A video card for Battlefield 3

Kekewy

Member
Dec 24, 2005
122
0
76
A friend of mine asked me to help him build a system to run Battlefield 3. He's buying everything fresh and wants to be able to run the game on max settings. He hasn't yet picked out any other components because of the GPUs the game recommends. Both of which are total budget busters for him. He has about $150 to $200 to spend on the card.

The two cards it recommends are a Radeon 6950 and a GeForce GTX 560. Both of these cards retail for about double what he wants to spend with 2 gigs of ram. What I'm wondering is if there is an alternative card that will still play the game at max settings. He also has a bamboo tablet and likes to draw using photoshop. So something that runs that well is a plus.

I don't have any other computer specs because the whole build kind of rides on if we can find a cheaper graphics card or not, but the rest of the game's specs are:

Windows 7 64 bit OS
AMD or Intel quad core CPU
4 gigs of ram
1 gig graphics card memory

Thanks for the help!
 

poohbear

Platinum Member
Mar 11, 2003
2,284
5
81
If the focus is BF3, i'd skimp on all the other parts & focus on the cpu! $250-$300 is the sweet spot for a fantastic video card, he can't save a little mpore to get the ideal card? 7850 & overclock the hell out of it, that'll do lovely for BF3.
 

psolord

Platinum Member
Sep 16, 2009
2,095
1,235
136
7850 2GB for me as well. I wouldn't get anything less than 2GBs nowadays.

Also disabling deferred AA in BF3 can really make a difference in performance and virtually no difference in image quality.

For a cpu I wouldn't get anything less than a 2500k/3570k and tune it up a bit.

Also 8gigs of ram. Ram is dirt cheap nowadays and it can really help the system breath.
 

moonbogg

Lifer
Jan 8, 2011
10,669
3,203
136
Didn't all the performance reviews of BF3 when it was released show that there was very little deviation when it came to CPUs? As long as you have 4+ cores you are good to go.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/battlefield-3-graphics-performance,3063-13.html
http://www.techspot.com/review/448-battlefield-3-beta-performance/page7.html

They are wrong, plain and simple. Here is WHY: BF3 is a multiplayer game and they tested single player. Anything will run single player just fine, but multiplayer will hammer the crap out of even the best CPUs, so keep that in mind.
 

Remobz

Platinum Member
Jun 9, 2005
2,564
37
91
They are wrong, plain and simple. Here is WHY: BF3 is a multiplayer game and they tested single player. Anything will run single player just fine, but multiplayer will hammer the crap out of even the best CPUs, so keep that in mind.

So there is zero hope for people with an i3 2100?
 

BallaTheFeared

Diamond Member
Nov 15, 2010
8,115
0
71
My i3-540 @ 4.2GHz is a pretty trashy, comparable to a quad core bulldozer.

Chokes my 470 badly down to around 30 fps a lot of the time, some animations (death) are broked too, not sure if it's the game or what but I never had the issue with my i5.
 

Durvelle27

Diamond Member
Jun 3, 2012
4,102
0
0
My i3-540 @ 4.2GHz is a pretty trashy, comparable to a quad core bulldozer.

Chokes my 470 badly down to around 30 fps a lot of the time, some animations (death) are broked too, not sure if it's the game or what but I never had the issue with my i5.

i wouldn't say that as my FX 4100 4.6GHz on 64 player maps only dipped in the 40s with a HD 6950 at 1920x1080 Ultra no AA.
 

Durvelle27

Diamond Member
Jun 3, 2012
4,102
0
0
30-40, neither are acceptable in a competitive fps.

AVG was 55 FPs but the dips weren't noticeable as it only happened for a second. And yea 40 isn't good. I try to keep at least 60 FPS in most games or 50 minimum in others with a exception for Crysis 3
 

Remobz

Platinum Member
Jun 9, 2005
2,564
37
91
AVG was 55 FPs but the dips weren't noticeable as it only happened for a second. And yea 40 isn't good. I try to keep at least 60 FPS in most games or 50 minimum in others with a exception for Crysis 3

For people with an i3 2100, would lowering the in game details (medium settings for example) and other odds and ends make the game playable for 64 player maps in multi?

The graphics card would be a msi twin frozr 7850 2GB non overclock model (but it can be overclocked if needed).

Just curious.....
 

TakeNoPrisoners

Platinum Member
Jun 3, 2011
2,599
1
81
They are wrong, plain and simple. Here is WHY: BF3 is a multiplayer game and they tested single player. Anything will run single player just fine, but multiplayer will hammer the crap out of even the best CPUs, so keep that in mind.

This, I had a noticeable FPS improvement when I overclocked my CPU.
 

Midwayman

Diamond Member
Jan 28, 2000
5,723
325
126
Why is he considering last gen GPUs? You don't need a high end card to run bf3 acceptably.

He should plan on spending at least ~$200 for a gpu. gtx 660, or 7870. Either will do fine on 1080p. Won't quite max out settings, but you'll run ultra with some AA. Quad core cpu for sure. It isn't terribly cpu dependent, but a quad makes a huge difference in minimum frame rate.

If you have the total budget and what he plans on reusing people can make better suggestions. Also beware of old BF3 benchmarks. The Radeon card got quite a bit better with driver improvments than a lot of older benchmarks suggest.
 

aaksheytalwar

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2012
3,389
0
76
Ultra is the same as max. AA is bonus\luxury. It is like saying anything below 1440p isn't called maxed out. That is stupid. Ultra at the rez of your choice without AA is maxed out. You need to specify rez and aa whenever you talk about your settings.
 

Rvenger

Elite Member <br> Super Moderator <br> Video Cards
Apr 6, 2004
6,283
5
81
If you want an inexpensive CPU that will perform great for the $$ its actually the FX6300.
 

Midwayman

Diamond Member
Jan 28, 2000
5,723
325
126
Ultra is the same as max. AA is bonus\luxury. It is like saying anything below 1440p isn't called maxed out. That is stupid. Ultra at the rez of your choice without AA is maxed out. You need to specify rez and aa whenever you talk about your settings.

Max is ultra with 4x msaa in bf3. Pick a resolution. This is how most benchmarks talk about it. AA is integral to you quality settings. Saying you are running 'max' setting with no AA is lying to yourself so you can feel better about dated/slow hardware.
 

moonbogg

Lifer
Jan 8, 2011
10,669
3,203
136
So there is zero hope for people with an i3 2100?

I wouldn't say that. It will run the game, but on larger maps with lots of players you will have some slow downs. Lower the image quality to medium and it should reduce some CPU load. I think you'll be fine, you just won't always get the big FPS numbers on certain maps/scenarios. You may get hammered into the lower 30FPS range during intense scenes.

30-40, neither are acceptable in a competitive fps.

Agreed, but the eyes do adapt and its possible to get used to it, if you have to of course. I was crying about dips into the 50's and even that took some getting used to. It doesn't bother me anymore as long as I keep that damn FPS counter TURNED OFF.

For people with an i3 2100, would lowering the in game details (medium settings for example) and other odds and ends make the game playable for 64 player maps in multi?

The graphics card would be a msi twin frozr 7850 2GB non overclock model (but it can be overclocked if needed).

Just curious.....

I do believe so. Turning my settings to medium increased my min FPS by quite a lot, perhaps by about 15-20fps during intense scenes.

EDIT: Also, a 7850 2gb would be good for BF3 so long as you go easy on the details. I think it would do great on medium personally, perhaps even with a little AA.
 
Last edited:

aaksheytalwar

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2012
3,389
0
76
No website ever calls max as ultra plus AA. AA is always pointed separately. What is saying that you don't need 8x MSAA instead of 4x?
 

aaksheytalwar

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2012
3,389
0
76
Dude, chances are my PC is better than most/majority as far as each and every part is concerned. Yet I am the most humble and honest as far as settings are concerned. 1440p with msaa is tough with even 2 high end gpus with many games and usually to required.

By the way, before this I had a
6970
5850
4850
9600gt
1900xtx

2600k
860
9550
Etc

I upgrade every few months or so. But some things are just not possible.