• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Battlefield 3 Beta Performance Thread

1680x1050 with everything on Ultra except shawows (Medium).
2x AA and Medium post AA (I cannot notice any jaggies at this setting)

Metro runs between 50-80 fps (with FRAPS on)
 
QuiteSufficient said:
Brother #1:

X3 740, stock speed
6gb ram
gtx 460SC

Runs good on medium at 1080p.

Brother #2:

X2 555 unlocked o'ced x4 3.6ghz
4gb ram
gtx470SC

Runs good on high at 1080p.

Brother #3

2500k stock
6gb ram
6970 stock

Runs good on ultra at 1650x1080


Friend 1:

Pentium D 2.2 o'ced to 3.0
2gb ram
9600GSO o'ced by about 20%

Runs good on low in 800x600 windowed mode.

Friend 2:

i5 660 stock
12gb ram
gtx 465 stock

Runs on ultra with AA and HBAO off 60+ fps at 720p.

Friend 3:

Athlon II 255 stock
2gb ram
240gt

Unplayable at 1650 so he gave up.

Does that help?
Click to expand...

Add me to the list. x3 710 @ 3.4
8gb ram
5870

screenshots with fraps fps running
http://roscowgo1.smugmug.com/Other/bf3/19319739_Lmg9vc

Would have grabbed more, but I was busy trying out the slugs I just unlocked. I'm in love.
 
Intel_Hydralisk said:
I'm still not 100% on this VRAM deal. Since I'm running at 5760x1080 with only 1 gb of VRAM. No AA though, *shrug*.
Click to expand...

At least that what it shows using GPU-Z (latest version). I have everything max out, if this is with a single 30" I can't even imagine running this game @7680x1600.
It's possible since I read somewhere in eVGA forum that even Crysis eats more than 2GB @5760x1080 already. I believe this game is more demanding than Crysis and any other games out there.
 
Should my 4890 be pegged at 99% always? I tried lowering the resolution but it doesnt do much, I have a 1080p dell u2311h.
 
gurgle said:
Should my 4890 be pegged at 99% always? I tried lowering the resolution but it doesnt do much, I have a 1080p dell u2311h.
Click to expand...

That's a good sign. It means you're not limiting your overall performance by having you GPU wait on bottlenecks in other parts of your system. This game is very demanding on the GPU, as my 6970 was pegged at 99% from every resolution from 1280*800 to 192*1200 with highest allowed settings.
 
gurgle said:
Should my 4890 be pegged at 99% always? I tried lowering the resolution but it doesnt do much, I have a 1080p dell u2311h.
Click to expand...
of course your older 4890 is going to be pegged. you do realize setups with two to three times your gpu power are being fully pushed?
 
Who here is running this with 6990+6970 tri-fire? What type of performance are you guys getting at 2560x1440+ resolutions?
 
§·H·ï·Z·N·ï·L·T·ï;1037825338 said:
I just upgraded the other day from a gtx260 to a gtx570 @ and OC'd it to 950mhz and it made a world of difference!

Was getting fps in the high 40's on medium settings with the gtx260 and the game felt very laggy and was kinda hard to track onto people quickly.

Now with gtx570 I run all ULTRA settings, 4x AA-Medium, 16x AF, no motion blur, HBAO off, 1280x960 rez @ 120hz on my CRT I'm averaging around 95 fps!

Running at this lower resolution really helps, the gtx570 is around 93% usage, if I run 1600x1200 it's pegged at 100% usage and fps is much lower. That's the nice thing with CRT's they still look great at lower rez with a really fast refresh rate.

ULTRA SETTINGS:
65 - 85 fps outside
90 - 150 fps inside

It's very smooth and super easy to get kills now, I feel like I have the jump on everyone.
Click to expand...
Awesome. Im doing the same thing. For some reason my gtx260 isnt running the game very well.
I have to run it at 1440x900 res in a small window, with everything cranked down to the lowest settings. With the card OC'ed im getting 30's to 50's out doors. I would be lucky to break 60's in doors. I dont know why its so crappy. Im using the beta drivers.

Any who, I got a gtx570 SuperClock from newegg that is supposed to arrive here on wednesday. I cant wait. Ill probably reformatt my hdd just incase and get a fresh install of win7.
 
game is runs fine with rig in my sig...however i get orange flashing while playing
playing 1920x1080 high settings. I dont remember if i tried ultra.
Is Ultra in BF3 like Ultra back in the Doom 3 days where you had to have a higher MB of video ram to run it properly? the game ran very smooth, im interested in trying ultra
Opinion : Graphically was not the WoW i was expecting
 
Turn off AA Post-Processing, the looks better without it.
It's MP, SP will look 10x better
Caspian looks, feel, plays and sounds 10x better than Metro.
 
I'm not sure if this was said yet in this thread but Ultra is not Ultra in the beta. You can "enable" it, but it doesn't really give the full effect that it will in retail. Not sure if the same goes for the other levels. I think most of them are about the same. I had everything turned down to low and it looked similar to medium.
 
Ron FTL said:
Awesome. Im doing the same thing. For some reason my gtx260 isnt running the game very well.
I have to run it at 1440x900 res in a small window, with everything cranked down to the lowest settings. With the card OC'ed im getting 30's to 50's out doors. I would be lucky to break 60's in doors. I dont know why its so crappy. Im using the beta drivers.

Any who, I got a gtx570 SuperClock from newegg that is supposed to arrive here on wednesday. I cant wait. Ill probably reformatt my hdd just incase and get a fresh install of win7.
Click to expand...

One suggestion, when I was running my 260 if you install rivatuner and go to the directx settings you can disable shaders completely. It gave me an extra 10+ frames but YLMV
 
I just ordered 3 26in IPS 1900x1200 panels.

Anyone running NV Surround? Will I need a 3rd GTX 580 to max everything out or will I be okay with 2? I've never used surround before so I'm not sure if I should just 1/3 my FPS to get an estimate or if the other screens are less demanding than the main one.
 
iTravis said:
At least that what it shows using GPU-Z (latest version). I have everything max out, if this is with a single 30" I can't even imagine running this game @7680x1600.
It's possible since I read somewhere in eVGA forum that even Crysis eats more than 2GB @5760x1080 already. I believe this game is more demanding than Crysis and any other games out there.
Click to expand...

I think the witcher 2 is still more gpu demanding. WIth the launcher edited to do a true 16:10 2560x1600 I can never get the same frames as I can in BF3 with similar settings.

That may be partly or mostly due to less optimized coding, I'm sure, but it is demanding either way.
 
I have an 8800 GTS 512 and a 955BE and although I am surprised the game is playing as well as it is and still looks OK even with everything set to "Low", I want to get a different card. Do you think a 5830 would be enough to smooth things out? I will be playing at 1920 x 1080. I'm not looking for Ultra or even High settings, but if I could get to Medium I think that would be good enough for now.
 
htpc_user said:
I have an 8800 GTS 512 and a 955BE and although I am surprised the game is playing as well as it is and still looks OK even with everything set to "Low", I want to get a different card. Do you think a 5830 would be enough to smooth things out? I will be playing at 1920 x 1080. I'm not looking for Ultra or even High settings, but if I could get to Medium I think that would be good enough for now.
Click to expand...

5830 is extremely low end, you might want to check out a 6870 if you are on a budget.
 
QuiteSufficient said:
I think the witcher 2 is still more gpu demanding. WIth the launcher edited to do a true 16:10 2560x1600 I can never get the same frames as I can in BF3 with similar settings.

That may be partly or mostly due to less optimized coding, I'm sure, but it is demanding either way.
Click to expand...

I prefer the witcher 2, better graphics than BF3.
 
Krieger91 said:
5830 is extremely low end, you might want to check out a 6870 if you are on a budget.
Click to expand...

I have someone willing to sell me a 5830 for $95 so I was hoping that would do me some good for now. I want to get a 6950 but I'm not ready to spend that much right now. I don't want to settle for a card now for say, $150 and then turn around and spend another $240 or so later on a 6950.
 
Anyone else here getting crashes to desktop after a little while of playing and have to shut down bf3.exe with taskmanager?

Temps are all on the cool side for me and there seems to be no pattern to the CTD.
 
cannondale06 said:
extremely low end? and a 6870 is like 40% faster so its not really a massive upgrade.
Click to expand...

I am playing with all settings on "ultra"(i know, not really ultra) except textures set to "high", only using "high" post processing aa, and I get around 40-45 fps outside. This is using a 6870@ 950/1150
 
Last night got hands on gtx460(Gigabyte OC version).
General Visual impression: Looks Good but Crysis 2 has much better graphics as well as FarCry 2. The only think in Graphics thats really shine is LIGHTING system. Otherwise I dont see why It does require that much GPU power.

My settings:
1920x1080
HIGH exepct:
Shadows - Medium
VEGETATION: Ultra
AA - 2xAA LOW
HBAO - off(this im my opinion is best improver:adds depth and contrast to the game)


METRO( OUTDOOR)
Core Duo E7200 2,5ghz
Framerates 22-38

Core Duo E7200 3,5ghz
Framerates 33-48

Somehow this game, feels fluid even on low fps, but chop time to time on dualcore.
Don't see the point for GPU higher than 250$ only to play this one title, as majority of games are Console ports, and I can play them on my gts250 very high/high details.
 
The fact that you compared BF3 to the monstrosity that was Cysis 2 was more then enough for me to realize you have no clue what you are talking about.
 
CRYSIS 2 monstrosity ???
why is that ?? it's one of best looking games on PC.
Highly detailed, properly lighted.Good enough animation.
While BF3 feels undetailed,callous and sterile in indoors.I guess this is due destructable enviroment.
Where BF3 shines it is Lighiting and Particle system. Not to mention best SOUND design.

Good but not very good.It does not have "WOW" factor as farcry or crysis 1 at their premiers.
 
Finally TECHSPOT done some proper Testing LINK

Cpu Speed test:
CPU_01.png


Cpus test:
CPU_02.png
 
Not sure what my frame rates were when I played a little over the weekend, but I didn't notice any lag or low points. This was on mostly High settings iirc with my i7-920, 6GB, and a 5770
 
I want to run the game at 2650x1600. I have a single 6950 right now but that is clearly not going to cut it. I am starting to doubt even a crossfire will run it at higher levels of detail. Do I need to go Crossfire? Anyone in the beta running 2650x1600 at high detail smoothly?
 
max621 said:
I want to run the game at 2650x1600. I have a single 6950 right now but that is clearly not going to cut it. I am starting to doubt even a crossfire will run it at higher levels of detail. Do I need to go Crossfire? Anyone in the beta running 2650x1600 at high detail smoothly?
Click to expand...

The rig in my signature is running 2560x1600 fairly well with default Ultra settings. However I'm concerned about what the full "Ultra" settings and 64 player maps will do once retail launches - I'm pretty much on the cusp of playable settings, and anything lower I will have to start decreasing IQ. EDIT: (38-40 FPS average in the outdoor section, better inside).
 
max621 said:
I want to run the game at 2650x1600. I have a single 6950 right now but that is clearly not going to cut it. I am starting to doubt even a crossfire will run it at higher levels of detail. Do I need to go Crossfire? Anyone in the beta running 2650x1600 at high detail smoothly?
Click to expand...

I push 70+ fps with my 6950s in crossfire in the outdoor areas. It wouldn't seem unreasonable that CrossFire would be able to net you 50+ @ 2560x1600 (with perhaps a reduction in AA).

I can't seem to enable eyefinity though, which is annoying. I want to try this out @ 5760x1080!
 
TwistedAegis said:
The rig in my signature is running 2560x1600 fairly well with default Ultra settings. However I'm concerned about what the full "Ultra" settings and 64 player maps will do once retail launches - I'm pretty much on the cusp of playable settings, and anything lower I will have to start decreasing IQ.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info. My 6950 is 1GB XFX OC, I'm wondering if I should exchange it for a 2GB or a 6970. I saw some talk about how much VRAM the game was already using. Hopefully the release version has some decent optimizations for the higher resolution (and a fixed hud) :)
 
max621 said:
Thanks for the info. My 6950 is 1GB XFX OC, I'm wondering if I should exchange it for a 2GB or a 6970. I saw some talk about how much VRAM the game was already using. Hopefully the release version has some decent optimizations for the higher resolution (and a fixed hud) :)
Click to expand...

If you're looking to run 2560x1600 I would highly recommend more than 1GB of VRAM per card.
 
BF3 looks like and plays like a Half Life mod....Plan of Attack. People prob don't remember it. Except BF3 has explosions/environment destruction...k.
 
TwistedAegis said:
If you're looking to run 2560x1600 I would highly recommend more than 1GB of VRAM per card.
Click to expand...

One more question - why did you go CF with the 6970 instead of a single 6990? A single 6990 is cheaper unless you got a great deal on 2 6970s?
 
kuman said:
My settings:
1920x1080
HIGH exepct:
Shadows - Medium
VEGETATION: Ultra
AA - 2xAA LOW
HBAO - off(this im my opinion is best improver:adds depth and contrast to the game)

Somehow this game, feels fluid even on low fps, but chop time to time on dualcore.
Don't see the point for GPU higher than 250$ only to play this one title, as majority of games are Console ports, and I can play them on my gts250 very high/high details.
Click to expand...

You tone down the two most graphics intensive settings (Ambient Occlussion and Shadows) and then brag about how your GTS250 can run it on High?
 
2011-10-04 08:50:08 - bf3
Frames: 84314 - Time: 1499139ms - Avg: 56.242 - Min: 35 - Max: 106

bf32011-10-0408-27-08-13.jpg


this was a full metro map (outside, inside, outside)

cpu at 4.6
gpu at stock 11.10 drivers

that is about right, right?

also, what do you use to check cpu usage?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top