Battlefield 4 PC performance thread
- Thread starter Overdoziz
- Start date
Terbinator
Member
Supersampling - so 200% @ 1080p is 4K, basically.
And undersampling when going below 100%.
Happened, when I tried to redeem my BF4 code aswell, turns out I had snuck in an extra space before the code, it recognizes it but can't redeem it, removed the space, and it accepted it right away.
SneakyStephan
Banned
An i3 3220 doesn't bottleneck this game on a 60hz monitor (will on a 120 hz one but since their test is gpu bottlenecked at 95fps we can't see how much...)
interesting (but logical since it was designed to run on pityful jaguar cpu)
I installed the 13.11 beta v8 drivers with the new patch and they work with crossfired 7970s. For some reason having v-sync on + frame pacing on in Catalyst makes the game a stuttery mess on the 13.11 beta drivers. Either turn off v-sync or turn off frame pacing in CCC and see if that helps.
Poetic.Injustice
Member
Made this gif.
cripterion
Member
Seriously, what's the deal with the sound stutter, then freeze and only closing the game on the task manager can get you out of it?
I'm not the only one with the issue, but is it hardware related, a bug or the servers? Cause it's fucking killing my interest here. Just went on a roll as a tank driver on Shanghai Normal Conquest; 30 people server, was doing just fine, already at +4K score with 9-0 kills and I finally died. Repop, about to shoot a sniper and the fucking thing happens.
This shit happens so often it's not even funny, and usually when you're in the midst of doing some good stuff.
Coupled with servers still giving up on you after the patch (the game just stops, and then it looks like it's going to reload a new map but no, kicks you right back to battlelog and when you click on the server it shows 0/0), the refresh button in the browser not working, fact I can't even redeem my premium key... I'm seriously wondering why did they have a beta, which, while it ran worse for me it terms of fps, was fucking flawless in terms of being able to play the game non stop without having it crashing every 1-2 games.
It's quite frustrating, especially when I had absolutely no troubles going through the sp portion of the game.
Ok, I'm going to check but when I put the key, it recognizes premium, it just won't accept me redeeming it.
EDIT : Thanks man, that did it for me, such an odd thing lol. Now if only premium access would somehow magically stop the game from crashing, that would be great...
I'm not the only one with the issue, but is it hardware related, a bug or the servers? Cause it's fucking killing my interest here. Just went on a roll as a tank driver on Shanghai Normal Conquest; 30 people server, was doing just fine, already at +4K score with 9-0 kills and I finally died. Repop, about to shoot a sniper and the fucking thing happens.
This shit happens so often it's not even funny, and usually when you're in the midst of doing some good stuff.
Coupled with servers still giving up on you after the patch (the game just stops, and then it looks like it's going to reload a new map but no, kicks you right back to battlelog and when you click on the server it shows 0/0), the refresh button in the browser not working, fact I can't even redeem my premium key... I'm seriously wondering why did they have a beta, which, while it ran worse for me it terms of fps, was fucking flawless in terms of being able to play the game non stop without having it crashing every 1-2 games.
It's quite frustrating, especially when I had absolutely no troubles going through the sp portion of the game.
Ok, I'm going to check but when I put the key, it recognizes premium, it just won't accept me redeeming it.
EDIT : Thanks man, that did it for me, such an odd thing lol. Now if only premium access would somehow magically stop the game from crashing, that would be great...
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
Did some testing. Gonna echo others: the "Effects Quality" setting has the most significant hit on performance than any other, the framerate difference between High and Ultra fucking huge. The effect seems to handle, surprise surprise, "effects" like particle effects (smoke/fire/sparks/etc), though I don't think include stuff like dof/bokeh/blur.
Without a doubt the best place to test this is the second campaign level, early on when you're looking out over the Shanghai hotel courtyard before infiltration. As most people will have experienced, framerate tanks in this area. However, with fraps running I noticed it wasn't constant; it fluctuates. The reason? The fucking water jets. When they're spraying, down goes the framerate. When they're not, the framerate soars right back up.
Here's an example of the difference in that area while the water is spraying. All other settings on "Ultra", post-AA off, MSAAx4, 1920x1080:
"Effects Quality" set to "Ultra": ~27fps
"Effects Quality" set to "High": ~52fps
That's a cost of ~25fps for one setting during intense particles.
What I'd like to know is what hardware the "Effects Quality" setting is dependant on: GPU or CPU. Transparencies and what not might fall back on the CPU. I'd also like to know what's going on with the technology between "High" and "Ultra". Density maybe, or how the particle responds to lighting and shadows. It's hard to spot a visual difference to be perfectly honest, but it would be interesting to learn what changes are made to particle rendering between those two settings.
In hindsight this explains a way a lot of my framerate dips from the beta, specifically when the tower collapsed and was spitting out particles, and when I died while in a tank and the kill cam highlighted my opponent through my smoking/burning remains. I was running everything on ultra at the time.
So yeah. If you're finding framerate dips during really intense stuff that involves particle effects (explosions, fire, smoke, dust kicked up by helicopters, etc), drop it down from Ultra to High and enjoy the tremendous framerate increase.
Without a doubt the best place to test this is the second campaign level, early on when you're looking out over the Shanghai hotel courtyard before infiltration. As most people will have experienced, framerate tanks in this area. However, with fraps running I noticed it wasn't constant; it fluctuates. The reason? The fucking water jets. When they're spraying, down goes the framerate. When they're not, the framerate soars right back up.
Here's an example of the difference in that area while the water is spraying. All other settings on "Ultra", post-AA off, MSAAx4, 1920x1080:
"Effects Quality" set to "Ultra": ~27fps
"Effects Quality" set to "High": ~52fps
That's a cost of ~25fps for one setting during intense particles.
What I'd like to know is what hardware the "Effects Quality" setting is dependant on: GPU or CPU. Transparencies and what not might fall back on the CPU. I'd also like to know what's going on with the technology between "High" and "Ultra". Density maybe, or how the particle responds to lighting and shadows. It's hard to spot a visual difference to be perfectly honest, but it would be interesting to learn what changes are made to particle rendering between those two settings.
In hindsight this explains a way a lot of my framerate dips from the beta, specifically when the tower collapsed and was spitting out particles, and when I died while in a tank and the kill cam highlighted my opponent through my smoking/burning remains. I was running everything on ultra at the time.
So yeah. If you're finding framerate dips during really intense stuff that involves particle effects (explosions, fire, smoke, dust kicked up by helicopters, etc), drop it down from Ultra to High and enjoy the tremendous framerate increase.
I'm experiencing a weird pausing issue with this game. I run at ultra/1080p and my framerste hovers at 90-100 fps when playing online and i get those random half second freeeze. I'm starting to suspect ram iasues (this machine only has 8gb) unless its a known bug..
I'm also not having much fun with the game; but I think it's more the case of being burned out with the franchise. It really feels like an incremental update with a very good paint job.
I'm also not having much fun with the game; but I think it's more the case of being burned out with the franchise. It really feels like an incremental update with a very good paint job.
lol
Now can people stop saying 'overclock that cpu!' and 'you need a new cpu for BF4.' Crikey, a stock i7 920 is performing nearly as well as the highest end cpu. Interesting too that this is the first review where the R290x seems to be curb stomping everything in BF4.
Just wow..
EDIT: Dumb charts that only show cpu scaling in single player mode..
Hurricane43
Member
this is huge.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1438222/battlefield-4-ram-memory-benchmark/0_100
overclocking ram from 1333 to 2333 gave him 13% more avg fps and 9 frames more of min fps in ultra preset.
and my rams don't want to jump from 1444 to 1800
http://www.overclock.net/t/1438222/battlefield-4-ram-memory-benchmark/0_100
overclocking ram from 1333 to 2333 gave him 13% more avg fps and 9 frames more of min fps in ultra preset.
and my rams don't want to jump from 1444 to 1800
forgot to mention - fov is on 80 (default 70). it must slightly hit performance too
now this was my performance during beta on previous GPU (5850)
http://imgur.com/OGtVnNu
on med/high settings (no aa)
http://i.imgur.com/WQCdt5E.jpg
Do you know how performance is with a lower clock in the CPU?
WarMacheen
Member
I have 13.11 drivers also, I'll take a look at CCC settings when I get home, thanks!
I'm getting black textures and stuttering in SP. Framerate seems okay, but all these other issues are a bit disturbing.
I'm running the beta drivers, not the new ones, can that be the reason?
Oh, and I'm on a laptop (I know, I know) I have the 1gb 650m with GDDR5 memory and an quad core i7, running fro an SSD.
It is not much, but it should be more powerful (in brute force) than the 8800gt that forms the baseline.
Multiplayer runs well.
Edit: Yup, was the drivers, nothing to see here.
I'm running the beta drivers, not the new ones, can that be the reason?
Oh, and I'm on a laptop (I know, I know) I have the 1gb 650m with GDDR5 memory and an quad core i7, running fro an SSD.
It is not much, but it should be more powerful (in brute force) than the 8800gt that forms the baseline.
Multiplayer runs well.
Edit: Yup, was the drivers, nothing to see here.
didn't test it but if you mean stock clocks (2,66) then it might bottleneck in multiplayer quite badly, especially in 64 player mode
Felix Lighter
Member
RAM speed would have had a negligible impact. CPU clock speed would have had a much much much bigger impact.
That benchmark was entriely done in the campaign. Which, you know, doesn't really taxes the CPU compared to multiplayer. Here's something more relevent.
total shit test for CPUs
haven't played single player yet, but according to their description they walked around during the opening of a level ? without any action going on ?
http://www.sweclockers.com/artikel/17810-prestandaanalys-battlefield-4/4#pagehead
This is a test on a MP map, already showing much more significant differences. For example, even at 1080p medium settings chips like the i3 3220 and Phenom II X6 drop below the 60 Hz threshold, whereas in the Techspot bench they are almost indistinguishable from top end CPUs. I'd like to see someone do frametime testing on different CPUs in multiplayer ... hard to replicate the same conditions every time, but I'm sure a hectic MP match is a lot harder on CPUs than a walk through some aircraft carrier is.
Just to be clear, back in BC2 I had a single GTX480, and the difference between an Athlon II X4 @ 3.3 GHz and my current 4.8 GHz i7 2600K was night and day ... also in BF4 MP I see very high CPU utilization (80%+) , and I'm running 1080p Ultra on a SLI 670 setup. I find it incredibly hard to believe an i3 or Phenom II X4 would deliver the same kind of performance.
Again, I'm not saying everyone should go out and get a Haswell chip immediately, but the 93-98 fps range that every chip from the last 5 years is in over at Techspot really makes no sense.
fluffydelusions
Member
off topic but is there a gaf pc server to play on?
KillerMan91
Member
Wildstar75
Member
Thanks for the link.
So based on these benchmarks and spec, how much would it cost to for a rig that could run BF4 at 1920x1200 at 60FPS on Ultra?
Hey, a 5 year old CPU does better at this game than the next-gen consoles. Without overclocking.Here's something more relevent.
I'm so surprised.
jim2point0
Banned
Resolution scale is supersampling. That's your transparency AA.
Felix Lighter
Member
Hyper Threading looks to be making a substantial difference even for lower clocked generations old CPUs.
That benchmark was entriely done in the campaign. Which, you know, doesn't really taxes the CPU compared to multiplayer. Here's something more relevent.
Ouch, huge difference there. Is that from the beta or a release review?
And memory bandwidth.
5 year old i7-920 @ 3.8 GHz with triple channel memory represent. Thing could probably keep ticking away for another 5 years.
What resolution? Got a 680m so that bodes well for me getting similar performance on all High with some AA.
Game looks and runs phenomenally for me on:
i7-2600k @ 4.4GHz
GTX 590 (1.5GB VRAM)
16GB RAM
I can tell that the low VRAM is causing some stuttering, but that is what it is. Running every setting on High with 2x MSAA. 50-60fps. I'm using Windows 7 and I haven't formatted in a long time, which definitely means that my PC is not running as well as it should. I'm lazy, whatevs.
i7-2600k @ 4.4GHz
GTX 590 (1.5GB VRAM)
16GB RAM
I can tell that the low VRAM is causing some stuttering, but that is what it is. Running every setting on High with 2x MSAA. 50-60fps. I'm using Windows 7 and I haven't formatted in a long time, which definitely means that my PC is not running as well as it should. I'm lazy, whatevs.
Damn, mines clocked at 4.6 too, but I haven't seen 100% utilization yet. With HT off I routinely get 100% though and even BF3 64-player MP will chug in the 50's because of it.
Should clarif, I was getting that in MP.
I'm not sure if my system is starting to show its age or if it's just something with BF4 but I'm just not that impressed with the graphics (the lighting looks "off" or flat, I guess). It almost seems like some settings are turned off even if I turn all the settings up to Ultra. My system should probably not be able to handle many Ultra settings but yet the game runs alright. This leads me to believe that maybe it's automatically defaulting to some setting appropriate to my system. I don't know. Has anyone else been experiencing this or heard of something similar?
Here's what I have in my system:
i5 2500K
16GB DDR 3
Radeon HD 6970 2GB w/ 13.11 beta drivers
Win 7
Here's what I have in my system:
i5 2500K
16GB DDR 3
Radeon HD 6970 2GB w/ 13.11 beta drivers
Win 7
Felix Lighter
Member
There are images, .gifs and high quality video out there. You can compare your experience to those but I imagine you are just not impressed by the graphics.
Uh.. Haha my laptop monitor is only 1366x768, so nothing crazy. I think your 680m will run it just fine even at higher resolutions. I've tried HDMIing it out to my TV but it never wants to go above my laptops resolution for some reason.
Edit:
Also if you're wondering my exact settings, I've got texture quality/filtering on high, lighting quality and effects quality on medium, pos process quality high, mesh, terrain quality medium, no deferred AA, medium post AA. Ambient Occlusion -ssao. Could probably push it a little more in single player, and on certain MP maps it's better to turn some of it down
Hbao to Ssao also gives about +20fps, and that's outside.
If you played BF3 at high/ultra settings, then it's normal to be unimpressed by BF4 multiplayer. It's not that large a leap over the last game. SP should still be impressive unless some ultra settings aren't working for you for some reason.
The Janitor
Member
I figured out why I couldn't type anything, it was the tutorial pop-ups and you have to click "continue" on them, esc doesn't work.
And with the HUD disabled I couldn't see them. So I just had to disable them in the menu.
Windom Earle
Member
After being disappointed with the beta performance this game is running really well for me now. You've done well Dice!
I've been looking at the screenshots thread on here and the other BF4 thread and mine seems to look a little different. Perhaps it's all in my head though.
I'll have to take some screens of my game and compare them. The ambient occlusion doesn't look dark enough despite trying both settings and the shadowing looks inconsistent.