What is the deal with BF3?

[aaksheytalwar]

I really don't get it when people say that BF3 is taxing. Really, it is far from that.

Of course I have only played the Single Player but I have finished it and it is one of the lightest games on my PC that I have played in recent times including Sleeping Dogs, Absolution, Farcry3, Crysis1 without mods, Crysis 2 without mods, NFS etc. all these games are far more intensive that BF3 SP.

These are the kind of FPS I used to get in BF3 SP with the setup below:
2600k 4.3
16gb ram ddr3 1866+
7970 at 1125 1575
Cat 12.4 or something. Way before recent drivers came out.

1080p 4x AA, everything max
Avg fps 80-100+ maybe higher I don't remember exactly
Min FPS mostly 70-80+ with rarely below 70 fps

1440p max but no Fxaa no msaa
Avg fps 70-90+
Min fps usually around 60-70 or so and very rarely below 60 if at all

And the other games I mentioned don't run this well with my rig, not even Crysis2 which is the lightest of the lot.

I really don't get it why people think it is intensive. There are dozens of games more intensive that this including Shogun, Metro, above list etc.

Of course MP is more intensive but I still don't see it being as intensive as some of the more intensive games I have played.

As for BC2 you rarely go below 50-70 fps even at 1440p 4x msaa and max. And avg is more like 80-120 fps or so.

 

[jacktesterson]

64 player maps

 

[snarfbot]

nice rig bro

 

[aaksheytalwar]

As I said, I haven't played Multiplayer. I am talking of Single player.

Besides I can nearly guarantee that Crysis 1 without mods is going to be more intensive than any of bf3's maps.

At 1080p no msaa I used to get avg 50+- fps in Crysis at max without mods and no AA. This is crysis1.

To get those kind of fps with bf3 I will need a 70% performance hit in going from single player to multiplayer.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/GPU12/398

I guess this is with old drivers or something. And the avg fps according to even AT is 70+ with a 7970 this is with FXAA at 1080p. And they use MP. Crysis 1 is more like 45 fps at these settings.

And this is besides the fact that the fps I get vary by a long shot from AT's results. So these fps are not what we get in game.

To get avg 50ish fps in BF3 SP I need to play at 1440p 2x msaa at least while with Crysis just 1080p no AA no mods is enough.

Even hitman absolution doesn't run that nicely at 1440p on my rig. Again, no AA. It is nice mostly but minimums are bad. So I play at 1080p.

Even sleeping dogs runs worse than bf3.

Crysis2 so runs worse than bf3 sp.

Metro is perhaps the most intensive game I played before Nfs MW which doesn't run perfect even on medium settings which metro is fine at high to max, somewhere in between.

BF3 single player runs in the same league as Max Payne 3 and Alan Wake. Not dot same, but comparable.

 

[RU482]

As I said, I haven't played Multiplayer. I am talking of Single player.

is there anyone who says single player is taxing?

Is there anyone who plays single player?

 

[aaksheytalwar]

is there anyone who says single player is taxing?

Is there anyone who plays single player?

Your point has bee negated in the post and thread above. Read the full thread please with all posts.

 

[moonbogg]

People never claimed that single player was taxing. At least thats not what I remember reading. Single player will run on a core 2 duo. If you want to see what everyone is talking about, go to a 64 player Gulf of Oman match and report back with your FPS.

 

[Dankk]

I really don't get it why people think it is intensive. There are dozens of games more intensive that this including Shogun, Metro, above list etc.

Yup. BF3 really isn't that intensive; Metro 2033 and Witcher 2 still trump it in that area. The new Hitman on Ultra settings is very resource demanding too.

 

[wand3r3r]

Yawn. Report back after you have played big maps.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

Lol. I can understand a 30-50% performance hit but not 70-80% performance hit. The games I mentioned are far more intensive even I get a 40% performance hit or so.

 

[BD231]

Drrr I have a video card a full generation ahead of a game and it has no problem running it, why? Drrrr why does this brand new game run worse than this other game that has had over a year of driver optimization?

 

[brandon888]

64 player maps

+11111 .. even GTX 680 can't maintain 60 fps constant with new drivers : (

 

[moonbogg]

+11111 .. even GTX 680 can't maintain 60 fps constant with new drivers : (

Nope. You'll be in the low 40's, even upper 30's during intense stuff. Even if you had the GPU power to maintain 60, your CPU won't get you there anyway. My 3930k at 4.3 goes into lower 50's. Without SLI 670's, i'd be getting upper 30's to lower 40's.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Your point has bee negated in the post and thread above. Read the full thread please with all posts.

no, your entire thread is negated by the fact that you've only played single player, no one thinks SP is taxing; when people talk about BF3 being a hardware intensive game they're talking about the large multiplayer engagements where framerates will easily be cut in half if not more relative to singleplayer.

I could play BF3 single player @ 120+fps for my 120Hz monitor and then even stream it to a site like twitch.tv @ 720p @ 60fps while still maintaining that frame rate. But as soon as I tried to do the same in a 64 player server my frames would drop below 60 and the game would feel unplayable relative to what single player played like.

 

[brandon888]

Nope. You'll be in the low 40's, even upper 30's during intense stuff. Even if you had the GPU power to maintain 60, your CPU won't get you there anyway. My 3930k at 4.3 goes into lower 50's. Without SLI 670's, i'd be getting upper 30's to lower 40's.

you mean that your I7 3930K on 4.3 GHZ bottlenecks gtx 670 in sli and that is the reason why you get 50 fps at minimum ? or you need better GPU power ?


:O I7 3930K is not powerful enough to maintain 60 fps lol wtf ? even with 3 GTx 670 for example ?

 

[aaksheytalwar]

no, your entire thread is negated by the fact that you've only played single player, no one thinks SP is taxing; when people talk about BF3 being a hardware intensive game they're talking about the large multiplayer engagements where framerates will easily be cut in half if not more relative to singleplayer.

I could play BF3 single player @ 120+fps for my 120Hz monitor and then even stream it to a site like twitch.tv @ 720p @ 60fps while still maintaining that frame rate. But as soon as I tried to do the same in a 64 player server my frames would drop below 60 and the game would feel unplayable relative to what single player played like.

Can you benchmark at these settings?

1080p No MSAA no FXAA rest max

Do you still not get minimum as 50+ fps?

If you do then that is what I am talking.

At the above settings Crysis 1 or crysis2 or metro or Nfs or sleeping dogs etc won't get you min as 50 fps, even without AA for these games. That is why I want you to test without AA.

 

[Termie]

Ok, here's the deal. No one has to benchmark anything for you. I can confirm that your single player benchmarks are almost identical to mine.

Now jump into multiplayer, knock 30% off your averages and your minimums, and try not to get killed. You won't manage all that well. Add full ultra settings, which you aren't using at 1440p, and the game will be over for you.

Here's the basic premise that you're missing: crysis 1 can be played through satisfactorily at 30fps. Most of those other games probably don't need more than 40fps. One minute of BF3 multiplayer at those settings and you'd be throwing a fist through your screen.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

I can't play those games at 30fps. I need a minimum of 50-60 fps in any game and none of these games run with AA at 1440p. Even the lightest game (recent ones that is) doesn't run with AA at 1440p unless you are talking of basic stuff.

For any modern game I either play
1080p max no AA
To
1080p 4x AA OR 1440p max no AA

Bf3 is no different.

I can tell you 5+ games which pawn bf3 mp fps and yet people don't make a hue and cry about it.

And there is no game on earth I play with less than 50 fps including rts and bf3 is no exception

And beyond 60 fps fps are irrelevant anyway for me

 

[skipsneeky2]

At 1920x1200 medium no msaa,a lightly overclocked 7850 can run a easy 60+ fps on most maps and even at high its not dipping under like 50fps in any situation i found,just enabling ultra could tank it but a single gtx670 could play ultra fine,just disable msaa.

I got over the ocd of trying to max this game on ultra with msaa,it can't be done as moonbogg said and sustain 60 fps minimums,will take a next generation processor and a overclock before that will happen and just maybe by then the gtx780 or next gen gpus will do it all on a single card without some crazy sli configure just to enable msaa at 1080p or higher.....

 

[Grooveriding]

With my system I never go under 65FPS in multiplayer, which is where I have the game frame capped, the exception being if I am very close to a building/vehicle destruction - at which point it drops to 50 or so.

This is 2560x1600, I'd figure 1080p or 1920x1200 wouldn't have those drops. You can do it with a SB-E and a couple 680s, and I'd assume 7970s as well.

 

[skipsneeky2]

With my system I never go under 65FPS in multiplayer, which is where I have the game frame capped, the exception being if I am very close to a building/vehicle destruction - at which point it drops to 50 or so.

This is 2560x1600, I'd figure 1080p or 1920x1200 wouldn't have those drops. You can do it with a SB-E and a couple 680s, and I'd assume 7970s as well.

I have a gtx670 that stutters like nuts if the fps in BF3 is sitting over 100,is that why you have the framerate cap on?

I had a thread about what i thought was a bottleneck cause of this weird stutter but someone suggested enabling adaptive vsync and i did and that fixed it immediately...minus the lack of stutter,i also noticed much less of a cpu load on my i5 2500 nonk,going from 80+% usage down into the 60% range which suggested perhaps some sort of bottleneck?

 

[Grooveriding]

I have a gtx670 that stutters like nuts if the fps in BF3 is sitting over 100,is that why you have the framerate cap on?

I had a thread about what i thought was a bottleneck cause of this weird stutter but someone suggested enabling adaptive vsync and i did and that fixed it immediately...minus the lack of stutter,i also noticed much less of a cpu load on my i5 2500 nonk,going from 80+% usage down into the 60% range which suggested perhaps some sort of bottleneck?

I can't play without the framerate cap, I wouldn't describe it as outright stutter but the multi-gpu microstutter is really bad in BF3 as well as screen tearing is really bad. I use the games' built in frame rate cap and it solves it, if it wasn't online I'd use vsync, but too much lag with vsync for an online game.

In single player games I usually always use vsync, but for online FPS I can't use it because of the lag. I generally always like to use vsync or a frame rate cap to keep temperatures as low as possible as well.

 

[moonbogg]

you mean that your I7 3930K on 4.3 GHZ bottlenecks gtx 670 in sli and that is the reason why you get 50 fps at minimum ? or you need better GPU power ?


:O I7 3930K is not powerful enough to maintain 60 fps lol wtf ? even with 3 GTx 670 for example ?

Thats right. My GTX 670's can easily get me there but my CPU just can't do it. Keep in mind that lowering graphics settings to medium or lower reduces the load on the CPU, so at that point a 60fps min is more likely. Ultra is a different story. But Ultra is what I play at and truth be told, the game runs great and is almost always at 60 or higher, but I still get those drops. The drops aren't brief either. They are persistent depending on where I am at on the map. If the whole map is in view from a rooftop, FPS goes to the 50s.

With my system I never go under 65FPS in multiplayer, which is where I have the game frame capped, the exception being if I am very close to a building/vehicle destruction - at which point it drops to 50 or so.

This is 2560x1600, I'd figure 1080p or 1920x1200 wouldn't have those drops. You can do it with a SB-E and a couple 680s, and I'd assume 7970s as well.

I believe you. You are also running at 5ghz, so this makes some sense. But even then, you have occasional drops to 50 as you mentioned. Isn't that a little crazy given your specs and OC?

 

[skipsneeky2]

I can't play without the framerate cap, I wouldn't describe it as outright stutter but the multi-gpu microstutter is really bad in BF3 as well as screen tearing is really bad. I use the games' built in frame rate cap and it solves it, if it wasn't online I'd use vsync, but too much lag with vsync for an online game.

In single player games I usually always use vsync, but for online FPS I can't use it because of the lag. I generally always like to use vsync or a frame rate cap to keep temperatures as low as possible as well.

Yeah most likely driver issues i am guessing as i thought my issue was hardware related with my h61+i5 2500 non k platform.

Went so far recently into investigating the stuttering issues with this gtx670 that i plopped a old am2+ mobo that housed a x4 9150e and 6gb ddr2 into my case and tried out BF3 on it,despite the fact the card was pulling like 35-58fps and averaging 40fps with 90% cpu usage and the gtx670 being severely bottlenecked,the stutter was no where to be seen lol.