• 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.

My budget Bad Company 2 machine does not run Bad Company 2 :)

S

SgtSpoon

Member
Last week i assembled this machine :

i3 530, overclocked to 3.5Ghz cpu, 1600Mhz memory
ATI 5750 512Mb
4Gb of ram

More details here :
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2061148

While i didn't expect high-end performance, i expected bad company 2 to be at least playable at "acceptable" settings. Lets say at least 1024*786 at medium details.

The game arrived in my mailbox yesterday and i started experimenting : i started setting everything to high details on 1280*1024 and of course that didn't run great. Then i started gradually lowering resolution and details, and found that even at 1024*786 at low details, this game does not run smooth enough to provide an enjoyable multiplayer experience.

Now, what do you guys think is the limiting factor here?
- i do -not- believe the cpu is limiting here. I know BF:BC2 favors quads, but based on the benchmarks i've seen an i3 530 at 3.5Ghz should be plenty to make the game at least playable.
- Is it the GPU chip?
- Or might i be limited by the 512Mb of ram on my videocard?

My guess is either the 512Mb, or the GPU chip itself. If that is the case i'm gonna throw this thing on ebay and go for a higher rated card, but before i do that i wanted to hear what you guys think.
 
Also, does bad company 2 have a way to get a performance number? (timedemo or something ...)

+ any recommendations on what to replace the videocard with?
 
SgtSpoon said:
Also, does bad company 2 have a way to get a performance number? (timedemo or something ...)

+ any recommendations on what to replace the videocard with?
Click to expand...

my 5770 1gb with phenom II X4 945 runs the game acceptably at 1920x1200 with medium settings.
 
My 5770 plays it fine at 1680*1050 DX11 max everything but 1xAA. It's playable with 2xAA but I like to have better framerates to be more competitive.

Mine is overclocked to 1030/1370 though so it's quite a bit faster than that 5750 but it's not 50%+ faster.... My guess would be the 512MB on that card or maybe an installation problem.
 
That system shouldn't have any problems at 1024x768. Try forcing DX9 mode in the settings.ini file (Change value of DxVersion = Auto to DxVersion = 9) in your BFBC2 folder - should be under My Documents. That might help.
 
There's something wrong here. 1024x768 at low settings? Come on... you're system should EASILY provide smooth gameplay. Unless you have some f*cked up idea about what smooth is, like you need 200+ fps to play the game.

There's something very wrong here.
 
I run 1900x1200 on GTX 260 Core216 with everything up, runs smooth as butter. That is prob the min card I would recommend.

You can pick them up pretty cheap.
 
M0RPH said:
There's something wrong here. 1024x768 at low settings? Come on... you're system should EASILY provide smooth gameplay. Unless you have some f*cked up idea about what smooth is, like you need 200+ fps to play the game.

There's something very wrong here.
Click to expand...

yeah I would think even with the 5750 at that res he should be OK

check fraps?
 
something is not right here..

he should be able to play the game at all medium for sure with that rig. for sure at 1650x1080

I run it at 1650x1080 with a unlocked phenom II x3 Oc'd to 3100Ghz,
4 gigs of ram and a Radeon 5770 with no problems...all medium settings 2xAA and 16 AF..runs great

good luck,
Chappie
 
0roo0roo said:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/battlefield-bad-company-2_7.html#sect0
gpu is it
even 5770 is marginal, never mind at 192x
Click to expand...

When i look at the framerates of the 5750 listed in that graph, its indeed in line with what i think i'm getting. However its odd that people in this thread seem to get acceptable results.

A friend of mine has a Q6600 with a 8800GT, and he runs it at 1024*786@medium and it runs smooth on his system (of course 8800GT is not DX11)

Unless you have some f*cked up idea about what smooth is, like you need 200+ fps to play the game.
Click to expand...

Well, i've been playing competitive fps games for more than 10 years, but that does not make me a cyborg. However, i'll definitely feel the difference between a game averaging on 30fps or 60fps. I think about 30 fps is what i'm getting when nothing is happening on the screen, but when things do start happening, like a few people shooting at me or some explosions, i notice dips in the framerate. These dips are especially noticable, and gamebreaking, when they happen when aiming.

something is not right here..

he should be able to play the game at all medium for sure with that rig. for sure at 1650x1080

I run it at 1650x1080 with a unlocked phenom II x3 Oc'd to 3100Ghz,
4 gigs of ram and a Radeon 5770 with no problems...all medium settings 2xAA and 16 AF..runs great
Click to expand...

Yeah it is weird. I am running windows 7. Is there anything i could have configured wrong? Dragon Age : Origins runs smooth at 1280*1024 with all the details crancked to maximum.

That system shouldn't have any problems at 1024x768. Try forcing DX9 mode in the settings.ini file (Change value of DxVersion = Auto to DxVersion = 9) in your BFBC2 folder - should be under My Documents. That might help.
Click to expand...

I have googled for BC2 tweaks, and tried forcing DX9 as you say (along with other tweaks) This yields a noticable difference, but when things start happening i still get unacceptable framedrops.

Anyway, maybe i should try measuring the actual framerates. I'll download fraps, and post again with some fps measurements.

Thanx to all for the feedback!
 
So, i installed fraps, ran around in the map with the water and lots of foliage (panama canal?) until i got shot, and this is the result :

Min:19
Max:38
Avg:23.051

And this is my settings.ini :

[WindowSettings]
Width=1024
Height=768
Fullscreen=true
RefreshRate=60
VSync=false
[Sound]
Quality=medium
VoipEnable=true
SpeakerCount=0
[Graphics]
Effects=medium
Soldiers=high
Vehicles=high
Overgrowth=high
Undergrowth=high
StaticObjects=high
Terrain=high
Shadows=medium
Bloom=false
HSAO=false
MSAA=1
Water=medium
MainQuality=medium
Texture=medium
DxVersion=9
Aniso=2
Detail=high
RenderAheadLimit=0
Fov=55

My system was only assembled last week, its a clean windows 7 machine, with only avg running in the background (scheduled scans disabled). Videocard drivers are ATI reference drivers, catalyst version 10.3
 
Last edited:
Set everything to Medium....keep Bloom and HSAO off and change that FOV to something bigger..I'm at 80...some people like 70...experiment

let us know what happens

Chappie
 
SgtSpoon said:
When i look at the framerates of the 5750 listed in that graph, its indeed in line with what i think i'm getting. However its odd that people in this thread seem to get acceptable results.

A friend of mine has a Q6600 with a 8800GT, and he runs it at 1024*786@medium and it runs smooth on his system (of course 8800GT is not DX11)
Click to expand...

yup minimum frame rate is what matters most, not what you get when staring at a long stretch of wall.
you can get by with min over 25, but its not optimal..or pleasant, silky smooth has to be over 50 minimum
 
SgtSpoon said:
So, i installed fraps, ran around in the map with the water and lots of foliage (panama canal?) until i got shot, and this is the result :

Min:19
Max:38
Avg:23.051
Click to expand...

I just tested my system at 1024x768 medium settings, also running around in foliage on panama canal multiplayer.

min: 19
max: 47
ave: 31.023

But my system is a total joke, 8600GT with E4300.
 
I can run the game at 1920x1080 on medium settings and have it play pretty well..... and this is on an 8800 GT with 512 mb. Something definitely wrong here, you shouldn't have a problem running the game at such low resolutions.
 
I am starting to think its an issue with the game. Check this thread on the EA forums :

http://forum.ea.com/eaforum/posts/list/15/424863.page

A quote from this thread :

I get the same, i can max it out @ 1680x1050 on x16 AA and 16x AF and full high detail and i get 25 FPS, then i lower everything to low turn off AA and AF, Vsync etc... and lower resolution to 1024x768 and i get 26-27 FPS.

I can max out most other games and maybe have to lower something to medium or high (not very high) to cope with the CPU as it is not the fastest CPU but still, in this game i cant do anything to make it playable, very disappointed and i wish i bought PS3 version, least it would be playable.

Maybe it is the 280 cards? i have media box running 8800GTS 320MB and AMD X2 7750 (2.7Ghz) might try that see what happens.

My specs:

Core2Duo E6750 2.66Ghz OC to 3.0Ghz in an attempt to make above playable all to no avail.
4GB DDR2 800
1GB GTX285 stock speeds
Click to expand...

That guy is running on a GTX285 and has crap framerates at 1024!

I have been a battlefield fan since BF1942, and played every game in between, and i know that every BF game is full of bugs after release, and needs multiple patches to run stable. So i won't be surprised if this is actually a game issue.
 
Last edited:
Not to insult the OP, but when you installed Win7, did you remember to install your chipset drivers? Especially before you installed your Catalyst drivers? How are other games playing? Also, what does the game play like when you return your CPU to stock settings?
 
SgtSpoon said:
I am starting to think its an issue with the game. Check this thread on the EA forums :

http://forum.ea.com/eaforum/posts/list/15/424863.page

A quote from this thread :



That guy is running on a GTX285 and has crap framerates at 1024!

I have been a battlefield fan since BF1942, and played every game in between, and i know that every BF game is full of bugs after release, and needs multiple patches to run stable. So i won't be surprised if this is actually a game issue.
Click to expand...

did battlefield 2 ever run stable?
 
MrK6 said:
Not to insult the OP, but when you installed Win7, did you remember to install your chipset drivers? Especially before you installed your Catalyst drivers? How are other games playing? Also, what does the game play like when you return your CPU to stock settings?
Click to expand...

I'm not that easy to offend 😉

After the clean install:
- chipset drivers
- ati drivers
- avg anti-virus

Dragon Age Origins runs very smooth at maxed settings, so does Battlefield 2, haven't tried anything else yet. Returning cpu and memory to stock does not solve my problem.

did battlefield 2 ever run stable?
Click to expand...

Rock-stable: i also have that installed.

Now that i think of it, the installation BF2 installed DirectX 9c. Could that have messed up something? (since Windows 7 comes with DirectX 11 preinstalled)
 
SgtSpoon said:
Now that i think of it, the installation BF2 installed DirectX 9c. Could that have messed up something? (since Windows 7 comes with DirectX 11 preinstalled)
Click to expand...

You never installed the latest version of DX9??? Install that motha. What DX mode are you running? It'll default to DX11 cus you have a DX11 card. Make sure it's on 9.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top