Battlefield 4 Beta Performance Preview @ [H]

Flopper

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 15, 2007
Messages
1,642
I am running an i7-4770k
ASUS Z87-C
Windows 8 64bit
16GB RAM
Nvidia 770 4GB

I can tell you without reservation that performance of the beta is pretty much flawlessly smooth no matter what on my rig at 1920x1080 at maximum game settings.

So whether it's my current cpu/mobo, windows 8, the 4GB video card or a combination thereof, the point is that it's running perfectly.

windows 8.
windows 7 atm cause a bit of a mess.
 

roki977

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
207
Game is running great after latest patch. On my 770 and 3770k @ 4.6, 1920x1200, 4xaa, ultra, minimum is 45 fps even with hard tank fight. Avg. over 70. Memory is maxed out but performance is still great.
I didnt notice if you used latest patch and if not you will have to do recap bcs. things are much different. Avg and min. are up more than 20 fps.

Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
22151, 311441, 45, 126, 71.124

Avg. CPU load dropped more than 10% after patch, dont know how you got 90%. All my 8 threads are 30-50% with some spikes over 90% but that is just when entering level or something like that..

http://www.pohrani.com/f/X/Pz/2xVFeuqq/1/newpicture045.jpg
 
Last edited:

wadec22

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
3,898
good read. I still feel the dips during heavy action on a highly clocked Titan on Win8. I put everything on medium settings on NVidia surround so the dips are pretty tolerable (I only dip to the 40's) but they are there.
 

Business6

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
1,860
Good read but this performance preview is essentially irrelevant with the new patch.

It crashes just as often as before (ugh) but it runs as smooth as BF3 for me now
 

Camberwell

Gawd
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
870
It's weird, I just checked again and on a 32 player map, with all my settings on high (1440p monitor), my system ram usage is only around 2.5 Gb according to AIDA64 (5.6 Gb free at desktop, around 3 Gb free in game). How come others are getting such high ram usage compared to me? Vram is pretty maxed out at 1.94 Gb though, but I expected that...
 

Metrocall

Gawd
Joined
Mar 4, 2008
Messages
952
That's very strange with the VRAM, at 1080p with ultra + 2X AA, I always see >2.2GB of VRAM.

Edit: 7950@1100/1400
 
Last edited:

roki977

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
207
My 770 is 2.09gb when maxed.. I dont think that 100, 200mb of vram or up to some point, can make much difference.
 

Ryoohki360

Gawd
Joined
Aug 23, 2010
Messages
605
My vram too is maxed but i feel the texture swapping at 2xmsaa on 2gb, depand on the # of players, on a 60 player map i just turn msaa off (660ti)
 
Joined
Dec 22, 2007
Messages
987
Running on 'High' preset @ 1080 with an OC'd 570 and it's pretty smooth. Bounces from 45-55 and occasionally drops to ~20 but I think this is due to known W7 issues.

Based on this review I need a 4GB GPU and another 8GB ram if I want to run max settings. $$$
 

EdKiefer

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 4, 2012
Messages
226
Game is running great after latest patch. On my 770 and 3770k @ 4.6, 1920x1200, 4xaa, ultra, minimum is 45 fps even with hard tank fight. Avg. over 70. Memory is maxed out but performance is still great.
I didnt notice if you used latest patch and if not you will have to do recap bcs. things are much different. Avg and min. are up more than 20 fps.

Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
22151, 311441, 45, 126, 71.124

Avg. CPU load dropped more than 10% after patch, dont know how you got 90%. All my 8 threads are 30-50% with some spikes over 90% but that is just when entering level or something like that..

http://www.pohrani.com/f/X/Pz/2xVFeuqq/1/newpicture045.jpg
Yes, latest patch helped a lot to smooth those dips into teens I was getting before even though avg and max were high (85avg, 130's max).
My CPU % on 3570k is about 80-85max (avg is closer to 80%) .I was able to up resolution to 1600x1200 as before was 1280x1024 . and my avg is like 70-80 fps now . very playable on 660ti but i run with high settings not ultra (didn't really notice much visual difference .
Before patches I notice my CPU core temps were very close to prime95 ones (was getting up to 59c during gaming ,and for ref prime95 is 61-62c ) . After two patches my temps are now 57c so that shows usage has gone down too .
I also have 8gig and after like 1- 1.5hrs I was around 4.5gigs used in task-manager .
Very playable now and smooth , I don't even have new drivers . Still using 314.07 's

Edit: One thing on memory usage, since this game uses web browser before the two patches I think I was hitting system limit of 8gig , felt like it as was slow after closing game . I normally have like 40+ tabs I while I didn't check the game usage , my Palemoon was using close to 2gigs . So make sure you don't have browser bloated with tabs when running or move to 16gigs .
I really wish server lists were built into game .
 
Last edited:

magoo

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
14,492
You missed the point then, the point was to compare a 2GB card vs. a 3GB card, since that is one of the most important comparisons people want to know about with this game, if 2GB will be a limit, and if 3GB cards will show a benefit.

Also, 280X and 770 are the latest models of video cards right now from both camps, reviews will consist of these new models. Obviously if you look at 280X performance you will know 7970 GHz performance, and if you look at 770 performance, you will know 680 performance.

This was a preview, of a Beta game, we aren't going to invest the resources on evaluating every video card, we chose the two most competitive at a $300-399 price range. In other games, they are dead even on performance, but in this game, they are not, again, an interesting turn of events.

The full evaluation will be done when the game is released.

Yup I missed the boat there, but the rationale wasn't obvious to me in reading the article.
I get the price part.
I just wasn't getting the choice of particular card. I'll be looking forward to the full review.

Obviously something isn't right in NVidia-land with this game, and it doesn't seem to be VRAM specific. The cards are just way too far apart.:eek:
 

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
53,024
"Considering that NVIDIA started its entire frame pacing / frametime investigation based on what HardOCP "said,"

Wow, impressive I was under the impression that Scott Wasson was the driving force behind quantifying these issues, any chance of more info on this / links?

I know you hate hearing this but I agree that frametime data would be most useful, it could very well clarify or at least narrow down what is going on with the 770. Maybe if it was used very specifically and sparingly you could avoid adding unreasonably to your benching workload?

Thanks for the preview.


Ask Tom Petersen, Director at NVIDIA. He has said it publicly several times as well. We were dealing with NVIDIA on this subject well before Scott went public with testing at that time, and Scott's data was actually flawed.

Our mind is made up on framerating data, it is not needed in order to explain the gaming experience.
 

pcjunkie

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
2,602
My understanding is Scott W. was the first one that got AMD to admit publicly there were certain issues in crossfire due to that article and got the ball rolling. I don't think it was much about Nvidia at all if that's the one were talking about, since Nvidia's frame pacing was much better already?
 

Dayaks

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
8,928
The game does recommend 3GB VRAM. Wouldn't be too crazy if 2GB gives you issues to some extent.
 

Araxie

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 11, 2013
Messages
6,452
Since tonight's BF4 update performance on my machine has doubled and all choppiness/stutter is no longer apparent. I was running about 40fps average with constant spikes to 3-5fps every few seconds, now that's about 70fps average with pure smooth gameplay on ultra/1080P.

Running two 2GB 660Ti's in SLI, both MSI power ed running with stock OC, Vram usage is about 1650MB per GPU.

GTX 660TI will never max out the Vram Usage due to the Asynchronous memory controller 660TI its basically a 1.5GB or 3GB Vram Card.. not 2GB. the tiny 192bits bus its not multiple of 2GB. so that mean it use 1.5GB at 192bits and 512mb at 64bits, so anything that pass from 1.5GB will in fact slowdown the memory speed.. diferent from using a 3GB 660ti wich can use full memory.

My vram too is maxed but i feel the texture swapping at 2xmsaa on 2gb, depand on the # of players, on a 60 player map i just turn msaa off (660ti)

hardly believe that unless you using a 3GB 660TI.. it will rarely pass from 1.65GB if not will hurt badly the efective vRAM speed..
 

Blacklash

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 16, 2004
Messages
1,893
AMD's drivers have improved. I'm thankful for whatever or whoever that caused it to happen. Now I can run through Skyrim's outdoors areas without using AB to cap my FPS and it's still smooth.
 

Nenu

[H]ardened
Joined
Apr 28, 2007
Messages
20,097
Has anyone with smoothness issues tried framerate limiting to somewhere near the average fps?
 

Pastuch

Gawd
Joined
May 13, 2010
Messages
622
I run the game at 2560x1440 with a single stock GTX670 and 8gbs of ram. The 42mb patch on Tuesday really improved frame rate stability. I average about 43FPS on FRAPS with BF4 settings on High. I crash to desktop once every 5 hours of play but it's never due to low memory. I'm running the latest nvidia beta driver.

I've played over 30 hours of 128 player conquest and never seen Windows 8 use more than 5gbs of ram so I can't wait to see the Windows 7 vs Windows 8 comparison.

The new obliteration mode with my friends is the most fun FPS experience I've had in years.

Windows 8 is worth upgrading to for the task manager alone. Install Classic Shell if you want a 'better-than-7' start menu replacement, it's free and I use it on my Windows XP, 7 and 8 builds.
 

Brent_Justice

Moderator
Joined
Apr 17, 2000
Messages
17,755
Did Hardocp read about all the Win 7 issues with Nvidia for this game? Try the game on Windows 8. The game runs flawlessly on Nvidia hardware with Windows 8.

I don't have any sort of framerate dips during action scenes.

I am of the belief that the game should run well on both Win7 and Win8, both platforms need to be supported for gamers. There's a larger install base of Win7 gamers, then there are Win8 gamers still. A lot of people don't upgrade OS, just to upgrade OS, they need a reason to, and many haven't seen a reason to upgrade to Win8. So Win7 shouldn't be a "issue", IMO it needs to be supported just as well as Win8, you shouldn't need to upgrade OS just for one game, IMO.

Officially, it has already been stated we will do a Win7 vs. Win8 performance article in BF4.
 
Joined
Feb 14, 2007
Messages
58
They better fix that because most people aren't going to be using Widows 8.X to play it no matter how hard you wish it.

Well then they are really doing themselves a unnecessary disservice for no real good reason. Even if you were stuck with Metro-which you are not-it is a really good OS and a worthy successor to 7 for 2103 and beyond, especially under the hood.

cuz OMG TILES RARRRRRRRR

NEW THINGS CAN GO TO HAIL

LOL


Why is it just because people don't want to upgrade from a perfectly working Windows 7 they are all labeled Windows 8 haters now? So much insecurity...:rolleyes:

It is a better product with more features and improvements over 7. And now we have a fantastic, concrete benefit in how much better it runs BF4. I'm sure your old video card was "perfectly working" too but you chose to upgrade as there were real benefits to doing so.

I am of the belief that the game should run well on both Win7 and Win8, both platforms need to be supported for gamers. There's a larger install base of Win7 gamers, then there are Win8 gamers still. A lot of people don't upgrade OS, just to upgrade OS, they need a reason to, and many haven't seen a reason to upgrade to Win8. So Win7 shouldn't be a "issue", IMO it needs to be supported just as well as Win8, you shouldn't need to upgrade OS just for one game, IMO.

Officially, it has already been stated we will do a Win7 vs. Win8 performance article in BF4.

No not just for "one game" but there are plenty of other reasons to upgrade, imo. And this BF4 performance situation is apparently due to concrete technical factors related to DX 11.1 and possibly betetr multithreading. Sure both plats should be "supported" but one is clearly superior here, at least as it stands today (and in the beta).
 

Dayaks

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
8,928
This Win7 vs Win8 is interesting. I have 7970s in trifire, 16GB RAM, 3770k with Win7. I play at 1920x1200, ultra, 4x MSAA and had 0 issues. Frame rates are 60-75 consistently, never have drops ect. I might just be powerig through all the crap?
 

Pastuch

Gawd
Joined
May 13, 2010
Messages
622
I hope that 1 year from now the debate becomes:

Should I upgrade to an AMD video card so I can run Mantle in Windows 7?
or
Should I upgrade to Windows 8 so I can Run DirectX 11.1/11.2 and take advantage of better CPU scaling?

The real dream is that Mantle provides massive 'free' performance benefits on compatible GPUs enabling early adoption of 4k gaming in Windows 8. I'll happily buy a $1000 60 inch chinese 4k as soon as they hit the market. Now that's a 'desktop' monitor ;) Until then 2560x1440 @ 110hz will suffice.
 

pcjunkie

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
2,602
Well then they are really doing themselves a unnecessary disservice for no real good reason. Even if you were stuck with Metro-which you are not-it is a really good OS and a worthy successor to 7 for 2103 and beyond, especially under the hood.

Nobody is doing anybody a disservice. BF4 runs great on Windows 8 already so they need to get Windows 7 performance better. Fact is with THIS game most people will be running it on Windows 7. This isn't the future and nobody is trying to stop anyone from using Win 8 or doing it a disservice. I swear the Win 8 fan boys get touchy over anything negative even if it has nothing to do with it.
 
Joined
Feb 14, 2007
Messages
58
I am not a fanboy. I still run 7 but Windows 8 has slowly won me over based on things like this. Was planning a new mobo to be able to go Crossfire again and will definitely be upgrading my OS to 8.1 during that same time now.

I meant it's a disservice in general to write it off because once you get past the UI bs it is a really good product that, if not for Metro, everyone would be fawning over like they still do 7.
 

Blacklash

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 16, 2004
Messages
1,893
Once the game is released and patched further performance will likely go up on Win 7. Some of the issues are likely due to bugs and/or a lack of tuning. I'll definitely be watching for [H]ard's comparison.
 
Joined
Feb 14, 2007
Messages
58
^ That is certainly possible, yes. This beta, at least, has really made some of Windows 8's updated and better aspects shine, however. MS coulda used it a year ago. Tons of people have downloaded and tried the 8 Preview as a result.
 

pcjunkie

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
2,602
^ That is certainly possible, yes. This beta, at least, has really made some of Windows 8's updated and better aspects shine, however. MS coulda used it a year ago. Tons of people have downloaded and tried the 8 Preview as a result.

Jesus xmas stop the Windows 8 plugs when were talking about Windows 7.
 

Pastuch

Gawd
Joined
May 13, 2010
Messages
622
I am not a fanboy. I still run 7 but Windows 8 has slowly won me over based on things like this. Was planning a new mobo to be able to go Crossfire again and will definitely be upgrading my OS to 8.1 during that same time now.

I meant it's a disservice in general to write it off because once you get past the UI bs it is a really good product that, if not for Metro, everyone would be fawning over like they still do 7.

This is exactly how I feel. I absolutely hated 8 until I turned off Metro and installed classic shell. It's hard to get past that initial first impression but it has a heart of gold. All my games run better, Aeroglass never crashes because it's gone, I have NEVER seen a low system memory warning while gaming (Happened all the time in 7), the new task manager is spectacular, the low resource usage is what every gamer says they want. I understand the hate for metro though, stupid idea. I regularly fight the MS rep at my office... his favorite argument: "The future of desktops is touchscreen". Sometimes I think he's trolling me.
 

Brent_Justice

Moderator
Joined
Apr 17, 2000
Messages
17,755
No not just for "one game" but there are plenty of other reasons to upgrade, imo. And this BF4 performance situation is apparently due to concrete technical factors related to DX 11.1 and possibly betetr multithreading. Sure both plats should be "supported" but one is clearly superior here, at least as it stands today (and in the beta).

I'm all about choice for users, and I don't think Win7 gamers should be penalized. There is no Reason DX11.1/2 can't come down to Win7, that is a MS forced decision that is being forced upon us. Win7 has a large install base, a lot of people haven't seen a need to upgrade to Win8, it doesn't offer them anything that's needed, they are being just as productive on Win7. You should not be forced to upgrade OS IMO.

Of course, we will do a Win7 vs. Win8 perf article in this game, but my personal opinion on Win8 stands. I will always hold the opinion that I think what MS ultimately should have done is more what Apple has done. iOS for Phones and Tablets, OSX for desktop PCs. MS needs a phone/tablet OS, call this "Metro" and a Desktop OS, call this "Windows" problem solved. (yes i'm aware 8.1 lets you boot to desktop, but fact remains, metro is is always there in the background)

I would have been happy, if MS gave you the option to install Metro, or install a Destkop interface only. I feel Metro is great for tablets and phone, but not right for desktops. That's all, give the user a choice, let them install only the software on their PC they want, if they don't want Metro, then don't install it. Focus more on the desktop experience, and excel at that.

Just my Opinion.
 

sk3tch

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 5, 2008
Messages
1,905
Jesus xmas stop the Windows 8 plugs when were talking about Windows 7.

He's merely talking about how after the beta, sure, Win7 performance could come up versus Win8 (whereas now there is a pretty large vista).

No matter what, it's not Win7 vs. Win8 it's DX 11 vs. DX 11.1 and currently Microsoft is locking DX 11.1 into Win8 so we're all stuck going to Win8 *if* we want DX 11.1 benefits - of which there are many for BF4 Beta. The developer (DICE) has confirmed they take advantage of DX 11.1 and WDDM 1.1/1.2 multiple times - links are posted earlier in this thread.
 

pcjunkie

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
2,602
He's merely talking about how after the beta, sure, Win7 performance could come up versus Win8 (whereas now there is a pretty large vista).

No matter what, it's not Win7 vs. Win8 it's DX 11 vs. DX 11.1 and currently Microsoft is locking DX 11.1 into Win8 so we're all stuck going to Win8 *if* we want DX 11.1 benefits - of which there are many for BF4 Beta. The developer (DICE) has confirmed they take advantage of DX 11.1 and WDDM 1.1/1.2 multiple times - links are posted earlier in this thread.

*sigh* I give up. :(
 

sk3tch

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 5, 2008
Messages
1,905
*sigh* I give up. :(

Sorry to upset you. We're having a conversation about BF4 Beta performance - whether you like it or not that involves speaking about the OS we use...simply because Microsoft locked DX 11.1 to a certain OS that I will not name (do not want to upset your further). :)
 

Pastuch

Gawd
Joined
May 13, 2010
Messages
622
I'm all about choice for users, and I don't think Win7 gamers should be penalized. There is no Reason DX11.1/2 can't come down to Win7, that is a MS forced decision that is being forced upon us. Win7 has a large install base, a lot of people haven't seen a need to upgrade to Win8, it doesn't offer them anything that's needed, they are being just as productive on Win7. You should not be forced to upgrade OS IMO.

Of course, we will do a Win7 vs. Win8 perf article in this game, but my personal opinion on Win8 stands. I will always hold the opinion that I think what MS ultimately should have done is more what Apple has done. iOS for Phones and Tablets, OSX for desktop PCs. MS needs a phone/tablet OS, call this "Metro" and a Desktop OS, call this "Windows" problem solved. (yes i'm aware 8.1 lets you boot to desktop, but fact remains, metro is is always there in the background)

I would have been happy, if MS gave you the option to install Metro, or install a Destkop interface only. I feel Metro is great for tablets and phone, but not right for desktops. That's all, give the user a choice, let them install only the software on their PC they want, if they don't want Metro, then don't install it. Focus more on the desktop experience, and excel at that.

Just my Opinion.

I agree with you completely. Microsoft never brought DX10 to Windows XP and they likely won't bring DX11.1/2/3 to Windows 7. Hopefully Mantle will remove the Microsoft handcuffs...
 

sk3tch

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 5, 2008
Messages
1,905
I used to be a Windows 8 hater, too. I gave it a try for the BF4 Beta and now I love it ($5 and Stardock's Start8 later and it's the same as Win7). I'm so used to jank performance with 3-way and 4-way SLI. It has been a revelation.
 

pcjunkie

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
2,602
Sorry to upset you. We're having a conversation about BF4 Beta performance - whether you like it or not that involves speaking about the OS we use...simply because Microsoft locked DX 11.1 to a certain OS that I will not name (do not want to upset your further). :)

I don't have a problem with the thread conversation, it was a couple specific posts that I was referring to including one of mine about performance on Windows 7, which had NOTHING to do with Windows 8 or DX 11.1 so there was no need for it. ;)
 
Joined
Feb 14, 2007
Messages
58
Sorry to upset you. We're having a conversation about BF4 Beta performance - whether you like it or not that involves speaking about the OS we use...simply because Microsoft locked DX 11.1 to a certain OS that I will not name (do not want to upset your further). :)

Thanks.

I used to be a Windows 8 hater, too. I gave it a try for the BF4 Beta and now I love it ($5 and Stardock's Start8 later and it's the same as Win7). I'm so used to jank performance with 3-way and 4-way SLI. It has been a revelation.

Right on. Love stories like this. And not cause I'm some damn 8 fanboy or whatever but because *this is how it should be*. A positive progression. Not exactly apples to apples but we all love the latest and "greatest" hardware, right? Why not software too (provided it's truly better in at least some ways and not buggy or bloated, of course)?
 

xeddex

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 14, 2005
Messages
147
I'm running the following and while there is an occasional "blink" of stutter I find it a completely acceptable gameplay experience.

NOTE: I put in 6 more gigs of ram yesterday so I have 12 total now. I can tell the game does feel a bit better with 12 vs 6. Not monumental but noticeable.


i7-920
Win7 64bit Home Premium
12gigs RAM
2 AMD 5850's xfire (stock settings, no oc)
1920x1080 with gpu scaling set to fill my 2560x1440 korean ips monitor (I tried running it in 2560 and switched it back after about 3 seconds)
 

Dayaks

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
8,928
I just found the resolution scaling. I set it 150% and it got rid of all jaggies and it's still smooth. :) All games should have that slider...
 

fanboy

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 4, 2009
Messages
1,057
I upgraded my Vista 64 bit to windows 8 64 bit today and my Trixx software shows it running as DX 11.1 and i'm on Cat 13.11 beta now. The game runs prefect now and no shutters /lag or anything.. just awesome gameplay and I only have 6Gb of ram and it has not been an issue!

i7-930 with HT @stock
6Gb DDR3 @1600Mhz
HD7950 @stock

1920 x 1080 on Ultra 64 player server .. I'm a believer in windows 8 now!
 
Top