• 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.

Will this Run BF3

R

Rajincajun

Weaksauce
Joined
Nov 30, 2010
Messages
99
I have a GTS250 1 gig of DDR, will this card run BF3? I'm running the Beta and it's very had to play @ 1260 and medium detail turned on.

My Cpu is a little old, Intel Duel core 3.2 Ghz.

What's hurting me the most? The CPU or the Vid Card?

Thanks guys.
 
The graphics card is probably hurting you the most, but the processor isn't helping things either. People seem to think BF3 needs ideally an i5 or up to run it with decent performance.

You might want to consider upgrading to a 5770 or a 5850 or something for your videocard (something that can do DX11)...I'm sure the more knowledgable guys here will be able to give you a more precise recommendation :cool:. I'm assuming you're not looking to run the game at 1920x1200 with max AA or anything, but you're probably just looking for "something playable", yeah?
 
Last edited:
Rajincajun said:
I have a GTS250 1 gig of DDR, will this card run BF3? I'm running the Beta and it's very had to play @ 1260 and medium detail turned on.

My Cpu is a little old, Intel Duel core 3.2 Ghz.

What's hurting me the most? The CPU or the Vid Card?

Thanks guys.
Click to expand...
Both are killing you. The recommended CPU for this game is a quad-core.

My machine is an AMD Phenom at 2.5ghz with an ATI HD4850 video card. It maxes out my CPU with 100% cpu usage on ALL 4 CORES. I have more of a system than you do, and I can still only manage playable framerates at ALL LOW graphics settings. The good news is that BF3 on low looks like Bad Company 2 on medium, so it isn't too bad.
 
Plague_Injected said:
The graphics card is probably hurting you the most, but the processor isn't helping things either. People seem to think BF3 needs ideally an i5 or up to run it with decent performance.

You might want to consider upgrading to a 5770 or a 5850 or something for your videocard (something that can do DX11)...I'm sure the more knowledgable guys here will be able to give you a more precise recommendation :cool:. I'm assuming you're not looking to run the game at 1920x1200 with max AA or anything, but you're probably just looking for "something playable", yeah?
Click to expand...


1920x1200 sounds good to me lol. I wan't to play it but I also want it to look pretty good. My monitor will do 1920 so why not have my system do it also?
 
CaptNumbNutz said:
Both are killing you. The recommended CPU for this game is a quad-core.

My machine is an AMD Phenom at 2.5ghz with an ATI HD4850 video card. It maxes out my CPU with 100% cpu usage on ALL 4 CORES. I have more of a system than you do, and I can still only manage playable framerates at ALL LOW graphics settings. The good news is that BF3 on low looks like Bad Company 2 on medium, so it isn't too bad.
Click to expand...

Capt, how are the performance of the AMD compared to the same Intel? Say price and same Ghz are the ADM CPU's still faster than the comparable Intel?
 
I'd say it's the processor that's holding you back more. I can run it at ultra settings, 1680x1050. Now the GTS450 really isn't that beefy a card so it must be the hex core that is boosting it. Looking forward to getting a 6950 in the near future.....see what that can do.
 
From what I have seen on review websites, BF3 Beta CHOKES on dual-core setups.

See here:

http://benchmark3d.com/battlefield-3-beta-performance-preview

With only 2 cores the average framerate is 13fps! But that jumps to 30fps with a third core.

If you ask me, it's an optimization issue that may be corrected in the future (BF:BC2 ran fine on a fast Core 2 Duo). But for now if you want to be sure you need 3-4 cores .
 
Thanks for the info guys. I'm looking at building a new rig soon and am looking at what I should get.
 
Rajincajun said:
I have a GTS250 1 gig of DDR, will this card run BF3? I'm running the Beta and it's very had to play @ 1260 and medium detail turned on.

My Cpu is a little old, Intel Duel core 3.2 Ghz.

What's hurting me the most? The CPU or the Vid Card?

Thanks guys.
Click to expand...

This game runs smoother on my system than BC2 did. I am not kidding. I was going to get a new mobo/cpu thinking it was going to be needed, not really. With setting on high, my FPS is hovering around 30-50. Granted some rough spots and not 100% smooth, but definitely playable.

ps, system in my sig. C2D 2.66ghz cpu/ATI 5850/8 gigs DDR2, 1920*1080 res.
 
I love how there are still people clinging onto dual cores and defending them with their life.

NEWS FLASH! If you have a dual core CPU, its obsolete. Time to upgrade.
 
Buxaroo said:
This game runs smoother on my system than BC2 did. I am not kidding. I was going to get a new mobo/cpu thinking it was going to be needed, not really. With setting on high, my FPS is hovering around 30-50. Granted some rough spots and not 100% smooth, but definitely playable.

ps, system in my sig. C2D 2.66ghz cpu/ATI 5850/8 gigs DDR2, 1920*1080 res.
Click to expand...
a 5850 with an old E6750 2.66? wow that is a huge mismatch. you do not even get half of what a 5850 can do in many modern games using that old cpu.


OP, a 3.2 "Duel core" does not really say much so you would need to list the exact model. and 1gb of DDR1? really? I cant even think of what 3.2 dual core cpu would have been around at that time. and 1gb of system ram was not even enough for demanding games in 2005 much less now.

so anyway at least you are prepared to get a new setup. ;)
 
I remember running my dualie athy x2 240 on bfbc2 with a 3870, it was okay but the upgrade to a phenom II x4 940 made a HUUUUGE difference then upgraded my gpu to a 5770 then a 5870 later.I would say upgrade to a quad first then gpu later.
 
defaultluser said:
From what I have seen on review websites, BF3 Beta CHOKES on dual-core setups.

See here:

http://benchmark3d.com/battlefield-3-beta-performance-preview

With only 2 cores the average framerate is 13fps! But that jumps to 30fps with a third core.

If you ask me, it's an optimization issue that may be corrected in the future (BF:BC2 ran fine on a fast Core 2 Duo). But for now if you want to be sure you need 3-4 cores .
Click to expand...

My i3 with two cores(4 with Hyper Threading) runs BF3 at around 70-80% usage on all cores.
 
MetalX said:
My i3 with two cores(4 with Hyper Threading) runs BF3 at around 70-80% usage on all cores.
Click to expand...
I hit 80-85% on 4 real cores.



defaultluser, something is screwy in this game because if I disable 2 cores the game drops to 10 fps yet a real dual core such as an E8400 can obviously do way way better.
 
Oh, I am not defending my CPU at all believe me. And I will be upgrading my motherboard/cpu soon, but fact is the game still runs smoothly regardless. And I bought the 5850 back in the day when I thought I was going to be upgrading everything else a month later. Turns out other things took priority and that didn't happen. And anyways, there hasn't been a game yet that actually taxed my system, hell even Metro2033 played very well with high settings using DX11. So just stuck with it. But I want a lot smother frame rate and I know that the only thing that's gonna fix it is getting new mobo/cpu/ram.
 
Buxaroo said:
Oh, I am not defending my CPU at all believe me. And I will be upgrading my motherboard/cpu soon, but fact is the game still runs smoothly regardless. And I bought the 5850 back in the day when I thought I was going to be upgrading everything else a month later. Turns out other things took priority and that didn't happen. And anyways, there hasn't been a game yet that actually taxed my system, hell even Metro2033 played very well with high settings using DX11. So just stuck with it. But I want a lot smother frame rate and I know that the only thing that's gonna fix it is getting new mobo/cpu/ram.
Click to expand...
yeah I was not saying that you could not run most games. I was just saying that the poor 5850 is not getting to shine. you could have bought a 5770 and had the same playable experience in nearly every case. I assure you that if you checked your framerates, especially minimums, they would be quite bad compared to what a 5850 should be getting. now once you upgrade your cpu, you will probably want even more gpu power. lol, it never ends. :)
 
cannondale06 said:
a 5850 with an old E6750 2.66? wow that is a huge mismatch. you do not even get half of what a 5850 can do in many modern games using that old cpu.


OP, a 3.2 "Duel core" does not really say much so you would need to list the exact model. and 1gb of DDR1? really? I cant even think of what 3.2 dual core cpu would have been around at that time. and 1gb of system ram was not even enough for demanding games in 2005 much less now.

so anyway at least you are prepared to get a new setup. ;)
Click to expand...

I think the 1gb is on the card, since he mentions it and follows with the question, "will this card run..."

My guess is the OP is running either a Pentium E6700 or a Pentium D (shudder) 940 or 840. All three of which would be the lagging factor in the set up (though a graphics update is also needed).

To the OP, since you're probably upgrading the CPU (and most likely the MB and RAM, as well), you could probably deal shop for a combo and use the savings to put toward a new GPU. Also, I don't know the specifics of your set up, but you may need to look into getting a new PSU as well.
 
Bomo said:
I think the 1gb is on the card, since he mentions it and follows with the question, "will this card run..."

My guess is the OP is running either a Pentium E6700 or a Pentium D (shudder) 940 or 840. All three of which would be the lagging factor in the set up (though a graphics update is also needed).

To the OP, since you're probably upgrading the CPU (and most likely the MB and RAM, as well), you could probably deal shop for a combo and use the savings to put toward a new GPU. Also, I don't know the specifics of your set up, but you may need to look into getting a new PSU as well.
Click to expand...
yeah you are right. for some reason I read it as 1gb DDR1. but yeah he needs to come back and give a better more in depth description of his specs.
 
Rajincajun said:
Capt, how are the performance of the AMD compared to the same Intel? Say price and same Ghz are the ADM CPU's still faster than the comparable Intel?
Click to expand...

wow... no offense but have you been living under a rock since 2006? AMD has been getting stomped by Intel since they released Core2... performance per buck they have been nice, but since the latest release of core chips this year they are losing that area too. In gaming, a lowly i3 2100 beats almost every AMD chip out right now provided you have a decent graphics card. In everything else, AMD still loses, but not as badly as they do in the gaming benchmarks nowadays.
 
What about x64 bit OS compared to x32 bit? Is there any performance boot by have x64?
 
I upgraded my ancient (early 07') Conroe build / 8800gts 320mb to a q9550 / 5950 combo a year ago and more than doubled my framerates in Bad Company 2. Quad core is definitely where it's at.

When I first installed BF3 beta a week ago, I thought my system wasn't going to survive an upgrade, but after updating drivers and turning AA off, it seems that I will (as long as the 32 v 32 maps don't drop my FPS more than 10 FPS below my average now). I can turn settings on high and still average right about 50fps in the first stage of the Metro map.

I really didn't want to upgrade the video card as it would require that I change out my Corsair 520 HX as well. With my current system, I don't think the PSU would handle a 580GTX, which is what I would want to upgrade to. Though perfect in-game, I've had to deal with a nagging flickering issue occuring immediately after exiting the game.
 
Anyone got any thoughts on running Win x64 if it will help with in game performance?
 
CaptNumbNutz said:
a lowly i3 2100 beats almost every AMD chip out right now provided you have a decent graphics card. In everything else, AMD still loses, but not as badly as they do in the gaming benchmarks nowadays.
Click to expand...

brostfur

January 3, 2011 by Chris Angelini

3DMark11%20Graphics.png


Metro%202033%201920.png
 
Rajincajun said:
What about x64 bit OS compared to x32 bit? Is there any performance boot by have x64?
Click to expand...

Not to be an ass, but there is no reason AT ALL to run a 32-bit OS today. I have been using 64-bit OS's for the last 5 years and I have never had problems and never looked back. Performance isn't extensive, but your system will run a lot smoother.

But, the real issue with 64-bit over 32-bit is the very fact that you are limiting yourself bigtime in the RAM dept.

With 32-bit, your OS only sees 3.5 gigs of RAM, and that INCLUDES your videoram. With 64-bit, your OS recognizes all of your RAM.

Think of it this way in a lung capacity/pressure term: Imagine trying to blow air through a skinny straw. Hard aint it? Now imagine blowing air through a paper towel tube. Same lungs and pressure, but the air moves a lot easier through the paper towel tube.

Whateva, that analogy just came to me lol.
 
I know what x64 and x32 does but that's not the question. From what I have read, BF3 makes better use of a CPU that can do 64 bit code. Forget about the Memory issue with 32 bit. With a 64 bit OS is BF3 going to use that to better translate performance for the game?

The reason I ask about the 32 and 64 bit is because my rig is older and it has 32 bit OS on it. I can change it to 64 bit but don't want to do that unless I get a performance boost in game.
I'm holding off onn 64 bit till I build me a new system and my old system will be for whatever...
 
Well I can say that it is using most of my CPU cycles while running and considering how dated my CPU compared to my videocard, I think it's working better than it would if I were using a 32-bit OS. But that's just conjecture on my part considering I haven't run this game on the same system using a 32-bit OS.

But to help you a bit tell us what your cpu/motherboard/ram/videocard is and we can go from there. Also have you played the beta yet on your current system and if so what kind of settings and FPS are you getting, etc. If you have a similar system as mine (C2D and 58xx series videocard) and your getting lower performance than mine then it might be the OS.

btw, I will run FRAPS and see what kind of hard info I can get on my end and see whats up.
 
Rajincajun said:
I know what x64 and x32 does but that's not the question. From what I have read, BF3 makes better use of a CPU that can do 64 bit code. Forget about the Memory issue with 32 bit. With a 64 bit OS is BF3 going to use that to better translate performance for the game?

The reason I ask about the 32 and 64 bit is because my rig is older and it has 32 bit OS on it. I can change it to 64 bit but don't want to do that unless I get a performance boost in game.
I'm holding off onn 64 bit till I build me a new system and my old system will be for whatever...
Click to expand...

Go with the best you can currently afford. If you're not going to go above 4gb of RAM (assuming you're going the Proc/RAM/Mobo route), then just use the cheaper option. $100 extra later on when you want to upgrade the RAM isn't too bad. My guess is that you are MUCH more hardware limited right now then 32 vs 64 bit limited.

Buxaroo said:
Well I can say that it is using most of my CPU cycles while running and considering how dated my CPU compared to my videocard, I think it's working better than it would if I were using a 32-bit OS. But that's just conjecture on my part considering I haven't run this game on the same system using a 32-bit OS.

But to help you a bit tell us what your cpu/motherboard/ram/videocard is and we can go from there. Also have you played the beta yet on your current system and if so what kind of settings and FPS are you getting, etc. If you have a similar system as mine (C2D and 58xx series videocard) and your getting lower performance than mine then it might be the OS.

btw, I will run FRAPS and see what kind of hard info I can get on my end and see whats up.
Click to expand...

There are no stock C2D 3.2Ghz chips (no offense to the OP, but from the lack of post on specs, knowledge of the 32 vs 64 bit OS's, and the general nature of the thread, I don't think he's OC'ing) and he says he's using a 250 GTS w/ 1Gb. He needs an upgrade across the board for mid to high BF3 settings at 1920x1080. I doubt the OS is the limiting factor here, but it's also gotta go.

OP we need your specs and budget.
 
Last edited:
How would a 5830 with a 955BE (stock) and 4GB RAM do? I want to get to at least Medium settings. My 8800GTS 512 does better than I thought, but it still seems not quite "right".
 
Plague_Injected said:
The graphics card is probably hurting you the most, but the processor isn't helping things either. People seem to think BF3 needs ideally an i5 or up to run it with decent performance.

You might want to consider upgrading to a 5770 or a 5850 or something for your videocard (something that can do DX11)...I'm sure the more knowledgable guys here will be able to give you a more precise recommendation :cool:. I'm assuming you're not looking to run the game at 1920x1200 with max AA or anything, but you're probably just looking for "something playable", yeah?
Click to expand...

this isnt really accurate. i run the beta (which is according to dice not as optimized as the release build) at 45fps steady, nothing below 40 and im using a core2quad q8200. i play at 1680x1050 with all settings on high using gtx460 1gb
 
The game will run different on the final release. Most likely will run harder on our systems. Your defiantly going to need a quad core, and I would suggest either a gtx560 Ti or radeon 6950 to enjoy the game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top