Battlefield 3 Beta Performance Thread

I

iTravis

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 21, 2010
Messages
484
Please post your specs and settings for the game to share with everyone as I'm sure there are a lot of people interested to see if their rigs can handle the game. Tweaks, tips....are also welcome.
I'll start with mine: With both 2600K and 6970CF stock I get about 35-40 fps outdoor and 50-70 fps indoor with Ultra max settings @2560x1600.
 
Phenom II 940BE @ 3.4ghz
MSI TwinFrozr III GTX570 @ stock
8GB DDR2-800

1920x1080, 4xAA, 16xAF, Ultra Settings

Fraps says I get between 40-50 frames on Metro, Caspian was more like 35-45 due to the huge draw distance.
 
iTravis said:
Please post your specs and settings for the game to share with everyone as I'm sure there are a lot of people interested to see if their rigs can handle the game. Tweaks, tips....are also welcome.
I'll start with mine: With both 2600K and 6970CF stock I get about 35-40 fps outdoor and 50-70 fps indoor with Ultra max settings @2560x1600.
Click to expand...

Same setup, same results (except OC'ed 2600k to 4.7). Although I turned off 4xAA and am having the same results, so perhaps I should turn it back on if it's "free."
 
I can run 1920x1200 on High, with 2xAA. I think my video cards run out of ram when I bump it up to 2560x1600 because my performance tanks even with AA off.

Comparatively, I could run BC2 @ 2560x1600 with AA off fairly comfortably.
 
Just did a quick bench during some random gameplay (all in the first section) with PlayClaw

NumFrames; 27964
Time; 462.88900
MinFPS; 29
MaxFPS; 100
AvgFPS; 60

bf3settings.jpg
 
Last edited:
My desktop specs are in my sig, averaged just above 40 fps outdoors, didn't notice when I was indoors.

Game is fun so far, looks good once you get it set for full screen. I did notice the flicker after I went to full screen and when I would drop heals or ammo dumps for others.

Overall I was pleased with first day beta performance and most of the servers I was able to connect to were not even close to me (California) most were UK and the best one I could get on was Illinois. I'll post more tonight and may also try to run it on my laptop (also in sig).
 
getting around 50-65 frames @ 1920x1080 according to fraps, game all max out
specs

i920 @ 4.3 watercool
12 gigs Sektor 7 DDD3-1600
SLI 2 x GTX480 1.5gig (PNY & eVGA superclocked)
Raid 0 2 x 40 SSD intel for OS, 1.5TB for apps
Have a third eVGA 480 in the closet (not that it will matter on a single monitor) however my craptacular 1000PSU won't be able to handle the third card ill probably burn to the ground before the system boots to the desktop so 2 GTX480 will do for now :rolleyes:
 
I currently have a 5870 and the performance at 2580x1440 is starting to get too jumpy for my liking. I am thinking about upgrading to a 580 but i am curious as to how much vram this game uses and if having 3g vs 1.5g will make much of a difference. Does anyone have any readings of vram usage and / or performance on the 3g cards on a single display vs the 1.5 cards?
 
xenios said:
I currently have a 5870 and the performance at 2580x1440 is starting to get too jumpy for my liking. I am thinking about upgrading to a 580 but i am curious as to how much vram this game uses and if having 3g vs 1.5g will make much of a difference. Does anyone have any readings of vram usage and / or performance on the 3g cards on a single display vs the 1.5 cards?
Click to expand...

Shouldn't make really any difference as from what anyone has said its not even using 1GB.. multidisplay you'll need more memory though.
 
n0code said:
Shouldn't make really any difference as from what anyone has said its not even using 1GB.. multidisplay you'll need more memory though.
Click to expand...

People who have enabled actual Ultra (by restarting the game after applying them) have said it maxes up even 2GB on Radeon 6970 CF at 1920x1200... I have 570 SLI @ 2560x1600 and it is maxing my 1280mb instantly.
 
hrmm. Also, (as I have not really kept up with hardware news in awhile) does anyone know how far out the next generation from nvidia is?
 
Rig in Sig

1920 x 1080
All Ultra, 4 x AA, 16 x AF, HBAO on
Driver 285.38

Metro - Average between 80 - 100 FPS just eyeballing EVGA precision in G15 LCD
Caspian - Can't wait to play, will repost FPS if I get lucky and get in a server
 
Great, thanks for sharing guys. Quick questions:
1. Is there noticeable difference between High vs Ultra?
2. I can't toggle Motion Blur for some reason, try to turn it off and it will turn back on. So if I leave it on and set it to 0 does that mean it's off? What's your take on Motion Blur?
 
All settings ultra, 4x AA in game. Maxed out.

5ghz 2600k
16gb ram
GTX 580 AMP SLI

65-80FPS outdoor, 80-140FPS indoor
 
xenios said:
hrmm. Also, (as I have not really kept up with hardware news in awhile) does anyone know how far out the next generation from nvidia is?
Click to expand...

Sometime in Q1 of 2012. Should be near the same time AMD's 7xxx series is released, maybe a month or so apart if they don't run into too many yield issue with TSMC's 28nm node

As for BF3 performance, with my system in my signature at 1920*1200, I get 35-45 outdoors and 50-75 in the subway. I'm running with all options at Ultra with deferred AA at 2x and Post AA at low. Jaggies aren't noticeable while playing, but do show up in screenshots. I've seen the VRAM usage hit a limit of 1.4GB, which is the highest I've seen in a game without using SSAA.
 
i7 950 @ 4GHz
Radeon HD 6870 @ stock speeds

Caspain Border:


1920x1080 with everything set to Ultra except for AA (both off). Average fps was 43.
 
Last edited:
1080p, ultra, 4x AA
40ish average outside, low of 30s.
60+ indoors

3.7ghz Phenom 2 quad
GTX570 @ 875/1950

CPU use is 70-85% at all times. I think it's time for an upgrade :(
 
Anyone here have 2x 5870 1GB running this game? It seems like its super choppy even at 45+ FPS.. is this what "microstuttering" is supposed to be? I was running everything on ultra at 50-60 fps and it felt worse than me running it at 37fps with a single card.
 
I told you guys about the vram...I wouldn't buy a GTX 580 1.5 GB...too little vram. You all told me I was wrong. Think of those dude with tri-580 sli and dual 580s, micro-stutterin' and complaining.

Not me tho. I got a solid 2 GB per GPU. ;)


btw...where the hell is this beta. I pre-ordered and there's nothing on Origin.

*edit nvm I found it.
 
Last edited:
spacing guild said:
I told you guys about the vram...I wouldn't buy a GTX 580 1.5 GB...too little vram. You all told me I was wrong. Think of those dude with tri-580 sli and dual 580s, micro-stutterin' and complaining.

Not me tho. I got a solid 2 GB per GPU. ;)


btw...where the hell is this beta. I pre-ordered and there's nothing on Origin.



btw...where the hell
Click to expand...

You don't have any idea what you're talking about. I got rid of my 2 6950's flashed to 6970's and picked up GTX 580 SLI 1.5gb. The game looks better and performance increase was massive. I never drop below 60fps, period. Average is somewhere in the high 80's.

Enjoy your massive texture tearing and subpar performance with the ATI setup though.
 
On Caspian border I was getting 80-120fps at all times with absolutely everything maxed (AA and post AA as well) and 1080p resolution. Played with one GTX 580 earlier tonight as I forgot to enable SLI after upgrading drivers.:rolleyes:

The difference between SLI and a single GTX 580 3GB card is substantial. The single card was running pretty smooth, but probably in the area of 45-50fps. It seemed perfectly smooth until I turned on SLI. Dear God, its 100% smooth as silk with SLI running. The biggest difference is in the feel of the mouse movement. Having 100fps and not a hint of lag makes everything feel more connected and responsive, which should provide a decent gameplay advantage.


GPU memory usage was pegged at 1543MB. If its true that the ultra settings aren't completely enabled in the beta (as is rumored), then I will be glad that I ended up getting the 3GB cards. Hell, its right at the limit for 1.5GB GTX 580s (probably by design).

Raw data:

-100% GPU usage on both cards
-1543MB of Vram used
-Not a single dip below ~80FPS


stats.jpg
 
Exactly. Glad someone can verify my claims, I've had several people call BS at the smoothness of a GTX 580 SLI setup. It's just frigging awesome, nothing else to say.
 
computerpro3 said:
Exactly. Glad someone can verify my claims, I've had several people call BS at the smoothness of a GTX 580 SLI setup. It's just frigging awesome, nothing else to say.
Click to expand...

Definitely makes a difference. Glad I got a second card!!! Did you get the 3GB model? If not, hopefully any extra detail features which might be added won't affect vram too much...
 
On high with my sig setup, I averaged high 20's fps outside. Disappointed to say the least. I suppose that upgrade is inevitable.

Turned every setting on low and reso to 16 x 10 just to average over 45 fps outside.
 
I don't know what it is about Operation Metro but the whole map is buggy as hell and runs like ass. Caspian Border runs amazing and has none of the terrain bugs and shit in it.
 
Just because the game has used 1.5Gb or VRAM at some point doesn't necessarily mean that it needed too.. However, it does seem quite close for the GTX580, still dead smooth though by the looks of things.

Also, constant 99% usage, nice! That's what i like to see :)
Can anyone report on whether the Beta drivers actually make a difference?
 
computerpro3 said:
You don't have any idea what you're talking about. I got rid of my 2 6950's flashed to 6970's and picked up GTX 580 SLI 1.5gb. The game looks better and performance increase was massive. I never drop below 60fps, period. Average is somewhere in the high 80's.

Enjoy your massive texture tearing and subpar performance with the ATI setup though.
Click to expand...

Can you stop mentioning how you screwed up your ati cards and decided to go running to nvidia already???
 
this is one of those games that will use the extra vram if you have it but does not necessarily need more than 1gb at 1920.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top