Battlefield 3 recommended GPU specs out

[at80eighty]

finally - something to make my rig go up in smoke

 

[Blitzvogel]

You guys think BF3 pownz Modern Warefare 3 ?

I know the COD series has millions of users. But then I noticed BF3 had millions of users too, as 2 million pre ordered the game. I have a question, is there leaning in BF2 or just strafe. If it has leaning, Im sold... thx

None of the Battlefield games (even BF2) ever had leaning in the first place, and AFAIK, there is none in BF3.

As for console design in lieu of PC design, I'm pretty sure that when DICE set out to build the game, they of course had PC in mind, but knew they couldn't push the scale so far as to leave console versions out of the question. Anyways, it would be pretty difficult to really design a practical PC game that couldn't in some decent form or another be scaled to fit the console world. Diminishing returns have kept console performance relevant even though the actual rendering power of today's best GPUs well exceed 10x the theoretical numbers that either the Xenos or RSX could put up at best. Considering that PC players are going to want to push 1080p, 4x MSAA and 60 FPS, it's not at all surprising to see assets across platforms be similar in memory size. It just takes so much less of a GPU to do 720p, 2x MSAA, and 30 FPS in comparison on a console, yet can still look very good.

Looks like I'll probably need to upgrade from my 5850. Hoping for good things out of the Radeon 7000s. I feel a desire to build a completely new machine, but I'd like to push one more year with the rest of the system though.

 

[TheAdvocate]

The console fanboi crap is ridiculous. This is a PC multiplayer bonanza. The console versions are dumbed down to run on outdated hardware, not vice versa.

And again, for the umpteenth time, the alpha build did not have many of the advanced graphical features enabled.

I feel dumber everytime I read this fanboi crap. Do people really take "sides"? It's going to be a beautiful game that will test even the most ridiculous rigs, and hopefully plays as amazing as it looks.

64 player with vehicles... cannot wait.

 

[blackened23]

My earlier post: I'm not a fanboy , but i'm also not completely blind. PC game sales peaked in 2000 and steadily declined exponentially since then. 2002 $1.4 Billion
2003 $1.22 Billion
2004 $1.08 Billion

I'll give you 5 guesses on 2010, and its far less than 1 billion. You can also guess the console figure if you wish.

Anyway, we can all agree we're happy about BF3 not being a crap console port, i'm a PC gamer just like you. But i'm extremely wary from past games.

Not to get into a big long debate about this, but PC game sales are absymmal (even taking DD into account) and i've seen various interviews with big figures in the industry talking about whats going on. GeorgeB from epic games had a good writeup on this a few weeks ago and basically what he said was, unless you're in the top 1% of the industry (valve or blizzard), MMO, or budgetware, getting published with a PC only game is nearly impossible. That makes PC only games very rare these days, unless you're making an mmo. In addition to this, a buddy of mine ran into Tim Willets at quakecon and he's a very cool dude...very approachable and easy going. He (willets) basically said that PC game sales , even with DD into account, would not give them an adequate profit and they had to go multi platform to be viable. Console sales are tremendously higher than PC.

He also mentioned that consoles are where the real money are. They get real data from all the DD services about how sales are doing, which isn't made public and it is across the board absymmal compared to console game sales. There are numerous blockboster console titles that sell 7+ million, but barely squeak 300k on PC's (even with DD). Its a pretty dire situation.

As well, you have to look at other industry leaders such as ID software making rage with consoles in mind. If you look at his interviews from years past, he basically stated that he had to make rage multi console to get the kind of profits they needed, there was no option of making it PC only. As a result, the PC version suffers because it does not take advantage of current PC hardware as previous ID games have. Also, blizzard has hired a console team and they are planning to develop diablo 3 for consoles - so even blizzard, a previously PC only giant is making all of their games for consoles in the future.

This isn't an afront to you, i'm not a huge console fan. I am and have always been a PC gamer, and i'm on your side -- I prefer the PC. But you can't deny whats going on in the industry. Crappy console ports are extremely common now, and PC only games which were the norm back in the 90's / early 2k are no longer, unless its a MMO. Understand that I don't like this situation, because i'm a PC guy-- but you'd have to wear blinders to deny it. PC gaming isn't in good shape compared to 5 or 10 years ago.

I remember growing up and playing games like magic carpet, ROTT, Populous, warcraft, descent.....there were ALL KINDS of PC only games that were incredible and not riddled with consoleitis. Those days are sadly gone....games with consoleitis are the norm now, with few exceptions. I am however happy to hear that BF3 was designed with the PC in mind, so i'm definitely looking forward to it.

 

[TheAdvocate]

Why are you quoting console game sales other than to be an argumentative idiot?

Any gamer who has not had his head stuck under a rock for the past 2 years knows this is a PC first game - the internet media coverage of the development is exhaustive and leaves absolutely no room for discussion or argument.

Hi,

Stating facts with your counterpoint is enough. There is no need to be insulting and condescending. Keep it civil and mature so we can maintain an aura of mutual respect despite a difference in opinion or knowledge.

Moderator jvroig

 

[Capt Caveman]

Why are you quoting console game sales other than to be an argumentative idiot?

Any gamer who has not had his head stuck under a rock for the past 2 years knows this is a PC first game - the internet media coverage of the development is exhaustive and leaves absolutely no room for discussion or argument.

B/c he's a troll, retarded or retarded troll.

Hi,

This is not off-topic. No such insults in the tech forums, please. Keep it civil and mature so we can maintain an aura of mutual respect despite a difference in opinion.

Moderator jvroig

 

[michal1980]

so what they are telling me is that my q6600 with a 8800gt needs to be upgraded?

so at 19x10, or 19x12 (next monitor) what card should I get for high settings 60fps?

 

[TheAdvocate]

The namecalling was out of line. I apologize. I just hate seeing an otherwise solid discussion get ruined.

 

[TheAdvocate]

so what they are telling me is that my q6600 with a 8800gt needs to be upgraded?

so at 19x10, or 19x12 (next monitor) what card should I get for high settings 60fps?

If I were you, I'd wait for some benches from the beta. There are 3 components here: CPU, GPU, and resolution. Rarely do people consider all 3. I have a sneaking suspiscion that the final version of the game is going to be more cpu dependent than some realize.

That q6600 is a quad core, isn't it? (Sorry I skipped that cpu generation), but low clocked... like 2.4 or 2.5 GHz, right?

I think you should wait for the benches and see where you might realize the greatest performance gain, though I think it's time to play taps for that 8800GT, if you want to run at anything but the lowest settings. Great card though. Just said bye to my 9800.

 

[SirPauly]

My earlier post: I'm not a fanboy , but i'm also not completely blind. PC game sales peaked in 2000 and steadily declined exponentially since then. 2002 $1.4 Billion
2003 $1.22 Billion
2004 $1.08 Billion

I'll give you 5 guesses on 2010, and its far less than 1 billion. You can also guess the console figure if you wish.

Anyway, we can all agree we're happy about BF3 not being a crap console port, i'm a PC gamer just like you. But i'm extremely wary from past games.

Revenue was around 16.2 billion over-all for 2010 for the PC platform.

 

[Epsilon-Zero]

Has there been any official announcement which GPU camp BF3 leans toward?
Ive seen this argument go both ways but with no links to official postings or hands on accounts. :?

 

[CupCak3]

Revenue was around 16.2 billion over-all for 2010 for the PC platform.

I was also confused by those numbers. I thought just the Blizzard games brought in a billion or more per year.

 

[96Firebird]

I was also confused by those numbers. I thought just the Blizzard games brought in a billion or more per year.

I'm also wondering where those numbers came from, no source was provided...

 

[SirPauly]

http://worthplaying.com/article/2011/2/28/news/80096/

 

[blackened23]

Yeah those figures include everything, including non PC game sales revenue. Its been brought up before. It also includes MMO subscription revenue. I wouldn't really say thats accurate of "first time game sales".

There's no doubt that PC game sales are pretty lacklusted compared to console.... thats pretty clear from the NPD charts, which also now track DD. The developers also all say the same thing, big names from the biggest devs. http://www.vgchartz.com/ .Without exception PC new game sales are mediocre, except for a select few -- this is why PC has so many console ports (which was definitely NOT the case 10 years ago!) and this is why practically every AAA title except blizzard is multi platform, with many of them being ported to PC from consoles. I miss the days of having PC only games such as BF1942, magic carpet, rise of the triad, descent! And so many more. The glory days are gone I think.

Do I like it? No. I definitely don't. I want the PC gaming glory days to return.

Anyway, this is all a tangent and was started when I doubted that BF3 was designed with a PC only team. Because most games are, consolitis ridden console ports....i've fell prey to that numerous times. For that, i'm sorry that this thread has gone on such a long tangent. I was also wrong, BF has a PC only team working on it ....lets all be happy about that. I've already pre-ordered the game from origin (which by the way, comes with dead space 2 free).

So cheers to PC gamers who will enjoy the best version of BF3

 

[SexyK]

I'm terrified to think what it will take to push this at 5760x1080. We really need to get some new GPUs up in here ASAP.

 

[lehtv]

^ I'm sure 7950 crossfire would handle that. This game was probably designed for the 28nm generation - bad luck for the devs and us that they got delayed.

 

[SirPauly]

Yeah those figures include everything, including non PC game sales revenue. Its been brought up before. It also includes MMO subscription revenue. I wouldn't really say thats accurate of "first time game sales".

There's no doubt that PC game sales are pretty lacklusted compared to console.... thats pretty clear from the NPD charts, which also now track DD. The developers also all say the same thing, big names from the biggest devs. http://www.vgchartz.com/ .Without exception PC new game sales are mediocre, except for a select few -- this is why PC has so many console ports (which was definitely NOT the case 10 years ago!) and this is why practically every AAA title except blizzard is multi platform, with many of them being ported to PC from consoles. I miss the days of having PC only games such as BF1942, magic carpet, rise of the triad, descent! And so many more. The glory days are gone I think.

Do I like it? No. I definitely don't. I want the PC gaming glory days to return.

Anyway, this is all a tangent and was started when I doubted that BF3 was designed with a PC only team. Because most games are, consolitis ridden console ports....i've fell prey to that numerous times. For that, i'm sorry that this thread has gone on such a long tangent. I was also wrong, BF has a PC only team working on it ....lets all be happy about that. I've already pre-ordered the game from origin (which by the way, comes with dead space 2 free).

So cheers to PC gamers who will enjoy the best version of BF3

Pc revenue is diverse and much more than just PC boxed revenue. If one counts just console boxed vs PC boxed, consoles have it all over the PC but digital downloads are growing very much so; as are other areas to garner PC game revenue.

 

[m3t4lh34d]

^ I'm sure 7950 crossfire would handle that. This game was probably designed for the 28nm generation - bad luck for the devs and us that they got delayed.

You'd be surprised what a properly optimized engine can do with just a single 580 for example. SLI 580s or 6970s in crossfire should be able to do 60fps at that res. If it can't, play it at 1080p until you're upgraded...

 

[Will Robinson]

I expect everything above the performance of GTX460 and HD6870 will run BF3 just fine, with plenty of eye candy.
This game is unlikely to feature vast amounts of occluded tessellation and so should be just the thing to really stretch the current gen cards and run beautifully on the new 28nm parts.

 

[RussianSensation]

I expect everything above the performance of GTX460 and HD6870 will run BF3 just fine, with plenty of eye candy.
This game is unlikely to feature vast amounts of occluded tessellation and so should be just the thing to really stretch the current gen cards and run beautifully on the new 28nm parts.

In the Alpha testing, there was a large difference in performance between the GTX460 and the HD6870. The GTX460 couldn't break 40 fps, while the 6870 couldn't break 50 fps. It all depends on what some gamers find acceptable. Some may find 25 fps min and 40 fps average fast enough. Others will want 60 fps minimums. The performance of dual core CPUs was abysmal too.

I have a feeling with all the Havok physics effects, 64 players, large maps, this game is going to put a serious strain on today's single GPU cards. Witcher 2, Shogun 2 and Dragon Age 2 have already done so this year. BF3 + Skyrim = 28nm GPU goodness.

 

[houe]

In the Alpha testing, there was a large difference in performance between the GTX460 and the HD6870. The GTX460 couldn't break 40 fps, while the 6870 couldn't break 50 fps. It all depends on what some gamers find acceptable. Some may find 25 fps min and 40 fps average fast enough. Others will want 60 fps minimums. The performance of dual core CPUs was abysmal too.

I have a feeling with all the Havok physics effects, 64 players, large maps, this game is going to put a serious strain on today's single GPU cards. Witcher 2, Shogun 2 and Dragon Age 2 have already done so this year. BF3 + Skyrim = 28nm GPU goodness.

Right. In the alpha the 6970 and the 570 were the same as is generally the case for most other games. Keep in mind if you go dual cards AMD seems to scale a bit better because 2x6950 (not 6970) is more or less equal to 2x570. It is going to be interesting to see more performance numbers from the beta. I think we will get a much better picture of the performance situation. I have three 24" monitors at 1920x1200 and would love to run this game at that res, but I'm guessing that won't happen until 28nm cards are out and probably still need sli or crossfire.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

I don't understand why people get their panties in a wad when it comes to graphics settings.

Will I be disappointed if my GTX580 can't run ultra? No, not at all, not as long as the medium or high settings look great as well, and they likely will.

Unlike console gamers who will be stuck at 30fps and 720p with medium quality settings or worse, I'll be running 1080p with whatever settings I like to achieve the frame rate of my desire. Some might want higher quality settings because they're still living in the past with slow LCDs, but I'll likely tweak and even lower specific settings (oh the advantages of PC gaming, yet all you nutters want to just blindly crank everything up in a fit of ignorance) in order to push my 120Hz monitor. I already do that in BC2, getting rid of frivolous eye candy like bloom and HBAO and settling for only 2xAA (not that BC2's AA is anything amazing to begin with) and even specifically tweaking certain graphical elements such as rendering undergrowth on the lowest setting (grass and bushes)


Ok, so I lied, I actually do understand why people cry about it, its because they're upset that their multi hundred dollar GPU(s) aren't capable of running any game at the highest setting, they're upset that their epeen is so small. Keep crying you self-entitled sillybillies. Would you be crying if DICE decided not to include Ultra settings and instead put out a game with graphics little better than BC2? If you wouldn't, you aren't thinking it through, instead we're going to get a game that pushes the boundaries and encourages competition in all facets, whether its with other software developers like Activision getting complacent with milking COD, or GPU producers like Intel thinking their CPU-integrated GPUs are going to be "enough" for the future.

 

[blackened23]

 

[Capt Caveman]

I don't understand why people get their panties in a wad when it comes to graphics settings.

Will I be disappointed if my GTX580 can't run ultra? No, not at all, not as long as the medium or high settings look great as well, and they likely will.

Unlike console gamers who will be stuck at 30fps and 720p with medium quality settings or worse, I'll be running 1080p with whatever settings I like to achieve the frame rate of my desire. Some might want higher quality settings because they're still living in the past with slow LCDs, but I'll likely tweak and even lower specific settings (oh the advantages of PC gaming, yet all you nutters want to just blindly crank everything up in a fit of ignorance) in order to push my 120Hz monitor. I already do that in BC2, getting rid of frivolous eye candy like bloom and HBAO and settling for only 2xAA (not that BC2's AA is anything amazing to begin with) and even specifically tweaking certain graphical elements such as rendering undergrowth on the lowest setting (grass and bushes)


Ok, so I lied, I actually do understand why people cry about it, its because they're upset that their multi hundred dollar GPU(s) aren't capable of running any game at the highest setting, they're upset that their epeen is so small. Keep crying you self-entitled sillybillies. Would you be crying if DICE decided not to include Ultra settings and instead put out a game with graphics little better than BC2? If you wouldn't, you aren't thinking it through, instead we're going to get a game that pushes the boundaries and encourages competition in all facets, whether its with other software developers like Activision getting complacent with milking COD, or GPU producers like Intel thinking their CPU-integrated GPUs are going to be "enough" for the future.

As someone that plays competitively, I adjust lower my settings to gain an advantage(ie. remove shadows/fog/dust/etc). However, just upgrading to a GTX 580, I can see the difference of having higher settings even in BC2. I never noticed the blood splatter caused by bullets til the upgrade and being able to crank everything to max. And so, yes it's nice to have all of the eye candy when pubbing.

Seriously, I think your whole post is silly.