Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I would like to see some since the game is out, any idea when or if Kyle will be doing one as well?
please include hex-core and quad-core comparisons if possible ! Thank you sir.
Nice, take your time.
This benchmark is really going to help me to choose between AMD or Nvidia.
Same here, I'm torn between 770 or 280X for the most part, but also tempted to just say eff it and go for a 780.
I'm working on it right now. These things take a while to do right (i.e. [H] style), and we don't get access to the game until everyone else does.
§·H·ï·Z·N·ï·L·T·ï;1040327142 said:Not offical, but I can confirm this is true. Pretty solid results. Game runs better then BETA.
i5 2500k @ 4.6ghz
7950x2 @ 1000/1350
1920x1080
all ULTRA
4xMSAA
HBAO ON
FOV @ 100
108fps average on 64man server..
Playing with my sig rig I'm getting 55-60 FPS on High with no MSAA.
100% CPU & 90-100% GPU utilization.
I can run ultra 40-55 FPS but I exceed my 1280MB of VRAM and CTD or lock up with looping sound.
On High with no MSAA I'm at ~1180 MB of VRAM use. Cutting it really close!
I'm really shocked at the 100% CPU use @ 4.7 GHz though I don't think the Windows perf monitor is accurate with a high overclock.
The 100% CPU usage is back? They got rid of that in the beta with that patch...
I'm pegged at 99-100% the entire time. My FPS are great though at 50-60 running high with no MSAA. VRAM is the major issue.
I can play on ultra for about 2 minutes and it's smooth and looks great but then I overflow and CTD. If this 570 had 2GB VRAM I don't think I would need to upgrade.
Are you on Windows 8 or 7? Because going off the beta if you're on win8 it still plays smoothly with 100% cpu usage, while on windows 7 it's awful.
I'm on a 570 (and a 2500k) as well by the way and am already looking to upgrade my graphics card in the next few days/week.
Puts to bed that myth about cards not having the GPU power to use more than their supplied amount of VRAM without being at unplayable framerate though doesn't it. All I read when I was researching before buying my GTX 570 is "oh don't worry about the VRAM the 570 doesn't have the GPU power to use more than that much VRAM anyways".
yeah... no. It's not true for the 570 and many other cards, and it's not true for the 2GB 680/770 either which is why I'd buy a 4GB one instead.
Running 8.1.
Well I really hope that there is no 100% CPU usage stuttering for people using quad cores on windows 7 again.
Well I really hope that there is no 100% CPU usage stuttering for people using quad cores on windows 7 again.
I have BF4 and Win7, no need to worry, it only uses 40-50% usage on my 4770k.
I used a 32 player server so maybe it could be higher in 64 player servers, but not by much.
I have BF4 and Win7, no need to worry, it only uses 40-50% usage on my 4770k.
I used a 32 player server so maybe it could be higher in 64 player servers, but not by much.
Well damn.. HT must be essential. Pegged at 100% here.
Windows 8.1 here, game is choppy and stutters a lot. Crashes every few minutes too.
Well damn.. HT must be essential. Pegged at 100% here.
And that's on a 3770 too? Well it seems like the game is in desperate need of fixes in its release state then.
http://pclab.pl/art55318-4.html
New test. Generally the AMD solutions are better in single player, from anywhere from 5-15 percent.
The tables flip and then some in multiplayer, Nvidia has a big advantage. Somewhere like 30% for a 290x vs a gtx 780. And similar amount between a 280x vs a gtx 770.
AMD CPU do badly in general too. Lose up to 40% of their frames rates compared to Intel when mixed with a 290x.
What is that Windows 7 vs Windows 8 multiplayer graph showing? Is that fps? Because that is absolutely insane if Windows 8 gives a ~20fps performance increase over windows 7.