Post your performance figures in BF3!

[badb0y]

Specs:
i5 750 @ 3.2 ghz
HD 6950 2 GB 1536 shaders @ 900/1350
4 GB DDR3 RAM
120 OCZ Solid 2 SSD and 1 TB HDD
1920x1200 Resolution

Game Settings:
Maxed out everything Ultra including AA.

Fraps bechmark Metro Map:
Frames Time (ms) Min Max Avg 37639 804575 26 97 46.781

I will post Caspian Border later on they seem to be offline at the moment.

 

[houe]

what resolution?

 

[BD231]

30-61-43 1920x1200 Ultra settings, 2 minute run. Massive difference in max but the average is about the same :hmm:. Dual GPU here I come.

 

[kevliken]

I think Nvidia is better than Ati. You should change to GTX560


This is a thread-crap and is not acceptable.

Moderator jvroig

 

[Stuka87]

Config:
Phenom II 965BE @ 3.7Ghz (Sig still says 3.9 I know, but had some stability issues)
4GB DDR3 1333
PowerColor AX5750 512MB
Windows 7 x64

Game Settings:
1080P
Everything on low except geometric detail, which is on High.
FRAPS shows 35-45 average (depending on indoor/outdoor). I have seen it hit 27fps as a low, and over 70 as a high.

Its plenty playable, but certainly not smooth, and messes with my accuracy. GPU upgrade will be coming soon.

 

[swilli89]

Core 2 Duo Conroe @ 3.0
4GB Mem
XFX 4890 @ 900 core

everything medium and special effects off. averaging 40 on metro with dips on the large outside battles to about 30. playable but could be better.

 

[tigersty1e]

I think Nvidia is better than Ati. You should change to GTX560

Are you paid from nvidia?


Next time, just report the offending post. Don't go ahead making accusations. Like the thread crap you quoted, this may result in the thread getting derailed and turning into another fanboy red vs green flamefest.

Moderator jvroig

 

[Grooveriding]

On ultra 2560x1600, everything turned on except motion blur off, 2x deferred MSAA and post AA off: 70-100fps outdoors, 90-140fps indoors on the Metro map.

Same settings on Caspian Border about 45-80fps depending on what is going on.

Big difference between the smaller less field of vision map (metro) and the huge epic battlefield type map (caspian)

 

[shotgunl]

i7 920 stock
6GB RAM
2x5850

1920x1200 on Ultra in the first section of metro:
27min 91max 70.508avg

last section:
13 80 57.8

Lots of microstuttering at 1920x1200 and 1080p. Not as bad at 1680x1050 and lower.
I drop into the teens a lot when quite a bit of smoke is on the screen.

 

[Arkaign]

I think Nvidia is better than Ati. You should change to GTX560

I think you are troll. You should change to basically any other website.

The 560 *is* a very good card, but the 2GB 6950 is = or better easily.


Re: "I think you are troll. You should change to basically any other website."

Next time, just report the offending post. Don't go ahead making accusations. Like the thread crap you quoted, this may result in the thread getting derailed and turning into another fanboy red vs green flamefest.

Moderator jvroig

 

[bunnyfubbles]

30-61-43 1920x1200 Ultra settings, 2 minute run. Massive difference in max but the average is about the same :hmm:. Dual GPU here I come.

Ultra textures require ~1.3GB of memory buffer, if you're still running a GTX460 like your sig implies you're still going to have that memory buffer bottleneck regardless of how many 460s you throw at the game (unless its a rare 2GB model)

 

[michal1980]

Q6600 , 4gm ram, 8800gts

Low everything but medium textures.

18-30fps

with 570 gtx

everything high, ultra textures.
~50-70fps,

resolution = 1680x1050

 

[BD231]

Ultra textures require ~1.3GB of memory buffer, if you're still running a GTX460 like your sig implies you're still going to have that memory buffer bottleneck regardless of how many 460s you throw at the game (unless its a rare 2GB model)

Yeah but there's no point in buying anything within the same line of GPU's when I could just SLI for pennies and get substantial gains no matter what title I throw at the combo (provided there's an sli profile). Waiting on next gen cards to go 2gb.

 

[spinejam]

1920x1200 Ultra settings w/ gtx570 @925c 2200m

3623f 63130ms 44min 72max 57.39avg

 

[RobertR1]

Finally got the game running right. I toggled many settings and ended up with this:

All settings to Ultra
MSAA = off
Post AA = Max
Motion Blur = 30
HBAO/SSAO = off

At 2560x1600 with 1 GTX 580 @ 920/1840/2150, this gets me 40-50 outdoors and 50+ in tunnels. My real worry going forward is going to be VRAM. I'm running at 1450mb+ at some points and I only have a 1.5GB card.

Turning additional stuff down really doesn't seem to make a huge difference. MSAA along HBAO/SSAO are the real performance killers for me. However, the Post Processing AA is really good so I don't mind it. To be absolutely honest, when playing even Post AA off is fine as chain linked fences are the last of my concern.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Yeah but there's no point in buying anything within the same line of GPU's when I could just SLI for pennies and get substantial gains no matter what title I throw at the combo (provided there's an sli profile). Waiting on next gen cards to go 2gb.

no, what there is no point to doing is using ultra settings when your hardware isn't capable of running it, SLI or no, you are memory limited, you should stop pretending you have high end hardware and bump texture settings down, you'll have a much better overall experience and likely won't notice the difference. If you care about your e-peen that much you can just lie to us on the forums about it.

 

[WraithETC]

Ultra
HBAO
4x AA
Post AA- medium
motion blur medium

60-100 FPS

Specs in sig.

 

[houe]

System in sig. Yup 8800gts. Everything on low running at 1280x800. 45-65fps. Its ugly.

 

[badb0y]

System in sig. Yup 8800gts. Everything on low running at 1280x800. 45-65fps. Its ugly.

lol! Did you splurge on the SLi setup yet

 

[BD231]

no, what there is no point to doing is using ultra settings when your hardware isn't capable of running it, SLI or no, you are memory limited, you should stop pretending you have high end hardware and bump texture settings down, you'll have a much better overall experience and likely won't notice the difference. If you care about your e-peen that much you can just lie to us on the forums about it.

Yes, posting results in a result posting thread is so epeen of me isn't it? Funny how it runs no better at high than it does ultra. Yet again your advice sucks, what a surprise.

 

[skipsneeky2]

Looks like the best cards will be 2gb amd cards and 3gb gtx580s.....all others if you care about eye candy won't do...

From what i have seen this game isn't worthy of spending $1,000 to crank up just yet...

Was gonna upgrade this month but glad i'm waiting till November .

Most likely a 2gb 6970 in my future...anyone with a 2gb 6970 who can report average fps?

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Yes, posting results in a result posting thread is so epeen of me isn't it? Funny how it runs no better at high than it does ultra. Yet again your advice sucks, what a surprise.

only ever was trying to help you by stating the facts, take or leave it, maybe you can somehow tolerate the obvious frame drops you'll get because fact of the matter is BF3 will use more than 1GB of video buffer when textures are set to Ultra. Maybe my advice sucks to read about because it emasculates your rig and/or throws a wet blanket on your easy upgrade path (again, getting another GTX460 will not remove the frame buffer bottleneck for running Ultra textures, you'll need at least a 1.5GB card base, preferably 2GB), but I assure you it is sound advice.

also, the point of this thread isn't necessarily performance figures for ultra, it would be far more useful for you to find the balance in settings you find as the best balance between image quality and frame-rate so that others with a rig similar to yours would have a starting point to go off of and compare to, we don't need you to yet again confirm that a 460 is less than ideal for running all Ultra (heck, DICE recommends at least a GTX570 just for High settings).

 

[lsv]

Guess I won't be playing that @ 1080p with my 5750. Time for an upgrade

 

[skipsneeky2]

Guess I won't be playing that @ 1080p with my 5750. Time for an upgrade

You could download the latest drivers and give the BF3 beta map Metro a go and come back with your results i know i would be thankful cause while i want a 2gb 6970 i can wait till next gen and BF3 does not care about DX10 all that much and i want a 5770 to hold me over.

Medium on whatever resolution would be very helpful to me and others if you could

 

[BD231]

only ever was trying to help you by stating the facts, take or leave it, maybe you can somehow tolerate the obvious frame drops you'll get because fact of the matter is BF3 will use more than 1GB of video buffer when textures are set to Ultra. Maybe my advice sucks to read about because it emasculates your rig and/or throws a wet blanket on your easy upgrade path (again, getting another GTX460 will not remove the frame buffer bottleneck for running Ultra textures, you'll need at least a 1.5GB card base, preferably 2GB), but I assure you it is sound advice.

also, the point of this thread isn't necessarily performance figures for ultra, it would be far more useful for you to find the balance in settings you find as the best balance between image quality and frame-rate so that others with a rig similar to yours would have a starting point to go off of and compare to, we don't need you to yet again confirm that a 460 is less than ideal for running all Ultra (heck, DICE recommends at least a GTX570 just for High settings).

If I wanted to hear strong feelings I'd talk to a female, and I don't believe it's healthy to relate computer parts to masculinity, I know I don't. Just sayin, this thread isn't about me, its about posting results based on user experience, not DICE recommended hardware requirements anyone could find for themselves you repeating piece of uselessness .