Battlefield 3

[maxim486]

Hi there, I'm just wondering if this computer rig will be able to run Battlefield 3 on max settings with 16x AF and 32x AA on at a res of 1920 x 1080.

AMD Phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition Six-Core CPU
8 GB [4 GB X2] DDR3-1600 Memory Module - Corsair Vengeance
AMD Radeon HD 6970 - 2GB - CrossFire Mode (Dual Cards)
[CrossFire] ASUS Crosshair IV Formula -- AMD 890FX w/ 3x PCI-E 2.0 x16
1200 Watt -- Corsair CMPSU-1200AX
Asetek 550LC Liquid CPU Cooling System (AMD) - ARC Dual Silent High Performance Fan Upgrade (Push-Pull Airflow)

I'm a bit worried about the ram. I'm not sure whether I should pay the extra $145 and get 16gb instead of 8gb.

Feel free to recommend me better brands or parts

 

[murphy_30547]

Hi there, I'm just wondering if this computer rig will be able to run Battlefield 3 on max settings with 16x AF and 32x AA on at a res of 1920 x 1080.

AMD Phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition Six-Core CPU
8 GB [4 GB X2] DDR3-1600 Memory Module - Corsair Vengeance
AMD Radeon HD 6970 - 2GB - CrossFire Mode (Dual Cards)
[CrossFire] ASUS Crosshair IV Formula -- AMD 890FX w/ 3x PCI-E 2.0 x16
1200 Watt -- Corsair CMPSU-1200AX
Asetek 550LC Liquid CPU Cooling System (AMD) - ARC Dual Silent High Performance Fan Upgrade (Push-Pull Airflow)

I'm a bit worried about the ram. I'm not sure whether I should pay the extra $145 and get 16gb instead of 8gb.

Feel free to recommend me better brands or parts

no it wont run it, I have been playing battlefield 3 for over a month on my i7 980x with 16gb ram and Sli'ed gtx 650's and i can only run it in 640x480 with ultra low settings and get 5-6 fps......
seriously though here...http://bf3blog.com/battlefield-3-system-requirements/
and dont take them to heart, they could be right and they could be off a little. I am pretty sure that you will not have any issues running battlefield 3 on the very highest settings without a hitch. Just sit back and take a deep breath and go play another game, soon enough you will know if you can run the game, and if not upgrade then, dont upgrade now. best of luck. Murph

 

[maxim486]

no it wont run it, I have been playing battlefield 3 for over a month on my i7 980x with 16gb ram and Sli'ed gtx 650's and i can only run it in 640x480 with ultra low settings and get 5-6 fps......
seriously though here...http://bf3blog.com/battlefield-3-system-requirements/
and dont take them to heart, they could be right and they could be off a little. I am pretty sure that you will not have any issues running battlefield 3 on the very highest settings without a hitch. Just sit back and take a deep breath and go play another game, soon enough you will know if you can run the game, and if not upgrade then, dont upgrade now. best of luck. Murph

Lmao, thanks for the reply it made my day. But do you think I should go with 8 gigs of ram or 16? I'm not sure whether I'll get better performance with the 16 and i'm just asking around if it will help with my system.

 

[murphy_30547]

Just from what I have read and my own knowledge I would say that 8 gigs is more than enough to run any game and probably any game for the next 5 if not 10 years from now.

Check out this article http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/memory-module-upgrade,2264.html

 

[cbrunnem]

no offense intended at all but maybe a little more research is order. and for purely gaming purposes 4gb of ram is all that is needed.

my only question is why the 1100t? if this hasnt been purchased i would strongly recommend you looking at the i5 2500k instead. i think that it will do a much better job of keeping the dual 6970's from being bottlenecked by the cpu.

 

[maxim486]

I chose the 1100T cause I wanted my CPU and GPUs to be AMD based. Plus the 1100T is a hexacore CPU for 1/3 of what an Intel one would cost 😀 I am also planning on overclocking that sucker to a sweet 4GHz.

If I will still be bottle necked by this CPU please let me know, I have not bought the system yet because I am not in extreme need of it YET (Battlefeld 3) and it would be great to know what I can change to get a better performance of it.

 

[murphy_30547]

I chose the 1100T cause I wanted my CPU and GPUs to be AMD based. Plus the 1100T is a hexacore CPU for 1/3 of what an Intel one would cost 😀 I am also planning on overclocking that sucker to a sweet 4GHz.

If I will still be bottle necked by this CPU please let me know, I have not bought the system yet because I am not in extreme need of it YET (Battlefeld 3) and it would be great to know what I can change to get a better performance of it.

there is nothing wrong with your processor, it is right on par with the i7 950. like i said buddy just calm down for the moment and set some money aside and see if you can run battlefield 3 when it arrives. If it doesnt run as you expect, upgrade, if it does run well... upgrade something anyway since you saved the money, lol. Dont get worked up over it bud, the technology race is never ending and you have to be a millionaire to actually keep up with it, and at that point you would be playing every new hot game with a totally new top of the line computer. murph

 

[Chieftexas]

The current hexacore AMD's offer a very minimal performance increase (if any) over their high end X4 models in gaming applications. The i5 2500k, or even 2400, are similarly priced yet offer much better performance and can even compete with the most expensive i7's when it comes to gaming.

 

[FlintIronStagg]

i like the couple threads on " can i run BF3?" that have people with beefier systems listing their specs and then asking if they can run it. I just love the subtle nature of humans.

 

[FlintIronStagg]

and if your system is that badass, why not know something about it, or gaming, like 16gb??? 8 is even overkill for gaming.

 

[gamerk316]

^^ Well, according to IGN [take ti for what you will], the "recommended" specs for BF3 includes 16GB of RAM...

Also, the reason games don't really benifit for more RAM is because they are all compiled as 32-bit executables, and thus can't even access more then 2GB [unless the LAA flag is set, in which case they can at least access 4], even on 64-bit versions of Windows.

 

[nishan11]

no it wont run it, I have been playing battlefield 3 for over a month on my i7 980x with 16gb ram and Sli'ed gtx 650's and i can only run it in 640x480 with ultra low settings and get 5-6 fps......
seriously though here...http://bf3blog.com/battlefield-3-system-requirements/
and dont take them to heart, they could be right and they could be off a little. I am pretty sure that you will not have any issues running battlefield 3 on the very highest settings without a hitch. Just sit back and take a deep breath and go play another game, soon enough you will know if you can run the game, and if not upgrade then, dont upgrade now. best of luck. Murph

What do you mean you've been playing battlefield 3? It's not even released yet.

 

[bdizzle11]

What do you mean you've been playing battlefield 3? It's not even released yet.

*facepalm*
You sir, are correct.

Those system requirements from ign have to be off, they are unrealistic, developers wouldnt make a product the average consumer couldn't use...

 

[rivo101]

I heard no rig can make out BF3 at release, guess we will have to wait and see.

 

[cbrunnem]

I heard no rig can make out BF3 at release, guess we will have to wait and see.

i highly doubt that.

 

[foverosiv]

guys, what you are hearing are RUMORS!
there is no way that BF3 is going to be so hardware intensive that can only be ran by top of the line rigs. because they have to consider in the Xbox 360 and PS3's system too, if only top of hte line PC can play it, there is no way consoles are going to work. also, there arn't many people with top of line rigs.

also, I claim that "IGN" system requirement is a hoax.
I mean cmon, i7-970? thats a Hex-core processor, WTF are you playing? Microsoft Space Shuttle Sim?
and the Sound card being DirectX9.0C is definitely a lie, BF3 will NOT be supporting DirectX 9. you shouldn't be required to have a sound card to play a game anyway.

also, is using 16GB of RAM on a 14GB game possible?
and a link to that IGN system requirement page would be appreciated

 

[0ozee]

guys, what you are hearing are RUMORS!
there is no way that BF3 is going to be so hardware intensive that can only be ran by top of the line rigs. because they have to consider in the Xbox 360 and PS3's system too, if only top of hte line PC can play it, there is no way consoles are going to work. also, there arn't many people with top of line rigs.

also, I claim that "IGN" system requirement is a hoax.
I mean cmon, i7-970? thats a Hex-core processor, WTF are you playing? Microsoft Space Shuttle Sim?
and the Sound card being DirectX9.0C is definitely a lie, BF3 will NOT be supporting DirectX 9. you shouldn't be required to have a sound card to play a game anyway.

also, is using 16GB of RAM on a 14GB game possible?
and a link to that IGN system requirement page would be appreciated

i maxed the alpha 60fps v-sync with 6950 2gb and dual core @ 4.0ghz at 1920x1080

i5 2500k and 6970/570 should be more then enough for this with 64 player battles/higher graphics and better optimisation

 

[Captainhero]

Maxed the alpha as well, didnt check framerate but everything was smooth and shiny.
Q9450 - stock speed
3gb DDR2 1066 (a mem stick died so no 4gb)
ati 5850 - stock speeds

The alpha only let you set, low medium or high details so couldnt tinker with AA etc. Set to high, ran in fullscreen and no issues

 

[simon12]

There is no way you need 2 x 6970s to play at 1920x1080 a single one is more than enough and as already stated the 2500K is much better than any AMD CPU for gaming.

 

[cbrunnem]

guys, what you are hearing are RUMORS!
there is no way that BF3 is going to be so hardware intensive that can only be ran by top of the line rigs. because they have to consider in the Xbox 360 and PS3's system too, if only top of hte line PC can play it, there is no way consoles are going to work. also, there arn't many people with top of line rigs.

also, I claim that "IGN" system requirement is a hoax.
I mean cmon, i7-970? thats a Hex-core processor, WTF are you playing? Microsoft Space Shuttle Sim?
and the Sound card being DirectX9.0C is definitely a lie, BF3 will NOT be supporting DirectX 9. you shouldn't be required to have a sound card to play a game anyway.

also, is using 16GB of RAM on a 14GB game possible?
and a link to that IGN system requirement page would be appreciated

they could just turn the quality down enough for the console so that argument isnt necessarily true but i dont see it being that intense either.

 

[Gman450]

The game is supposedly to be developed for PC first and then ported to the PS3 and Xbox 360. So, I don't think you'd be expecting it to be a console port.

 

[Poppinfreshh]

my friend was in the alpha before it got shut down and he told me 4gb of ram is enough so i wouldn't sweat it lol

 

[foverosiv]

if they can turn the quality down so consoles can still play it, average gaming PCs should be able to play it with decent settings too, not just top of the line PC

 

[Dabigado]

What do you mean you've been playing battlefield 3? It's not even released yet.

come on man, it was a joke how did you not see that? lolz 😛

 

[foverosiv]

Its not a joke... people who got invited by EA have free access to Battlefield 3 Alpha.