Okedokey
Well-Known Member
Yeah but the point is most people who are right into gaming do play at 1080p. And at that resolution, 1 GTX580 wont cut it at ultra settings. Trust me.
Battlefield 3 Thread
- Thread starter Machin3
- Start date
Yeah but the point is most people who are right into gaming do play at 1080p. And at that resolution, 1 GTX580 wont cut it at ultra settings. Trust me.
salvage-this
Active Member
Hmmm... I played through the entire campaign maxed with my single 6950. I never saw lag.
kennebell347
Member
I have played this game on one of my 6950s completely maxed at 1080p and 4x AA and it is smooth as silk. With both my 6950s it runs at 60fps with v sync and never dips below that. These are also 1 GB cards.
Whoever said you need 2 gb cards and multiple expensive gpus to run this game is incorrect.
Okedokey
Well-Known Member
Rubbish, a 6950 cannot run BF3 at 1920 x 1080 at max. Simply cannot. I mean full AA, max textures the whole lot. Not a selective 'max' setting. Try a full battle scenario on Caspian Borders in MP. You will fail. I am vindicated by the statement below:
Im sorry but 4xAA is not "completely" maxed out lol, plus if you are only getting 60FPS with 2 cards, your performance with one card will be (by definition) less than 30FPS, which is rubbish - in fact, unplayable. Not 'smooth as silk'.
Crank it up to proper max, including max AA and HBAO and you'll get pwned with that set up.
Source
Source as above
Secondly, VRAM is pretty much maxed on a 1.5GB card with BF3 due to the hi res textures during Ultra play. If you plan on using anything higher than 1080p you will need more VRAM. Period.
Last edited:
SuperDuperMe
New Member
Maybe your definition of playable is different to ours, i mean yeh sure 60 fps consistent looks nice, but 30 is playable. I am more than happy to play at 30. I would prefer to play at 60 no doubt, but this isn't a cod game, you dont need blazing fps to stay on point, you just need consistency.
So if these guys say theyre maxing it out then im inclined to agree.
As for the AA settings when i had a look 4x was the most it went upto. How do you increase that?
So if these guys say theyre maxing it out then im inclined to agree.
As for the AA settings when i had a look 4x was the most it went upto. How do you increase that?
Okedokey
Well-Known Member
Yeah fine, but he's playing at less than 30FPS due to no CF or SLI scaling being 100% and that is at only 4xAA which is low. 16AA is max and my nvidia control panel puts it up to 32AA. My point is, if you want to play at full 'ultra' 1 GPU is not enough. And less than (or equal to) 30FPS is rubbish for FPS games regardless of taste. On FPS games, less than 40FPS is really 'struggle street' and less than 30 is unplayable.
So in summary to suggest that 1 x 6950 will play at 1080p on max is bullshit.
So in summary to suggest that 1 x 6950 will play at 1080p on max is bullshit.
Last edited:
SuperDuperMe
New Member
http://www.guru3d.com/article/battlefield-3-vga-and-cpu-performance-benchmark-test/6
Theres one gtx 580 there playing at 1080 on ultra.
That suggests to me single card set ups can play it (albeit hi end ones)
Still my argument stands, i find 30 fps comfortable. And does higher than 4x aa depend on hradware because its not showing up on my settings options.
Theres one gtx 580 there playing at 1080 on ultra.
That suggests to me single card set ups can play it (albeit hi end ones)
Still my argument stands, i find 30 fps comfortable. And does higher than 4x aa depend on hradware because its not showing up on my settings options.
linkin
VIP Member
Responses in bold. 1024MB/1280MB/1536MB is simply not enough, sometimes even 2GB is not enough for 1080p maxed out. I know this because the game crashes with a DirectX message with something about not enough VRAM, 0KB free, please ensure your GPU has at least 512mb etc, when I have textures on anything higher than medium with my 5770, which has 1GB of VRAM.
Riddle me this. If 1GB is enough, why are we seeing cards targeted at 1080p with more than 1GB VRAM?
The answer is that 1GB is not enough for modern games. It might be more than enough for a Source engine or COD game, but certainly not DX10/DX11 titles on maximum.
The point is that it's better to have too much than not enough.
SuperDuperMe
New Member
guessing by most benchmarks i would believe its average. 1.5gb or 3gb doesnt matter the argument bigfella put forward is single card set ups cant handle the game.
Having at 60fps minimum is your decision, but could you post a pic of this 8xmsaa, i cannot see it when i have been in the settings looking under ultra, nor custom. And by ultra i am refering to in gam eoptions not foced ones in CCC or nvidia control.
i was on my telly with my comp last night, at 1080, put it to ultra (it was obviously completely unplayable) and i didnt get this message. But the argument remains regardless of wether the cards vram is 1.5gb or 3gb were on about single cards, not the specs of them cards.
I could be wrong, i cant remember every post iv put in here, but i dont think i ever said 1gb was enough. Like i said i could be wrong but i dont think i am.
My 1gb card is enough to max dead island, battlefield bad company 2, fear 3, and a host of other games that aren't source engined games or CoD games.
I agree but not everyone has a money tree or lots of disposable income, i dont hence the reason im on an e6600 and have only now after almost a year been able to get a modern card.
EDIT:
again all tests have DX11 / Ultra mode 4xAA enabled / 16x AF enabled / HBAO enabled -- we'll everything is enabled
I guess guru couldn't find 8x msaa either :/
Last edited:
skidude
Active Member
I absolutely cannot stand Origin or the horrid web-based server browser. It literally takes me 15 minutes to successfully join a game, every single time. Either the game errors out when it first launches, thus making it stick on "joining server" indefinitely or it fails to connect to the login server or when I finally get through all of that I will get to the loading screen and it will freeze and crash.
Very, very pissed off because when I can actually get into a game I'm having a blast but trying to do so is an absolute nightmare.
Very, very pissed off because when I can actually get into a game I'm having a blast but trying to do so is an absolute nightmare.
SuperDuperMe
New Member
^^^ I have the exact same problem sometimes, more so today after there server updates that they were doing last night.
Aastii
VIP Member
What resolution?
And how do you have 5.5GB of memory?
=EDIt=
Operation Metro is the worst map I have every played on any game, it is so badly designed, it is just an RPG fest, and on conquest is even worse
Last edited:
mrjack
VIP Member
Based on the videos I have seen of Operation Metro being played as a 64-player conquest map I'd have to agree. On the other hand I think it was an okay map when I played it as a 32-player rush map during the beta.
RPG spamming as a whole is extremely annoying, especially the moments when an enemy uses it in a CQC situation and I get killed but they somehow survive the blast.