Battlefield 3 Performance: 30+ Graphics Cards, Benchmarked

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

paperfox

Distinguished
Mar 1, 2009
1,207
0
19,460
Just to throw out some numbers:
5760x1200 on a 5870 eyefinity6 edition, i7 930 @ 3.8ghz, gives ~38 ave on low preset and med about gives ~31, ccc 10.9 though.
 

paperfox

Distinguished
Mar 1, 2009
1,207
0
19,460
Forgot to mention that my friend reports with his 5760x1200 setup:
2600k stock, 11.10 preview drivers, crossfire 6970 msi lightnings
48 med and 39 ultra presets
He is also having trouble with the graphics menu as described in the article.
 

cangelini

Contributing Editor
Editor
Jul 4, 2008
1,878
9
19,795
[citation][nom]amk-aka-phantom[/nom]What? You don't have two 560 Tis??? That's blasphemy! Phenom FX? Why, right here....
2m4xgza.jpg
EDIT: Chris >>>>> Wolfgang[/citation]

Oh, that's the damn price engine. Nothing I can do about that. It's a Pricegrabber typo :-/
 

cangelini

Contributing Editor
Editor
Jul 4, 2008
1,878
9
19,795
[citation][nom]sentinelspark[/nom]Okay how is the HD5850 better than the HD6850. The HD6850 has better memory clock speeds. I was able to play the game in 1080p and AAx2 and all but two on ultra high, and i was getting 35fps average. I am calling Bulls**t on this one.[/citation]

Believe it, friend. Why do you think we were so tweaked when Barts came out and AMD's naming sounded so deceptive? 5850 is faster than 6850, just like 5870 is faster than 6870!
 

dragonsqrrl

Distinguished
Nov 19, 2009
1,280
0
19,290
Thanks for the great review. I've been waiting for Tom's to do a BF3 performance article, and this pretty much sums up my expectations. Good job.

Rocking out with an i7-950 and GTX480 at 1920x1200 and near maxed out settings. It's definitely playable, but it also isn't silky smooth. Benchmarking with fraps I recorded min frame rates as low as 31 across several runs. I think I'm fine as long as the minimum doesn't dip below 30, and overall I'm pleased with the performance results. Prior to the beta, after watching all the ridiculous in-game footage released online, I definitely wasn't expecting to be able to max out this game.

The game play and graphics are phenomenal, it's by far the most intense multi-player fps experience I've ever had. But then again, the last first person shooter I played extensively was BF2.
 

dragonsqrrl

Distinguished
Nov 19, 2009
1,280
0
19,290
[citation][nom]kyosuke[/nom]pffft. My HD 6870 handles Ultra maxed just fine![/citation]
hmmm... either you're running at a relatively low resolution (1680x1050?), or you have a high tolerance for lag.
 

darkrydr3

Distinguished
Oct 18, 2008
34
0
18,540
So AMD kicks Nvidia's butt in almost everything here including Crossfire/SLI, but when one changes the graphics to ultra high settings it sucks? What the heck...
 

JOSHSKORN

Distinguished
Oct 26, 2009
2,395
19
19,795
Nice review. Unfortunately my card isn't up there. I have the GTX 460 SE. Not sure how much different that is than the GTX 460.

I'm glad at least one developer is putting PC gaming ahead of the consoles. Unfortunately it's the same company that makes me use that Origin software. I hate it. Blah. Secondly I have to launch it from the browser, and the plugin is not compatible with the browser I mainly use, which is Firefox Nightly build.
 

Doug Rochford

Distinguished
Oct 28, 2011
21
0
18,510
Repost because I do not see submitted comment displaying. Use this one if the other one is lagged.

I am running Battlefield 3 on Medium / High default settings. I am not getting 60 fps constant with High default settings at 1920x1080. I almost prefer medium to get the stable high framerate. I am using 3.5 i7, 1600 Ram, 6970's in crossfire (4 GB total) 10.9 drivers

I just wanted to contribute. thanks...

-Douglas Rochford
 
Status
Not open for further replies.