First gaming build able to run battlefield 4?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
L

Lucke2999

Honorable
Dec 3, 2013
14
0
10,520
Hello and thanks for helping me out 😉
I just want to know if this build is ideal to run recent games like battlefield 4 at ultra.

CPU: AMD Vishera FX 8350 @4.0 ghz

Motherboard: ASUS Sabertooth 990fx AM3 ESATA USB 3.0 SATA 3

GPU: ATI Radeon HD 7950 3gb GDDR5

PSU: SENTEY 850W

Tower: SENTEY Optimus II

Thanks in advance for your advice I have learnt a lot since the beginning of the research for the build and I like to learn a lot more from you.

-thanks
 
Solution
ImPain


Obviously the graphics card, BF4 is quite demanding especially if you want to play it in ultra at 1080p with 60 fps and no drops.
I have a 680 (equivalent to a 7970 or so), and I can play it smoothly in High.
I can also play it in ultra at 60 fps, but when there are explosions and stuff I drop to 45 or so and I don't like it so I prefer to stay in high with all the filters on.

If you want to play it in ultra you have to step up and get like an R9 280X or GTX 770 minimum, or more if you have budget (780 or R9 290).


Obviously the graphics card, BF4 is quite demanding especially if you want to play it in ultra at 1080p with 60 fps and no drops.
I have a 680 (equivalent to a 7970 or so), and I can play it smoothly in High.
I can also play it in ultra at 60 fps, but when there are explosions and stuff I drop to 45 or so and I don't like it so I prefer to stay in high with all the filters on.

If you want to play it in ultra you have to step up and get like an R9 280X or GTX 770 minimum, or more if you have budget (780 or R9 290).
 
Solution


http://www.techspot.com/review/734-battlefield-4-benchmarks/page6.html

If you want better performance you have to go i5. If you want to go Ultra, you need to go i7 with R7/R9 or Nvidia 7xx as a i5 will bottleneck highest end cards.
 


A good i5 (3570k or 4670k) won't bottleneck these cards..
 


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Cj8RP4kEGo @ 2:50
and http://www.imagelucidity.com/news.php?id_2=1050&?topic=Haswell-Showdown

Yeah it will, because a i3 is still less core / threads then a i5 and much less then a i7.
Remember computer work as follows:
ALL data code is stored (HDD) then grabbed in groups (RAM) to then process (CPU) to the component (GPU, NIC, Printer, etc.) to perform the tast (Render, transmit, print, etc.). So before the GPU can even consider rendering, it still needs to rely on the HDD, RAM and CPU to get the data to it. If there is not enough core/threads in the CPU the GPU has to wait and wait and wait on it (bottleneck). More cores/threads, more processed data passes to the GPU to render.
 


You are right about the process no worries, but the video you linked (VeryTraumatic) I saw it long ago also and it was during BF4 Beta.
Indeed during the beta, the game wasn't well optimized at all especially for CPUs, and people with 4 cores were bottlenecking a lot using more than 90% of the CPU.
This has been fixed by DICE now that the game is launched, and 4 cores processors (i.e 3570K or 4670K) can run the game normally just fine.
Of course 8 cores will perform better for BF4 no doubt, but 4 cores are also enough if you get a good one like and i5.

The other question that could be more relevant is if it is futureproof to invest in an i5 now, I would say no since games (like BF4) will slowly get to use more cores than 4 that was the max now. BF4 can use 6 cores and up to 8 cores, and new games will probably follow this trend.

So if you have the choice and the budget, you should go with an 8 cores (like the 8350 that Lucke2999 has is good).
Regarding the CPU, he is perfectly fine, that's why you should invest more on your GPU.
 
Yeah my only (shocking found out) point was, even if investing in a R9 / Nvidia 7xx top of the line card, it doesn't "bypass" the CPU even in games, so there is a point when the CPU will bottleneck the demands of the topline cards, that being the i5s and below it (AMD, i3, etc.). So the old 'games only use GPUs' is no longer relevent, as it was once upon a time 'get the most Mhz will always be fastest' has fallen by the wayside with the maxing out at 2Ghz on CPUs now (realistically).
 


Stop pushing intel cpus down the people`s throats for nothing, this is the main reason that AMD does bad in sales, every guy out there knows only intel, in some cases that might be true but not everywhere.

CPU_01.png
 
I am not pushing anything down the throats, I am saying the same thing those charts show. If you go highest end video card, it won't "make up for" having a non-i7 CPU when in ULTRA settings (notice those specs are HIGH). So splurging on the best Nvidia/AMD GPU will bottleneck on anything LESS THEN a i7 system, because the game does ALOT of CPU intensity, and the 4Cores/4Hyperthreads (now 6Core/6Threads on Haswell) perform consistantly better then anything else (i5/fastest AMD/i3/normal AMD).

Look a bit further and you can see this

http://gamegpu.ru/images/remote/http--www.gamegpu.ru-images-stories-Test_GPU-Action-Battlefield_4-test-bf4_intel.jpg
http://gamegpu.ru/images/remote/http--www.gamegpu.ru-images-stories-Test_GPU-Action-Battlefield_4_Beta-test-bf_4_intel.jpg

I was shocked on the 'load' difference across the cores, but PROVES alot more 'work' is needing to be done by AMD CPUs then as compared to Hyperthreaded i7s (and thus causing more bottlenecking BEFORE processing the data read by the RAM from the HDD to pass to the GPU to render). Makes sense, more Hyperthreaded cores, more performance (i7 vs i5/i3) since AMD hasn't developed (and oh I AM SOO WAITING till they do) a Hyperthreading alternative, instead of just 'adding more cores'. More cores doesn't make for more 'performance', but it is the 'threading' of the data to / through / out of the Cores that makes the difference repeatedly (which again makes sense because if there is delays in reading / processing / outputting the data because each Core is fighting to be the 'first' one, that is typical of bottlenecks).

I am not saying you MUST buy a R9-7XX/i7 combo to play BF4. I am saying if you temper the level of graphics depths (no Ultra 8xAF/AA triple 1900x1080 24" screens) with the cost of trying to get at those levels, you should be either a i5 or a top end AMD CPU with some upper 6xx/lower 7xx OR 7xxx/ lower end R7 GPU and you will have a nice HIGH graphics level BF4 experience in the 50FPs range @ 1900x1080 display according to most figures (avergaing the above performance with a different card's performance PLUS normal Internet traffic, 64Man team and think about being HeliPodded while on the 'waves') The SERIOUS problem is if you cheap even lower (see the AMD CPU usage chart) your CPU chokes on the demands constantly pegging out (which is why no one serious suggest playing on a old i3 Core system). Though I was surprised the new Haswell i3/i5 Cores really can perform dang nicely now (seems AMD has more to worry about AGAIN! SIGH!!!!) http://www.imagelucidity.com/news.php?id_2=1050&?topic=Haswell-Showdown . At the end of the video though, still proves the same thing, highest end cards won't "make up" for lower end CPU performance, the CPUs will just keep bottlenecking the higher end card (makes sense!).

For BF4, and I wonder any other 'nexgen games' (AC3??) it is now the better 'Pairing' of CPU performance WITH GPU performance is the best solution, as the GPU isn't 'loading' the data right from the HDD on it's own. It still has to rely on HDD loads to RAM then processed by CPU to pass the data to the GPU to render, and if there is too slow HDD (5400RPMs), low timing RAM (DDR2, 9-9-9-9, etc.), or not enough Cores+Threads (i3/normal AMD CPUs) then the GPU is twiddling its thumbs waiting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom