Battlefield 4 **Official Discussion Thread**

someone please help me here

is there anyway to average 120 fps in this game without mantle? It seems like my frame rate is stuck between 70-80 fps. I have a i5 4670k and a r9 290 so I dont understand the low fps. I used mantle but I prefer direct. I updated bios/gpu drivers.

I dont understand why I can get fps above 100. I need it to be at 120. thanks
 
is frame pacing on with a single 290? or is that crossfire only thing? try typing in devicerender.framepacingmethod 0 to see if it turns it off and you notice any fps improvements.
 
Wildace said:
is frame pacing on with a single 290? or is that crossfire only thing? try typing in devicerender.framepacingmethod 0 to see if it turns it off and you notice any fps improvements.
Click to expand...

I read it works for both but I thought it was only for mantle?


also Newbie question, would ram affect the fps at all? Currently im on 32-bit Windows 8 but I was on 64-bit windows 8.1 and dont recall seeing much of a difference (lag wise). I didnt do the fps check so I wouldnt know if the fps jumped by much. Mantle did work and I saw a huge fps boost, but for whatever reason I just prefer playing with directx. Just seems smoother.

thanks, I will try your method and will report back in a little bit. Any other tips would be great.
 
i see 70-80fps a lot on my system but i've been attributing it to my 4.5ghz 8120 not being able to push it higher in some scenes. i have 2 290's on silk road tonight i was at 80-100
 
thebufenator said:
Was using the quickmatch.

Its obviously a tactic to get me to buy the map packs.......but I have a hard time justifying it for the price.
Click to expand...

I can't offer any input on the in's and out's of quickmatch, but I believe you might be jumping to conclusions on the whole "tactic to get you to buy the map packs"

Maybe I'm wrong -- but after each match, I don't think it kicks you out and back in to a different server does it?


If it operates as I'm assuming it does -- it's just the fact the server is a random one, and the odds of a random server having all the map packs installed is quite high. Anyone running a server wants it to be populated most if not all the time, and the way to net as many players as possible is to have all the DLC running. From a numbers standpoint it would kinda suck to spend X number of dollars per month and only run the maps that cater to a small part of the community.

It does suck -- and multiple DLC packs in this manner surely fracture the community.

I still highly suggest finding a few 24/7 servers that only rotate the original maps and then play that way, will be much smoother in the long run for you.
 
Has anyone ever seen anything like this?

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?...1001958627.1073741829.10618869&type=3&theater [facebook.com]

Basically after an hour or so of playing I start getting performance drops. Every other second my framerate drops from either 60 (I have it capped there) to either 33 or 45ish. Then back to 60. It won't stop until I quit out of the game engine and restart. Here's a breakdown of my rig:

i7 3930k stock frequencies HT off
evga x79 sli board
16GB gskill 1866 stock frequency
2 x Radeon 290 in xfire with fan speeds capped at 65%.
eyefinity resolution of 5910 x 1080.
catalyst 14.3 drivers
sb x-fi ti latest drivers

This stuff is driving me crazy!
 
etegv said:
someone please help me here

is there anyway to average 120 fps in this game without mantle? It seems like my frame rate is stuck between 70-80 fps. I have a i5 4670k and a r9 290 so I dont understand the low fps. I used mantle but I prefer direct. I updated bios/gpu drivers.

I dont understand why I can get fps above 100. I need it to be at 120. thanks
Click to expand...

Watch this vid. Copy his settings.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mm-cD5pECe4
 
So I updated to the 14.4 leaked drivers and then the 14.4 RC drivers and I haven't seen those 1 sec interval performance drops anymore. I don't know if there was a bug in 14.3 or I just had a corrupt file somewhere.

However it opened up a new question. Ever since the last game patch Mantle now nets me worse performance then dx11. With the exact same graphics settings depending on what's going on in game I can get between 60-120 fps with my rig in dx11. Mantle? 60fps if I'm lucky. It's stable now with mantle but I'm getting shit performance. Anyone else see this?
 
OFaceSIG said:
Has anyone ever seen anything like this?

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?...1001958627.1073741829.10618869&type=3&theater [facebook.com]

Basically after an hour or so of playing I start getting performance drops. Every other second my framerate drops from either 60 (I have it capped there) to either 33 or 45ish. Then back to 60. It won't stop until I quit out of the game engine and restart. Here's a breakdown of my rig:

i7 3930k stock frequencies HT off
evga x79 sli board
16GB gskill 1866 stock frequency
2 x Radeon 290 in xfire with fan speeds capped at 65%.
eyefinity resolution of 5910 x 1080.
catalyst 14.3 drivers
sb x-fi ti latest drivers

This stuff is driving me crazy!
Click to expand...
My gf has the same processor and motherboard for that matter and has the same problem with the cpu spike problem as you. I'll be playing just fine and it will get random hiccups where the fps will drop to 30 and go back up, the graph shows the same yellow cpu spike. It does this randomly though and the spikes are usually spaced out. My system runs the game much less smoothly (i7 [email protected] ghz, geforce 480)but I don't get those cpu spikes with the random fps drop.
 
Game runs so much better with latest nvidia drivers. Huge performance bump, subjectively. I actually can play this game on a GTX 590 now!
 
Oh by the way does anyone not agree with my that the M16 is the most deadly weapon in the game? For the assault class. That thing is DEVASTATING the way it spits out two bullets. You can sort of spray and suppress but still get some of that single fire accuracy. And the iron sights are wicked. In Locker like three guys came running at me and I just took em all out click click click. Love that gun.
 
The 3 round burst thing in this game with the net code (or what ever you wanna blame) kills it for me, I can't seem to click fast enough to be effective against someone just spraying bullets, AEK or M416 workouts better for me. The appeal that the M16 for me has always been that its a 3-4 hit kill gun that does a 3 round burst on target, in this one it feels like I hit with 1 bullet and the others just don't have any effect.

Heck, I have better luck running around with an SKS then I do the M16.
 
I would rather run around with the CZ3A1 than anything else. But then again, I un-installed the game after all of the BS random rubber banding that I get 4-5 times a match.
 
Ya, I stopped playing BF4 too frustrating. I went back to playing BlkOps1.
 
Blackstone said:
Game runs so much better with latest nvidia drivers. Huge performance bump, subjectively. I actually can play this game on a GTX 590 now!
Click to expand...
Thanks for the heads up. I will update tonight. I've already been getting high 80-90 fps at 1080p mix of Ultra and high settings on my GTX760. More performance won't hurt. :D

Blackstone said:
Oh by the way does anyone not agree with my that the M16 is the most deadly weapon in the game? For the assault class. That thing is DEVASTATING the way it spits out two bullets. You can sort of spray and suppress but still get some of that single fire accuracy. And the iron sights are wicked. In Locker like three guys came running at me and I just took em all out click click click. Love that gun.
Click to expand...
The M16A4 or the M416? 2 different rifles. M416 is full auto. The M16A4 is burst fire.

I'm going to assume you meant the M416. It is a beast. Its a toss up between it and the Ace23 for the assault class. I've heard rumors that the M416 got a buff with the recent patch, but nothing confirmed yet so it might be placebo effect or high ranked players going back and trying it after getting bored with their current favorite.

The M416 reloads faster when there are rounds left (1.85s vs 2.1s of Ace23) and when completely empty (2.4s vs 3.1s of Ace23). It also has less spread increase per shot. The first shot out of the m416 will give slightly higher vertical recoil than the Ace23, but every shot after has less deviation and less vertical recoil than the Ace23. M416 has almost no leftward recoil, but a wicked pull to the right when fired full auto where as the Ace23 is pretty balanced left to right.

Ace23 fires slightly faster than M416 770rpm vs 750, but that higher rate of fire combined with the higher deviation multiplier per shot means full auto the M416 will put more rounds on target at range than the Ace23.

My suggestion:
Ace23 with angled/folding grip and muzzle brake
-or-
M416 with Stubby/Potato grip and compensator (to fix the wicked right pull) as long as you aim for chest first, the first shot recoil combined with less deviation per shot will put the 2nd, 3rd, 4th shots directly in your opponents face.

Use the Ace23 if you expect close encounters, but not a bunch of guys at once. If are expecting dropping several enemies at once, the reload time could favor the use of the M416. If you expect any shots at medium range, again go for the M416.
 
I'm sure he meant the M16, which is just fucking awesome. First gun i took to 500 kills.
 
RangerXML said:
The 3 round burst thing in this game with the net code (or what ever you wanna blame) kills it for me, I can't seem to click fast enough to be effective against someone just spraying bullets, AEK or M416 workouts better for me. The appeal that the M16 for me has always been that its a 3-4 hit kill gun that does a 3 round burst on target, in this one it feels like I hit with 1 bullet and the others just don't have any effect.

Heck, I have better luck running around with an SKS then I do the M16.
Click to expand...

I agree. I just can't time the 3 round burst properly with my mouse click cadence. Just can't do it.
 
Is this game any better as far as rubber banding and shot reg?
I haven't played in about a month.
 
OFaceSIG said:
I agree. I just can't time the 3 round burst properly with my mouse click cadence. Just can't do it.
Click to expand...

I find that the burst modes are very inconsistent. Sometimes it is so rapid that it is a continuous 9 round burst. Other times it is a 3 shot burst and almost a full second, if not more, between bursts. When there is no pause it is certainly deadly, but if there is a random pause then it can get you killed.

I wish they'd put in an M4A1 for auto. Don't like the HK.
 
hi guys quick question

what would fetch you a higher kd

g sync or ben q 144hz? Thing is some of these people are hard to kill and im tired of lagging behind him. Its like they dont even have to try which is bs. Im seriously considering playing this game on ps4 because at least there you have an even playing field.
 
I ran the in game graph and this is what I got

standing:



running:




is this normal? windows 8 32-bit/amd r9 290/ i5 4670k/ direct x. Also fps normally does not stay at 135. It usually goes to 80-100 during fights. That game had like 18 people total.
cpu usage was around 88%

thanks
 
etegv said:
I ran the in game graph and this is what I got





is this normal? windows 8 32-bit/amd r9 290/ i5 4670k/ direct x. Also fps normally does not stay at 135. It usually goes to 80-100 during fights. That game had like 18 people total.
cpu usage was around 88%

thanks
Click to expand...

This is the way I read your graphs. You have more than enough GPU. Not enough CPU. You can do a few things to help. Either go to a hex core Intel which is very expensive or you can limit the strain on your hardware. It's hard to help a CPU bound situation but on a single screen you can run Mantle instead of direct X. That usually works ok on a single screen. Another thing that may help is limit your frames to 60. This is assuming you have a 60hz monitor. If you run thre gametime.maxvariable 60 command either in game at the console or in a user.cfg in the base folder of the time this will limit you to 60 frames per second. Now this will not ease your cpu a bunch but it will ease the strain on your graphics card and will result in a bit less CPU consumption. I would suggest trying mantle first. See how that works out for you.
 
OFaceSIG said:
This is the way I read your graphs. You have more than enough GPU. Not enough CPU. You can do a few things to help. Either go to a hex core Intel which is very expensive or you can limit the strain on your hardware. It's hard to help a CPU bound situation but on a single screen you can run Mantle instead of direct X. That usually works ok on a single screen. Another thing that may help is limit your frames to 60. This is assuming you have a 60hz monitor. If you run thre gametime.maxvariable 60 command either in game at the console or in a user.cfg in the base folder of the time this will limit you to 60 frames per second. Now this will not ease your cpu a bunch but it will ease the strain on your graphics card and will result in a bit less CPU consumption. I would suggest trying mantle first. See how that works out for you.
Click to expand...

thank you very much for the reply

yes I tried mantle and FPS jumped up significantly (I believe by like 30-40 min fps)

it was a huge difference. The reason I switched back was because I felt like I was losing way too many gun battles with it on. I guess that was just placebo because Im losing gun battles now with direct x. I want to avoid situations where I have my aim up and people end up killing me (this didnt happen about 2 months ago where I was perfectly happy with directx/bf4)

say I do go back to mantle... I read somewhere that gametime.maxvariable doesnt work with mantle too well. Should I still limit my fps? I have the asus 144 hz. Thanks
 
etegv said:
thank you very much for the reply

yes I tried mantle and FPS jumped up significantly (I believe by like 30-40 min fps)

it was a huge difference. The reason I switched back was because I felt like I was losing way too many gun battles with it on. I guess that was just placebo because Im losing gun battles now with direct x. I want to avoid situations where I have my aim up and people end up killing me (this didnt happen about 2 months ago where I was perfectly happy with directx/bf4)

say I do go back to mantle... I read somewhere that gametime.maxvariable doesnt work with mantle too well. Should I still limit my fps? I have the asus 144 hz. Thanks
Click to expand...

No if you have a 144hz monitor do not limit your frames. The more frames the more you'll see on a 144hz monitor. You should run mantle if you get more frames with it. Until you hit 144fps you'll be limiting your abilities. In theory you'll have more time to react in a gun battle with 60+ fps on a 144hz monitor. If you limit your frames you'll get no benefit from that monitor.

Back to mantle Sir! :)
 
Im getting these direct x crashes all the time :( it happens literally 2-3minutes in, it always says E_OUTOFMEMORY.

I have 8gb ram and 2 780s and a 3770k >_< i cant even play the game now.
 
renji1337 said:
Im getting these direct x crashes all the time :( it happens literally 2-3minutes in, it always says E_OUTOFMEMORY.

I have 8gb ram and 2 780s and a 3770k >_< i cant even play the game now.
Click to expand...

Have you tried reinstalling DirectX?
 
Rattle said:
Is this game any better as far as rubber banding and shot reg?
I haven't played in about a month.
Click to expand...

Yes and no, it seems to be server based for the most part. I still experience rubberbanding, although shot registration seems to be better.
 
renji1337 said:
Im getting these direct x crashes all the time :( it happens literally 2-3minutes in, it always says E_OUTOFMEMORY.

I have 8gb ram and 2 780s and a 3770k >_< i cant even play the game now.
Click to expand...

I would definately try reinstalling dx11. If that doesn't work I'd do a repair install on the game and then proceed to reinstalling your video driver. Dx11 is usually pretty dang stable.
 
renji1337 said:
Im getting these direct x crashes all the time :( it happens literally 2-3minutes in, it always says E_OUTOFMEMORY.

I have 8gb ram and 2 780s and a 3770k >_< i cant even play the game now.
Click to expand...

I had that issue with my 7950s, its running out of VRAM, lowering MSAA helped me (I run at 1600p res with 2xMSAA).
 
etegv said:
say I do go back to mantle... I read somewhere that gametime.maxvariable doesnt work with mantle too well. Should I still limit my fps? I have the asus 144 hz. Thanks
Click to expand...

I'm using maxvariablefps with Mantle, and it works great. But it has to be on the nose, like with a lot of 60hz monitors, you actually need to cap it at 59.94. I would say cap your framerate at 144, for the moments when you go over. Your monitor won't show anything over 144.

Or, if you want to increase your resolution scaling and visual settings, you can cap it lower, to get a more consistent frame pacing. For example, if you capped at 96, you would get one exactly one duplicate frame for every 3 frames, which would look pretty smooth at 144hz.
 
etegv said:
I ran the in game graph and this is what I got

standing:



running:




is this normal? windows 8 32-bit/amd r9 290/ i5 4670k/ direct x. Also fps normally does not stay at 135. It usually goes to 80-100 during fights. That game had like 18 people total.
cpu usage was around 88%

thanks
Click to expand...
1st off...is that a typo? Are you running Windows 8 32bit? If so, ditch that shit. This game does have a full 64bit native version and can use more than 2GB of RAM with the 64bit version.

2nd. What settings are you using? People running single card setups with R9 290's and GTX780's are having problems maintaining 120fps on all ultra settings. Game engine really is that strenuous. You might have to dial things down a bit to get 120+ fps constantly. Watch this video, copy his settings. Use that as a baseline to get 120+ fps. This guy has a GTX780 in the same class as your card. If you still aren't reaching your fps goal, keep lowering settings.

OFaceSIG said:
This is the way I read your graphs. You have more than enough GPU. Not enough CPU.
Click to expand...
He has more than enough CPU. His CPU usage is at 80%. It's not even being fully used. Now if his GPU usage was 80% and his CPU usage was 100%, then he would have a CPU bottleneck.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top