[GPU.RU]Battlefield 4 Beta Bench

[Makaveli]

I am one of the few who installed windows 8.1 preview and saw a impressive gain in fps,talking 55+ for the most part with the majority of the stutter gone.

Doesn't seem like everyone gets this same result but i know i did,the 8.1 preview is free from microsoft,clear off a partition on your hard drive,install that iso on a blank disc or usb thumb and give it a go,its free till the 15th of Jan.

Perhaps when the game is patched during beta or when it is released then my little windows 8 workaround will be rendered obsolete but currently its been the only fix for the erratic fps dips i had with windows 7.

I think its too early to tell as this game is still beta.

But something to keep an eye on going forward.

 

[isawthedevil]

The problem is that by only looking at minimum and average numbers you dont know how often the fps drops. But i will try to find out.

I can disable the HT on my 3770K from the bios, i will also try a real 2500K. I also have the FX8150, 8350 and 6300 and some FM2 CPUs. And dont forget my favorite core i7 920

Aten you are hilarious.

Spoiler

Warning issued for thread crapping.
-- stahlhart

 

[raghu78]

Dang that is some brutal CPU devastation there, bigger map I presume.. even a 4c/8t OC i7 is struggling.

Also, 7970 Ghz is a boss, its minimum fps is so high compared to the 770, and nearly matching a 780 in performance.

nice observation. here is another benchmark. at 1600p the HD 7970 Ghz is just 1-2 fps lower in min fps wrt GTX 780.

http://www.sweclockers.com/artikel/17679-grafikprestanda-i-battlefield-4-beta/3#pagehead

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Battl...-4-Beta-Test-Grafikkarten-Benchmarks-1090869/

also the difference between HD 7970 Ghz and GTX 780 is 10 - 12% at 1440p/1600p Ultra 4X MSAA. Normally we expect to see a 20% gap between GTX 780 and HD 7970 Ghz. Nvidia has work left with getting GK110 to perform better. they have 3.5 weeks to do that.

can't wait to see R9 290X in DX11.1 first and then with Mantle in Dec. :biggrin:

 

[frozentundra123456]

Some more benchmarks over at PCgameshardware.de

CPU
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Battl...Beta-Test-Prozessor-Benchmarks-Cores-1091016/

GPU
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Battl...-4-Beta-Test-Grafikkarten-Benchmarks-1090869/

There must be a mistake with the FX6350. They are showing it at the very bottom of the list. I can believe it wont soundly beat a phenom at 3 ghz.

 

[skipsneeky2]

Beta has to many issues to even consider using the current gpu and cpu charts as accurate information.

Then with all this talk about Mantle coming out later this year,these numbers could 360 on all of us.

 

[AznAnarchy99]

Damn. I guess its almost time to upgrade my 4 year old 5870

 

[SPBHM]

so with the 3770 disabling HT on a 64P map only lost 3%?
and running with 2 cores with HT lost 31% compared to quad core with HT.

 

[blackened23]

Beta has to many issues to even consider using the current gpu and cpu charts as accurate information.

Then with all this talk about Mantle coming out later this year,these numbers could 360 on all of us.

This. BF3 beta performed horribly, I remember this. I do not understand why folks expect the final release to mirror the performance in the beta. With BF3,, the final release performed substantially better than the beta.

I'm sure the release version will be fine.

 

[hawtdawg]

So far the beta is performing much better than these benchmarks say. My 780@1201 stays in the 40-60 range with everything maxed and 4x msaa @1440p. There is some hitching though that they need to get worked out, but the framerate itself is fine

 

[AtenRa]

Edit: retracted

 

[Makaveli]

Damn. I guess its almost time to upgrade my 4 year old 5870

Yes pick up a 7970Ghz which will give you a 50%-70% boost in performance.

Just wait for the new gen to come out and grab it on the first price drop.

 

[SPBHM]

Damn. I guess its almost time to upgrade my 4 year old 5870

should be great for medium, maybe high


tested the game briefly on my i3 2100, playable but far from ideal, 64p or 32p map didn't make much of a difference, ranges from low 30s to 40 something most of the time... didn't see it going under 30, but based on what I've seen, the game should run well enough on any i5.

edit: oh well, tried higher settings, and maybe more action going and got a lot of under 30fps action, not a very pleasant experience at all.

 

[Makaveli]

should be great for medium, maybe high


tested the game briefly on my i3 2100, playable but far from ideal, 64p or 32p map didn't make much of a difference, ranges from low 30s to 40 something most of the time... didn't see it going under 30, but based on what I've seen, the game should run well enough on any i5.

He should be able to play at high.

I could on my previous 6970 which is only slightly faster than the 5870 but you that will be with no MSAA only FXAA and 1080p and below.

 

[Durvelle27]

Siege of Shanghai 64/64

1080P Max Settings

FX 8350 @4.8GHz
1866MHz 8GB RAM
HD 7970 1200/1600


2013-10-04 07:34:49 - bf4
Frames: 12213 - Time: 200000ms - Avg: 61.065 - Min: 40 - Max: 104



Core USAGE pegs at 64%

 

[isawthedevil]

http://bitsocialmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Internet-Troll.jpg

You wish I was a troll dear seller.:awe:
Apparently I am not.

Spoiler

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&ie=UTF8&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://forum.oktabit.gr/topic/%25CE%25B1%25CE%25B3%25CE%25BF%25CF%2581%25CE%25B1-%25CE%25B5%25CE%25BD%25CF%258C%25CF%2582-pc-custom-gaming-pc%3Fpage%3D1%23comment-103362&sandbox=0&usg=ALkJrhj8id6cg9eAdmsSzyuKfx6oWRqPAQ


Thank you for the entertainment^_^

Warning issued for callout.
-- stahlhart

 

[PPB]

Way to stalk someone and still dont come up with proof about..... well anything besides he has some AMD rigs.


Congrats, uhm, I guess :\

EDIT: Loved the part where an image of a random poster in OCN calling him out suddenly becomes proof of him being a shill, priceless.

 

[RussianSensation]

Also, 7970 Ghz is a boss, its minimum fps is so high compared to the 770, and nearly matching a 780 in performance.

BF4 is a complete reversal of BF3. This is NV's worst PR nightmare unless they drop prices or fix performance soon.

$299 R8 280X/1Ghz 7970 is trading blows with a 770 and GTX780 is barely faster, while at 1600P, Titan has no GPU power left. This is without Mantle. If Mantle brings a 20% boost, a $299 R9 280X will be be trading blows with a $650 780 and R9 290 will be whooping the $1K Titan.

When your $650 780 is beating a $300 card by 4 fps, you gotta throw your entire driver department on this game

 

[blackened23]

To be fair, the 290X and 280X will be judged solely by DX11 at launch. If Mantle changes that, great, but that's a few months away. I think it has a lot of potential, but i'm leery of declaring any card a winner based on Mantle - most folks want benchmarks and we won't have that for a long time.

What is annoying are the suggestions that the 290X will cost 700$+. Seeing as the card will (as it should) be judged by DX11 benchmarks (including BF4) upon release, I highly doubt anyone will pay 700$ for that card when they can simply buy a pre-overclocked GTX 780 instead. AMD has always been pretty good with the value cards, but on the high end I would like to see them put a meaningful fight up. And they can do that at 550-600$ with the 290X. At 700$+? They are completely throwing their opportunity away. I don't think anyone will be interested in that when they could simply buy an overclocked 780 which already matches the Titan out of the box.'

Heck, even the best pre-OC'ed 780s are under the 700$ mark. I think if AMD launches the 290X at 700$, a large percentage of potential buyers who WOULD bite at 550-600$ would otherwise simply laugh and shrug their shoulders at the 700$ price. I hope AMD isn't stupid enough to release it with that kind of price premium......I've said it before but AMD doesn't have the brand loyalty (as NV does), yet, to get away with price premiums.

The BF4 tie in with the AMD brand is great. But, like I said, nobody will judge bf4 / 290X by mantle for a long time and will instead look at DX11 initially. With that being the case AMD needs to play their cards correctly and price the 290X properly.

 

[paul878]

To be fair, the 290X and 280X will be judged solely by DX11 at launch. If Mantle changes that, great, but that's a few months away. I think it has a lot of potential, but i'm leery of declaring any card a winner based on Mantle - most folks want benchmarks and we won't have that for a long time.

What is annoying are the suggestions that the 290X will cost 700$+. Seeing as the card will (as it should) be judged by DX11 benchmarks (including BF4) upon release, I highly doubt anyone will pay 700$ for that card when they can simply buy a pre-overclocked GTX 780 instead. AMD has always been pretty good with the value cards, but on the high end I would like to see them put a meaningful fight up. And they can do that at 550-600$ with the 290X. At 700$+? They are completely throwing their opportunity away. I don't think anyone will be interested in that when they could simply buy an overclocked 780 which already matches the Titan out of the box.'

Heck, even the best pre-OC'ed 780s are under the 700$ mark. I think if AMD launches the 290X at 700$, a large percentage of potential buyers who WOULD bite at 550-600$ would otherwise simply laugh and shrug their shoulders at the 700$ price. I hope AMD isn't stupid enough to release it with that kind of price premium......I've said it before but AMD doesn't have the brand loyalty (as NV does), yet, to get away with price premiums.

The BF4 tie in with the AMD brand is great. But, like I said, nobody will judge bf4 / 290X by mantle for a long time and will instead look at DX11 initially. With that being the case AMD needs to play their cards correctly and price the 290X properly.

Price don't really matter, there are always people out there that are willing to pay big money for top performances.

 

[Smartazz]

Can't wait to play. I'm worried that I'm going to need a new graphics card for this though. 60FPS is more important than graphics to me in an online game like this.

 

[raghu78]

Price don't really matter, there are always people out there that are willing to pay big money for top performances.

exactly :biggrin: the price did not stop the Titan from selling out and neither will it matter for R9 290X. performance is what matters. R9 290X even in DX11.1 looks to be the fastest GPU in a key holiday blockbuster title like BF4. With Mantle in Dec AMD will reap some serious rewards this holiday.

 

[RussianSensation]

highly doubt anyone will pay 700$ for that card when they can simply buy a pre-overclocked GTX 780 instead. At 700$+? They are completely throwing their opportunity away. I don't think anyone will be interested in that when they could simply buy an overclocked 780 which already matches the Titan out of the box.'

Not defending the $700 price or speculating MSRP is $699 instead of $599 but there could be 1 scenario where $699 R9 290X > after-market 780s:

If R9 290X after-market cards are $699, they perform > 780 out of the box and overclock at least as good as the 780. That would imply R9 290X oc would be faster than 780 oc. For example, right now it takes a 1.05-1.1Ghz 780 to match a Titan if a 1Ghz R9 290X matches a 1.1Ghz 780 but it also overclocks to 1.3-1.4Ghz, then 780 will be outmatched in performance.

2nd scenario: BF4 is going to be a major title and right now 780/Titan's performance at 1440p/1600p in this title looks terribad for the price. R9 290X will beat those cards without Mantle and if Mantle gives a 20% boost, these cards will fly off the shelves.

Of course NV can always adjust prices / fix performance with new drivers, etc.

 

[Erenhardt]

I played on ultra, but had to turn AA off on my HD7770. And there are chokes every once in a while (lack of SSD?). My Phenom2 965 @4GHz is running at full tilt.

 

[blackened23]

Not defending the $700 price or speculating MSRP is $699 instead of $599 but there could be 1 scenario where $699 R9 290X > after-market 780s:

If R9 290X after-market cards are $699, they perform > 780 out of the box and overclock at least as good as the 780. That would imply R9 290X oc would be faster than 780 oc. For example, right now it takes a 1.05-1.1Ghz 780 to match a Titan if a 1Ghz R9 290X matches a 1.1Ghz 780 but it also overclocks to 1.3-1.4Ghz, then 780 will be outmatched in performance.

2nd scenario: BF4 is going to be a major title and right now 780/Titan's performance at 1440p/1600p in this title looks terribad for the price. R9 290X will beat those cards without Mantle and if Mantle gives a 20% boost, these cards will fly off the shelves.

Of course NV can always adjust prices / fix performance with new drivers, etc.

I own a 780 myself and I think you're vastly over-estimating the number of cards that do 1.3ghz. I can more or less assure you that 1.3ghz on a GTX 780 isn't common - but that is okay. Even a meager overclock of mid 1100s will generally have the 780 being in fighting range of the Titan, my own 780 is in the 1100 range.

That said, I agree with a lot of your points. Overclocking can certainly change things, but this does not change my opinion of the 290X price. 700$ is lunacy, period. 600$ is reasonable, with 550$ being a hell of a deal for that level of performance. I just don't think people will buy a 700$ card for the promise of overclocking - web reviews will hit mostly on stock performance and from everything we know, the 290X will be a bit faster than the 780 and trade blows with the Titan. To me that does not quality for a 700$+ price tag, even with overclocking - you could just as easily buy a factory OC'ed 780 to match the Titan's performance anyway for 660$ which would still be cheaper than a theoretical 700$ 290X.

 

[Erenhardt]

I own a 780 myself and I think you're vastly over-estimating the number of cards that do 1.3ghz. I can more or less assure you that 1.3ghz on a GTX 780 isn't common - but that is okay. Even a meager overclock of mid 1100s will generally have the 780 being in fighting range of the Titan, my own 780 is in the 1100 range.

That said, I agree with a lot of your points. Overclocking can certainly change things, but this does not change my opinion of the 290X price. 700$ is lunacy, period. 600$ is reasonable, with 550$ being a hell of a deal for that level of performance. I just don't think people will buy a 700$ card for the promise of overclocking - web reviews will hit mostly on stock performance and from everything we know, the 290X will be a bit faster than the 780 and trade blows with the Titan. To me that does not quality for a 700$+ price tag, even with overclocking - you could just as easily buy a factory OC'ed 780 to match the Titan's performance anyway for 660$ which would still be cheaper than a theoretical 700$ 290X.

I'm glad you already figured out price tag for a card we don't know full specs yet. GJ!