• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Battlefield 4 CPU performance: Win 7 vs Win 8.1, up to 50% more fps

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
imaheadcase said:
THE PARTIAL DX11.1 FEATURES PUT INTO WIN 7 ARE THE MINOR PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENTS ALREADY IN WIN 8 DX 11.1.
Click to expand...

Can you post some proof please? I can't find any evidence of that at all.

All I'm seeing is a quote by somebody at DICE saying DX11.1 is faster on the CPU side. Absolutely nothing about those optimizations being present in Windows 7.
 
Last edited:
BSim500 said:
If Core Parking is the issue for poor Windows 7 performance, then for those of you with Windows 7 and an i3 or i7 CPU, try disabling CP with the following then benchmark it again:-
http://bitsum.com/about_cpu_core_parking.php

Or try it manually via registry:-
http://forum.cakewalk.com/FindPost/1963569

I haven't tried BF4, but I did notice a huge +20% boost in performance on an old i3 530 in WinRAR with CP disabled as above (2,988 CP ON / 3,609 CP OFF). The problem was, Windows 7 "parks" Hyper-threaded cores, then doesn't "unpark" them on some apps games (because they're not "real" cores). Try benchmarking before/after WinRAR as well. That was one app that repeatedly showed up the issue on my old Clarkdale rig.

NB: The "CP doesn't unpark some cores" issue only affect CPU's with Hyper-Threading (i3 & i7) and only then in certain apps / games. It doesn't affect i5's, and can be easily remedied by disabling CP with no noticeable loss in power consumption if you have SpeedStep enabled. I don't know if this will solve the issue with BF4, but it's worth doing anyway just to rule it out. I can't test it myself as I have an i5-3570 (no HT).
Click to expand...
the problem wasn't just core parking cause I see huge jump in min and avg fps now . I run i5-3570k .
Whatever it was IMO was on CPU side of things , cause lower graphic settings didn't fix it , just slightly better .
Now I think it just network lag here or there at times but it runs smooth now for most part .
 
I hope they fix this. I was using Win8 for a while now and it works great. The only reason I had to swap back to windows 7 was because I can't change the polling rate in it with hidusb for my razer salmosa pro. Best mouse I've ever used =/
 
jigglywiggly said:
I hope they fix this. I was using Win8 for a while now and it works great. The only reason I had to swap back to windows 7 was because I can't change the polling rate in it with hidusb for my razer salmosa pro. Best mouse I've ever used =/
Click to expand...

Why not use the Razor Synapse software? That's what I'm using for my DeathAdder, seems to work fine under 8.1
 
I am more interested by how the 4960X outperforms the 6350 by a factor of 3 on both OS... There really is something fishy about these benchmarks since no other review site has shown such a dramatic difference in performance...

battlefield4-beta-7.jpg

CPU.png
 
The Gamegpu chart looks more correct, my 770 at 1366x768 ultra no msaa is bottlenecked by my processor being the i5 2500 non k and the toms chart is full of it as my chip drops into the 40s often enough so the minimums look right for Gamegpu.
 
Here is my results for beta with my PhenomIIx4 @ 3.6ghz
Win 7 pre-patch high 20's FPS
Win 7 patched high 30's FPS with mid 40's here and there
Win 8.1 preview low/mid 40's with instances of 60+
All of which show roughly 60-70% GPU usage

Win 8.1 definitely gave me a solid 6-7fps gain which is very noticeable at the 40fps thresh hold my phenom is capable of.
 
No reason not to run 8[.1]. Get over Metro/Modern/whatever and welcome to 2013. Unless you have old ass hardware that is XP dated.
 
SPBHM said:
more than 1 year using Win8 here, and I can't complain, it has been a pretty good experience, maybe I'm lucky for using mostly keyboard shortcuts and ignoring the start menu most of the time even before win8, I don't know, but I didn't have much trouble adapting, and I'm rarely exposed to the modern UI.

but about BF4, I'm also thinking performance have improved for my little i3, I tried earlier on high (64p) and I didn't notice it going under 30 for most of the time (it did once, well into the 20s for a few seconds), and it doesn't feel to stuttery or anything, but, I'm not really a BF enthusiast and my BF runs are basically 10 mins of me dying a lot and giving up lol
Click to expand...

This is the reason I like windows 8 a lot. I think the keyboard shortcuts are really good actually. It's MUCH faster for me to load stuff on Windows 8 than Windows 7 now that I'm used to it and if I had touch, windows 8 is nice too. Using it on the laptop, sometimes my sister or dad will be doign stuff and instead of being frustrated telling them where to clickk, i just touch the screen!
 
escrow4 said:
No reason not to run 8[.1]. Get over Metro/Modern/whatever and welcome to 2013. Unless you have old ass hardware that is XP dated.
Click to expand...

Or if you have Haswell, where you won't get properly working USB under 8.
Or if you use Windows Media Center, which after shelling out for Pro + $10 media pack you'll find is absolutely butchered in 8(.1)
Or if you RDP from anything other than Windows.
Or if you use Lightscribe
Or if you use Ghost
Or if you use TrueImage

8 is seriously not yet production ready.
 
glugglug said:
Or if you have Haswell, where you won't get properly working USB under 8.
Or if you use Windows Media Center, which after shelling out for Pro + $10 media pack you'll find is absolutely butchered in 8(.1)
Or if you RDP from anything other than Windows.
Or if you use Lightscribe
Or if you use Ghost
Or if you use TrueImage

8 is seriously not yet production ready.
Click to expand...

I dont have any of those problems. 😕
 
glugglug said:
Or if you have Haswell, where you won't get properly working USB under 8.
Or if you use Windows Media Center, which after shelling out for Pro + $10 media pack you'll find is absolutely butchered in 8(.1)
Or if you RDP from anything other than Windows.
Or if you use Lightscribe
Or if you use Ghost
Or if you use TrueImage

8 is seriously not yet production ready.
Click to expand...

I don't like 8 much either, but seriously, don't make crap up like that.
 
glugglug said:
Or if you have Haswell, where you won't get properly working USB under 8.

Nope, USB a-OK here.

Or if you use Windows Media Center, which after shelling out for Pro + $10 media pack you'll find is absolutely butchered in 8(.1)

Nope, use XMBC or some other alternative if you don't like WMC

Or if you RDP from anything other than Windows.

Never used it. Can't comment.

Or if you use Lightscribe

Lightscribe in 2013?

Or if you use Ghost
Or if you use TrueImage

Or just use the built in Win 8 tools - recimage etc.

8 is seriously not yet production ready.
Click to expand...

8/8.1 is by far the best OS MS has spat out so far. 7 polished right up, fast and solid. Again, you need modern hardware with modern drivers to really make it work.
 
jigglywiggly said:
I hope they fix this. I was using Win8 for a while now and it works great. The only reason I had to swap back to windows 7 was because I can't change the polling rate in it with hidusb for my razer salmosa pro. Best mouse I've ever used =/
Click to expand...

I would bet on this being an issue with the MS USB drivers provided in Windows 8, vs. being able to install the Intel ones for your chipset in Windows 7. The incompatibility of Intel Series 8 chipset USB with the MS drivers was one of the big reasons for my going back to 7. It might work for some devices, but not 2 of my external enclosures, or my SD card reader, and my webcam would only work with certain apps under 8 due to the USB driver issues. It will be interesting to see if GA Rollup A addresses this. 8.1 RTM did not.
 
My rig consists of:
OS: Win 7 Pro
CPU : i7 970 six core
RAM : 24gb of ram
GPU : Titan

When I first had a bash at the BF4 beta the game was laggy and not that playable. Then the first patch came and performance improved but was still a bit laggy, then a second patch came out and it was pretty smooth with on a minor lag every no and then.

I don't know what my exact fps was between them, but from a qualitative point of view the difference in performance between the patches was huge for me. I think that the final game will be playable on my rig.

I know that my cpu is very old and will probably be a bottleneck in some games, still it has lasted a long time and upgrading to a six core ivy doesn't seem too appealing, maybe an 8 or more core haswell will be a better upgrade.
 
escrow4 said:
8/8.1 is by far the best OS MS has spat out so far. 7 polished right up, fast and solid. Again, you need modern hardware with modern drivers to really make it work.
Click to expand...

Ive been using 8 since January and just updated to 8.1 there. Its a pile of trash. Its no wonder the guy that designed it got canned and Ballmer is out... I got it free and still feel cheated :\
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top