading during play.....no guesses. Very little open except for the browser, battlelog, Origin, and the usual apps that run in the background.

The Ram useage is almost exactly the same as BC2.

Right now, if you have over 4GB of Ram, both these games push just over 4 in game play. If you have less ram.............well, duh, then it will use less Ram...

.
Click to expand...
1.3-1.4GB is what it is using right now. I was at 2.4GB when starting the game and never went over 3.8GB with game running so yeah about 1.4GB is all the game uses.
 
Anyone playing with 570s or stock clock 580s in SLI at 2560?

Can't wait to fire it up tonight, I just hope it will run good.
 
Core i7 920 (D0) @ 3.66Ghz
2x HD 6950 2GB
12GB DDR3@1600Mhz
128GB SSD
1920x1080 all settings at "Ultra" (High, in actuality)

Currently averaging 90 fps in fraps in outdoor areas on Metro, haven't seen it dip below 80 yet. Silky smooth, no sign of micro-stuttering or random flashing.
 
2600k 4.6, gtx 580 920/1100

1920 x1080, Ultra, HBAO on, aa post. high, 4xaa, outside Metro map.

Frames: 41397 - Time: 708838ms - Avg: 58.401 - Min: 39 - Max: 107

GTX 580 stock

Frames: 21557 - Time: 467238ms - Avg: 46.137 - Min: 33 - Max: 82

No difference in performance between aa perf. medium and high. I even think aa perf. high performance is better. CPU usage is between 25 and 50% on all 8 cores, HT. Played game with 2x6970 at my friends and games is round 50 to 80fps, mostly round 70+ at same settings as my.
There are no fps big drops on explosions, lots of smoke etc., at least on this map. I think that the game will run just fine on any high end GPU on max. settings with reasonable amount of aa , when optimized drivers come out. It is hard on GPU but not too demanding..
 
Last edited:
cannondale06 said:
1.3-1.4GB is what it is using right now. I was at 2.4GB when starting the game and never went over 3.8GB with game running so yeah about 1.4GB is all the game uses.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, I was quoting "total" Ram, not game Ram...my bad.....probably Windows 8 filling up Ram w/ pre-loaded stuff............most definitely.

.
 
i don't even think the settings work, check your fps outside with all settings at low/med/high and see no change in fps (even after restarting).
 
With Everything on low I get 30-40FPS with the odd dip to the 20's. 1920*1200 with everything turned to low and no AA or AF. Motion Blur set to 50. I am upgrading to an AMD 965BE on October 7 though and upgrading my GPU to a 6950 around the end of November.
 
With all settings on high apart from AA and HBAO, which are turned off at 1920x1200 im getting 60FPS with 99% GPU usage and about 1.2GB Vid ram usage.

Specs

i5 760 at 3.4
8GB Ram
6950 2GB unlocked.
 
Simmonz said:
With Everything on low I get 30-40FPS with the odd dip to the 20's. 1920*1200 with everything turned to low and no AA or AF. Motion Blur set to 50. I am upgrading to an AMD 965BE on October 7 though and upgrading my GPU to a 6950 around the end of November.
Click to expand...

That should help. I bet you're very CPU limited.
 
I been playing for a few hours (rig in sig) in 720P. I play on my tv and it only goes to 720. I been playing with everything on high. I get 40-60 FPS consistently. Picked up this GTX 560 Ti today to play BF3.

6196845842_d5a16ceb09.jpg


6196845124_d32fe68ff6.jpg
 
Specs in sig

Set to medium I'm getting 60fps+ about 85~90% of the time and when it drops below its drops to about 55fps. DX11 at native (1920x1080). My GTX 460 SSC+ is at 850MHz factory.
 
silentsnake09 said:
I been playing for a few hours (rig in sig) in 720P. I play on my tv and it only goes to 720. I been playing with everything on high. I get 40-60 FPS consistently. Picked up this GTX 560 Ti today to play BF3.
Click to expand...
whats your cpu usage like? I remember the alpha appearing not to use HT, even on dual cores, very well so I would like to see how its pushing your 2100.
 
cannondale06 said:
whats your cpu usage like? I remember the alpha appearing not to use HT, even on dual cores, very well so I would like to see how its pushing your 2100.
Click to expand...

forgive me for being out of the PC world for years. What app do I need to monitor that stuff while gaming? I will report back.
 
silentsnake09 said:
forgive me for being out of the PC world for years. What app do I need to monitor that stuff while gaming? I will report back.
Click to expand...
you can just pop out of full screen and look at the task manager. my stock 2500k was hitting 65-75% or so when I looked.
 
crossfire 6950s are more or less unplayable in the outside areas due to intense tearing/flickering and hitching.

playing with 1 card at 30fps seems much smoother than the hiccupy, 50-60fps reported during crossfire
 
If you guys are playing at 1080p, then don't get anything lower than a 6950/560 Ti if you want to play at ultra settings (still no AA). With AA, I believe a gtx 580 is needed.
 
1080p ultra settings 4xaa HBAO = 115fps indoor and around 80-90 outside on metro. gtx 570 sli
 
settings don't work, except for like hbao and motion blur (percent). so this thread is kinda irrelevant, but I get its usefulness.
 
Roliath said:
settings don't work, except for like hbao and motion blur (percent). so this thread is kinda irrelevant, but I get its usefulness.
Click to expand...

Changing most settings doesn't work immediately, but you have to reload the map. Choosing Medium and then Ultra is a large difference in framerates once a new round starts.
 
Anyone experiencing some stuttering when getting into action or maybe loading into a new level part?
 
4.9ghz 2500k, gtx 590 @ 660 core / 3600 memory

Running all ultra with AA on low, motion blur at 40, and HBAO off

Getting 70-90 in doors, and 60-75 out doors...

Much better than I expected.
 
1920x1200 ultra 2xaa hbao off was getting me about 35fps on metor, upper 20s low 30s on caspian.
mix of high/ultra mix 0xaa hbao on caspian is getting a good 45-50.

stock 955
stock 6870
8gb ram
 
pandora's box said:
1080p ultra settings 4xaa HBAO = 115fps indoor and around 80-90 outside on metro. gtx 570 sli
Click to expand...

Sounds about right. Same settings, but 1 GTX570, yields min 36FPS, avg 50FPS, and max 72FPS.

I've never been a fan of multiple card solutions, but it looks like come October it's going to be a must.
 
SicKlown42012 said:
Changing most settings doesn't work immediately, but you have to reload the map. Choosing Medium and then Ultra is a large difference in framerates once a new round starts.
Click to expand...
fps doesn't change here as I posted earlier even after restarted. don't see any difference in screenshots either.
 
Where the hell is Kepler already. I'm not shelling out $700 for a 590 to play at low anti-aliasing settings. I want to blow the doors off this game. Of course, a single GPU Kepler probably would not perform much better than a 590.
 
2600k + GTX480 SLI @830mhz

5760x1080 is laggy and feels like a lot of input latency - it's not fun and hard to play (even on low settings). I finally broke down and put it on a single screen and it's a LOT better.

1920x1080 is butter smooth - easily 60fps all the time.

Graphical glitches, occasional crashes, but nothing unreasonable for what is clearly an older build.

I like it.
 
Posted yesterday how I had horrible framerates and had to turn down all my settings.

In an effort to improve my experience, I ended up installing the new ATI drivers (11.9) that just came out, turning off all AA and motion blur, and now I can 45+ fps consistently in the outdoors on high. Not sure which it was (having 11.8 installed, motion blur, or AA), but I don't get that choppy 25 fps lag on high anymore. Looks like I may not have to upgrade after all. :)
 
Sotorious said:
Anyone experiencing some stuttering when getting into action or maybe loading into a new level part?
Click to expand...

Yes, stuttering and screen flicker. Even after exiting the game and goofing around in on the desktop.
 
30 - 40 fps @ 1680 x 1050 all medium no AA with rig in sig.

I'll be upgrading to a 560 ti or something since my cpu usage in game never exceeds 80%, even on Caspian Border!

Hopefully that'll run on or close to Ultra at my puny res!
 
Blackstone said:
Where the hell is Kepler already. I'm not shelling out $700 for a 590 to play at low anti-aliasing settings. I want to blow the doors off this game. Of course, a single GPU Kepler probably would not perform much better than a 590.
Click to expand...



uh, isn't the monitor in your sig 1680x1050? Why would you need a $700 videocard for that?
 
Cool Vibrations said:
Everyone here saying they're on ultra is really on high.



http://csnation.net/content.php?556-Ultra-Visuals-Not-Implemented-in-Battlefield-3-Beta

Basically, you can turn your settings to Ultra, but it doesn't change anything. You'll still be on High. You can look for more information in the official forums. Kinda explains why I was getting around the same frames as I was getting on high quality since I was expecting a hit when tessellation would kick in but it looks like I'll have to wait for the final release version.
Click to expand...

Interesting, if this is true then I can't even imagine how Ultra settings will improve the image quality since I'm really impressed with the game @"High" settings. At the same time I feel bad because even at high settings it already brings my system down to its knee.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top