Battlefield 3 Open Beta Performance and Image Quality @ [H]

Nobody does it because it's pointless, the image quality has been proven to be effectively identical time and time again between brands. It's not like the Geforce 8 days where nvidia skimped on image quality to get a higher frame rate, stuff like that doesn't really happen any more, thankfully.
 
Island said:
Running rig in my sig...2 580 sli's on my dell u3011. All maxed out. I will getr around 50-70 fps using fraps. After awile of gaming though, it feels like a memory leak or something else as my fps go into the tank and I hover around 20-25. then out of nowhere it will pick back up, but then dip down again...have not checked vram useage though...I hope that whql drivers and the final game with the first few patches will iron everything out...
Click to expand...
Sounds just like my problem minus the GPU on fullload.
 
LOL it's the only game i know that make my GTX 460 SLI overclock crash! bercause of temps, usually i get max 66C, in BF3 it gets to 77C and i had a lot of error. I had to downclock my OC a little and now it's stable.. LOL
 
Ryoohki360 said:
LOL it's the only game i know that make my GTX 460 SLI overclock crash! bercause of temps, usually i get max 66C, in BF3 it gets to 77C and i had a lot of error. I had to downclock my OC a little and now it's stable.. LOL
Click to expand...

Sounds more like an unstable overclock under load then overheat...these GPUs can go well over 80c and still run....my 6970s crash at 110c...though I prefer to not let them do that...
 
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?
 
Anyone else has the problem with Eyefinity that their Map and Ammo menu thingie are not on screen? All I see are my squad members and the kill log.
Anyone know how to fix?
 
The game isn't calibrated properly by default. You need to go into the settings and adjust the video size make the visible area box smaller (Open Screen Adjust)
 
Vsync is not working right? I tried applying it and I was still pulling 100 fps. Also I can't assign mouse buttons. When I try to assign the right mouse button for jump it does nothing. Also that frame rate on your 5870 at 1080P is dam good for a card that is like almost 2 years old. The 5870 is one hella of card..
 
DualOwn said:
im sure i7 920 is to blame here, amd cards always ran better with older/slower cpu's.

I always gave AMD props for that, their gpu's require less cpu speed and cores to get them working at highest peek.

fermi is nvidia's biggest cpu hog so far, thing requires a 3rd cpu core in some games where amd card show no cpu usage at all after 2 cores.
Click to expand...

Do you have any information that backs this hypothesis of yours? I'm curious and would like to read more about it.
 
This is the first game in a while that makes me wanna upgrade my vid card. Given the system in my sig do you guys think I'll be fine in the CPU department if I just upgrade the vid card?
 
Without an overclock, not really, that CPU's a bit on the slow side. You should be ok at the 40-50fps point, but if you want a solid 60fps the CPU is going to hold you back.
 
USMCGrunt said:
Sounds more like an unstable overclock under load then overheat...these GPUs can go well over 80c and still run....my 6970s crash at 110c...though I prefer to not let them do that...
Click to expand...

I have over 80 games, none crash at that setting. Not Metro 2033, not Crysis 2 DX11 Ultra setting (witch is pretty demanding) etc etc.. all is very stable. But when in BC3, i can play max 10 minutes at my original OC and it crash (BSOD or CTD HardLock). If i underclock the OC by 22mhz on the GPU and 77mhz on the Memory, it's perfectly stable..
 
Just saying my results exactly contrast with [H], having AMD cads performing worse, but no matter which cards you go with you will be able to play the game with great IQ settings.
 
DualOwn said:
im sure i7 920 is to blame here, amd cards always ran better with older/slower cpu's.

I always gave AMD props for that, their gpu's require less cpu speed and cores to get them working at highest peek.

fermi is nvidia's biggest cpu hog so far, thing requires a 3rd cpu core in some games where amd card show no cpu usage at all after 2 cores.
Click to expand...

while a very good point I'm not sure that is the issue here. This may just be a game where the developer actually used amd hardware early on.

It is however far to early to be making these comments based on a beta build.
 
Crossfired 6970s working so far with default "Ultra" beta settings @ 2560x1600; however it's framerates in the same range as [H] was shooting for here, averaging around 38-40. I'm concerned however about what they will be with 64 player, much larger maps and all settings enabled in retail.

I don't think my motherboard supports tri-fire...will have to cross my fingers and maybe hold out for the new GPU lineup coming out. I also think (hope) there is some significant gains to be seen with driver optimizations, especially for Crossfire/SLI.
 
I dont like that it runs from my web browser, I wanted to test the game like the demo execute file? its somehow slow on my system and even if I shoot at someoned in front of me, that person kills me first.
 
I too had 38-40fps at the same settings with two 6970s. I got rid of the AA and HBAO and now I see a minimum of 65, normally 85-110.
 
I would love to see after launch, if [H] has the resources, a CPU comparison as well as a GPU comparison. 920, 2500k, 2600k, BD (if it's ever out :p). I'm most interested in seeing if the hyperthreading of the 2600k gives it any type of edge over the 2500k.
 
samuelmorris said:
Without an overclock, not really, that CPU's a bit on the slow side. You should be ok at the 40-50fps point, but if you want a solid 60fps the CPU is going to hold you back.
Click to expand...

Alright sounds good, thanks!
 
Awesome review! Im loving my shader unlocked 6950 in this game! Never dipped below 35 frames.
 
Tamlin_WSGF said:
Could you contact Dice regarding the high GPU memory usage? Many are trying to prepare for the BF3 release later this month and people are insecure about how much GFX memory they need for different resolutions (up to Eyefinity/surround).
Click to expand...

I'd like to add my name to the list of people who would be very interested to see the effects the amount of VRAM has on the game. Preferably with on cards with the same clocks, like the EVGA HD's.
 
I wanted to see how well an overclocked GTX 580 compares to a stock card, using Hardocp'd settings.

Here my benchmarks compared to HARDOCP:

PLAYABLE SETTINGS AS PER HARDOCP FOR 2560x1600. GTX 580 OC'D TO 950/1900/2225. Intel 2600k @ 4.6ghz.

The benchmark were conducted defending the first M-COM stations in the same game. The server was full and game was action packed. All the action takes place top side which is the by the far most taxing part of the level:

Run 1:
Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
6540, 120000, 43, 70, 54.500

Run 2:
Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
6644, 120000, 43, 72, 55.367



SAME SETTINGS AS HARDOCP BUT WITH HBAO/SSAO DISABLED (restarted the game to ensure settings took and waiting for the same game scenario as above)

Run 1:
Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
8016, 120000, 54, 88, 66.800

Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
8104, 120000, 51, 93, 67.533
 
38 fps for THIS?

On GTX 550?

Someone should court order DICE to hand over Mirror's Edge to Valve, because all they can do last couple of years is make big fuzzy blobs of green

Oh and as a BF3 bonus - net code is fvucked up as ever.
 
RobertR1 said:
I wanted to see how well an overclocked GTX 580 compares to a stock card, using Hardocp'd settings.

Here my benchmarks compared to HARDOCP:

PLAYABLE SETTINGS AS PER HARDOCP FOR 2560x1600. GTX 580 OC'D TO 950/1900/2225. Intel 2600k @ 4.6ghz.

The benchmark were conducted defending the first M-COM stations in the same game. The server was full and game was action packed. All the action takes place top side which is the by the far most taxing part of the level:

Run 1:
Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
6540, 120000, 43, 70, 54.500

Run 2:
Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
6644, 120000, 43, 72, 55.367



SAME SETTINGS AS HARDOCP BUT WITH HBAO/SSAO DISABLED (restarted the game to ensure settings took and waiting for the same game scenario as above)

Run 1:
Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
8016, 120000, 54, 88, 66.800

Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
8104, 120000, 51, 93, 67.533
Click to expand...

If you changed the quality settings, then you didn't really compare the overclocked card to stock - at least not in a meaningful way.
 
I'm just hoping that a single 570 will run this somewhere near max with a single 1920x1080 display.

I might switch to a 2500K and use the extra scratch to jump to a 580 and wait a week or 2 for the Gen 3 Asus boards (might as well) and just plan on going Ivy at some point in 2012.

I'd hate to invest in a new rig just to play BF3 and the rest of 2011's titles on anything below max (excluding tweaks to AA and AF)

Thoughts?
 
Forceman said:
If you changed the quality settings, then you didn't really compare the overclocked card to stock - at least not in a meaningful way.
Click to expand...

The first set of runs is EXACTLY like hardocp's settigns.

The 2nd set of runs is hardocp settings but HBAO/SSAO turned off to show how much more performance can be gained by doing such.

If you want apples to apples, you would compare my first set vs hard's figures. These numbers show that by overclocking the GTX580 from stock, you can gain 15fps on average. Hard to beat that.
 
Last edited:
I have been running everything on Ultra or the highest settings among with 4x AA with no post-anti aliasing effect off with 2 GTX280 around 40~45 FPS. its amazing game
 
RobertR1 said:
The first set of runs is EXACTLY like hardocp's settigns.

The 2nd set of runs is hardocp settings but HBAO/SSAO turned off to show how much more performance can be gained by doing such.

If you want apples to apples, you would compare my first set vs hard's figures. These numbers show that by overclocking the GTX580 from stock, you can gain 15fps on average. Hard to beat that.
Click to expand...

Okay. I guess I assumed that the first numbers were from the [H] review, and not from you. I didn't think to cross-reference them with the [H] review page.
 
Here are some scaling results from my gtx 460's SLI 768mb 900mhz o.c. medium textures Everything else ultra no aa 1680x1050 120hz

150 fps max 100 avg.
BF3scaling900mhzresize.jpg
 
Last edited:
HohnyF said:
Oh and as a BF3 bonus - net code is fvucked up as ever.
Click to expand...
There's definately an issue with netcode where often it looks like someone kills you with a single shot, but they actually began shooting at you seconds before. But compared to the hit detection problems of BC2, I'd say this is preferable. And that's not to say that netcode problems should be acceptable, but I'd say this is the lesser of two evils, therefore I'm far more satisified with how BF3 works online than with how BC2 did. My last real BF game was 2142 however (same with BF2), and I don't remember having so many issues there on non-laggy servers, but then again that game didn't have the bullet physics the new games have.
 
I think it will be interesting to see how the performance changes (up or down) with new driver releases, as we saw with BC2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top