Upgrades for Battlefield 3

[ZMX]

So, I just got Battlefield 3, and I'm displeased with my computer's performance. I'm looking to upgrade.

**All I want is 50+ FPS on low quality at 1920x1080**

CPU: Core 2 Duo e4600 2.4GHz (Conroe/Allendale)
GPU: Radeon 4870 1GB
RAM: G.Skill 4GB DDR2-1066
Mobo: Gigabyte EP43-UD3L; Socket 775; doesn't support crossfire
PSU: Seasonic M12II-620W

FPS is reasonable with overclocking on the GPU+CPU, but the game has been pretty intolerant of even the slightest OC with regular crashes (even with low temps).

I have zero loyalty for bands, keeping parts, etc.

I believe that the most cost efficient route would be to go for a used q6600 and get a new HD 7770. But, I'm not certain about that, and I don't even know which to buy first.

Oh, and I'm from the USA.

 

[Ken g6]

FPS is reasonable with overclocking on the GPU+CPU, but the game has been pretty intolerant of even the slightest OC with regular crashes (even with low temps).

Which can't you overclock? Maybe you've missed something trying to OC the CPU? If you can get that done, I'd say it should be decent enough - even though it may still be your bottleneck.

I see why you selected a 7770, but there are cheaper 6850s, and 550tis are at fire-sale prices right now. Of course, fire sales happen for a reason; you're not going to come back next month complaining that your card can't play some new game at ultra, are you?

 

[VirtualLarry]

Solution - buy my Q6600 CPU! (FS thread)

Seriously, though, BF3 is said to really take advantage of a quad-core. If you don't want to do a full platform upgrade, then consider dropping in a decent 775 quad-core CPU.

 

[ZMX]

Which can't you overclock? Maybe you've missed something trying to OC the CPU? If you can get that done, I'd say it should be decent enough - even though it may still be your bottleneck.

Somehow, both. I've never had any issue with game crashing before.

I've had my 4870 BIOS flashed to 825MHz (up from 750) ever since I got it, and crashes even at 790. I haven't yet fleshed out what exactly the limit will be. Memory bandwidth was always plenty, so I never touched memory MHz.

The CPU, I've traditionally kept at 2.92GHz at 1.35 volts. I tried raising the voltage as high as 1.40 (temps stayed <65C), and the game locks up the computer in <20 minutes. I have yet to flesh out what the CPU limit will be.

The CPU overclock SEEMS to help more.

.

Even with the overclocks, the game gets fairly choppy.

I see why you selected a 7770, but there are cheaper 6850s, and 550tis are at fire-sale prices right now. Of course, fire sales happen for a reason; you're not going to come back next month complaining that your card can't play some new game at ultra, are you?

Haha, playability is 95% of my concern. I just don't want to be at a disadvantage.

 

[DSF]

Have you done any stress testing with the overclock, or do you just set it and run the game?

I have a very similar chip (E4500) running at 2.93 GHz with less than stock voltage. (It's been so long, but I believe it's somewhere between 1.22 and 1.25V.) Runs BF3 fine for hours, although like you said, it would be nice if it were just a tiny bit smoother. Have you made sure that when you're OCing your CPU you're not also stressing the RAM?

You say you haven't yet gotten into why the overclocks aren't stable. Is that something you're interested in doing, or would you rather just spend some money on an upgrade and be done with it? If you do upgrade, what's your budget?

Even with a Q6600 I don't know that you're going to get to where you want, as I don't think the game will make much use of the extra cores. If you can OC the Q6600 to 3.0GHz or more you'll probably see a difference, but whether it will meet your standards I couldn't say.

 

[ZMX]

Have you done any stress testing with the overclock, or do you just set it and run the game?

It's the way the computer has been for years. It has worked with many, many other games.

Have you made sure that when you're OCing your CPU you're not also stressing the RAM?

The RAM is rated for 1066MHz, but I'm running it at 800MHz, 5-5-5-15. So, I don't expect it's being pushed hard. Also, the RAM settings stayed like this when I returned to stock CPU + GPU clocks.

You say you haven't yet gotten into why the overclocks aren't stable. Is that something you're interested in doing, or would you rather just spend some money on an upgrade and be done with it?

Why? The same reason any overclock isn't, I suppose. Ideally, I'd spend zero dollars, but I don't see that happening to get performance that doesn't put me at a significant disadvantage against online opponents.

If you do upgrade, what's your budget?

The minimum it takes to get what I mentioned in my initial post. 50+ FPS at 1920x1080 on low quality.

Even with a Q6600 I don't know that you're going to get to where you want, as I don't think the game will make much use of the extra cores. If you can OC the Q6600 to 3.0GHz or more you'll probably see a difference, but whether it will meet your standards I couldn't say.

Well, here: http://www.techspot.com/review/458-battlefield-3-performance/page7.html I see the i5-750 @ 2.66GHz performing similarly to the i3-2120 @ 3.3GHz. Also, the i5-750 is Lynnfield, which has lower IPC than the i3-2120's Sandy Bridge architecture. So, from that, I'd reckon the game takes advantage of multiple cores.

...

Update into overclocking. I've successfully run the game for a few hours with the CPU at 2.66GHz (266x10), at 1.32 volts (1.28 in full vdroop).

 

[sm625]

You're probably scoring 5-6k on 3dmark vantage - performance setting. The quad would take you to about 10k, if overclocked out the wazoo. (I'm talking 3.5GHz) Based on your inability to OC an allendale I would not expect more than 9000 for a 3dmark vantage - performance score with an upgrade to a q6600. That's about what you'd score with a 7770 and your current cpu, maybe not even that. But if you upgrade both you will go to about 14k. If you buy a 2500k and keep the same video card, you will score around 11k.

Is reinstalling the OS an option? If so I would get a pentium G850 and a 6850.

If you are married to that motherboard then you may want to get something with a higher multi than a q6600. Or go higher than 7770. You can get a 6950 for $200 with a bit of searching. That should get you a doubling of your 3dmark vantage - performance score. I think that's the best you can do for $200. A q6600 plus a 7770 is going to cost you $250-$270 and you will only get 10% more performance than just buying a 6950 for $200.

You really need to find a way to overclock that cpu. It should be able to run at 3.3GHz.

 

[VirtualLarry]

If you are married to that motherboard then you may want to get something with a higher multi than a q6600.

Why? For a quad-core, the Q6600 actually has a pretty high multi, because it was designed for the 1066 FSB speed, not the 1333 that the later 45nm quad-cores were. So a Q6600 is easier to overclock, than say a Q8200 or Q9300.

And all you need to effectively "max out" a Q6600 is only 400FSB, which most board should be capable of. (9 x 400 = 3.6Ghz, at that point you will be temp-limited)

 

[BD231]

FYI you'd get better frames out of an OC'd GTX 460 for cheaper.

 

[ZMX]

For a quad-core, the Q6600 actually has a pretty high multi, because it was designed for the 1066 FSB speed, not the 1333 that the later 45nm quad-cores were. So a Q6600 is easier to overclock, than say a Q8200 or Q9300.

And all you need to effectively "max out" a Q6600 is only 400FSB, which most board should be capable of. (9 x 400 = 3.6Ghz, at that point you will be temp-limited)

Agreed.

You're probably scoring 5-6k on 3dmark vantage - performance setting. The quad would take you to about 10k, if overclocked out the wazoo. (I'm talking 3.5GHz)

I'm not concerned with benchmark numbers.

Based on your inability to OC an allendale

Sigh. My inability? Overclocking is pretty simple. I could brag about my past overclocking exploits, but that would belay the issue: Anyone with half a brain can overclock. Er, uh, I AM SO OFFENDED. I HAD MY OPTERON 165 AT 1.8->2.8GHZ STABLE WITH A STOCK COOLER FOR YEARS BECAUSE OF MY UBER 1337 HAXXOR SKILLS OF CHANGING MULTIPLIERS AND VOLTAGE IN THE CMOS.

Is reinstalling the OS an option? If so I would get a pentium G850 and a 6850.

Yeah, it's an option. But, why would I buy a new 1155 motherboard, DDR3 memory, and a new processor just so I could have worse performance than a q6600?

If you are married to that motherboard then you may want to get something with a higher multi than a q6600.

Married? I already said this. I'm don't care about the motherboard. I don't care about what gets replaced. I care about two things: Money and Performance.

Or go higher than 7770. You can get a 6950 for $200 with a bit of searching. That should get you a doubling of your 3dmark vantage - performance score. I think that's the best you can do for $200. A q6600 plus a 7770 is going to cost you $250-$270 and you will only get 10% more performance than just buying a 6950 for $200.

If the game is CPU limited, it doesn't matter what GPU I have. But, on second I probably will avoid the 7770 whatever I get.

You really need to find a way to overclock that cpu. It should be able to run at 3.3GHz.

It would probably overclock better if I replaced the stock cooler. But, if I can get a different CPU with a much larger guaranteed performance gain without spending a lot of extra money, then that option looks more appealing.

FYI you'd get better frames out of an OC'd GTX 460 for cheaper.

That does not appear to be the case. http://www.techspot.com/review/458-battlefield-3-performance/page5.html

 

[mfenn]

I'm not concerned with benchmark numbers. Sigh. My inability? Overclocking is pretty simple. I could brag about my past overclocking exploits, but that would belay the issue: Anyone with half a brain can overclock. Er, uh, I AM SO OFFENDED. I HAD MY OPTERON 165 AT 1.8->2.8GHZ STABLE WITH A STOCK COOLER FOR YEARS BECAUSE OF MY UBER 1337 HAXXOR SKILLS OF CHANGING MULTIPLIERS AND VOLTAGE IN THE CMOS.

Dude, chill out. It's obvious in context that sm625 was referring to the inability of your current setup to be stable, not any technical deficiency on your part.

One point to keep in mind when looking at BF3 benchmarks is that they are typically taken in the single player portion of the game. Unfortunately, BF3 presents a much different (more intense) CPU workload in multiplayer. As you're discovering with your current parts, TechSpot's result of "any old dual core will get over 50 FPS" isn't quite true in multiplayer. By the way, do you want 50 FPS min or average?

Since you only want to run on low, I'm thinking that your GPU is probably OK. Even if it isn't, you definitely need a CPU upgrade, so it won't hurt to upgrade in two phases, CPU then potentially GPU. The absolute cheapest way that I can see to guarantee 50 FPS is:

i5 2400 $190 - the "juice"
ECS H61H2-M2 $35 AR - you said minimum
DDR3 1333 4GB $20 - obviously 8GB of a better brand is preferable, but see above

 

[Termie]

You need a new CPU, pure and simple. If you have $100, buy VirtualLarry's q6600, if you have $175, buy the ECS H61 board linked above and an i3-2100 plus memory. If you have $225, buy exactly what mfenn suggested.

And if you have the budget for it, throw in a $130AR HD6870: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814150561

It's way faster than a 7770.

 

[ZMX]

Dude, chill out. It's obvious in context that sm625 was referring to the inability of your current setup to be stable, not any technical deficiency on your part.

It didn't look like that to me :/. Either way, I'm not actually looking for trouble.

One point to keep in mind when looking at BF3 benchmarks is that they are typically taken in the single player portion of the game. Unfortunately, BF3 presents a much different (more intense) CPU workload in multiplayer. As you're discovering with your current parts, TechSpot's result of "any old dual core will get over 50 FPS" isn't quite true in multiplayer.

Yeah. I imagined this was likely the case. My overclocking changes with CPU/GPU also seem to agree with that.

By the way, do you want 50 FPS min or average?

Good point. 50 was a number I pulled out of my ass. Forgive me for that. I just don't want to be at a disadvantage online. If that means a minimum of exactly 38, or a minimum of exactly 60, I don't care. I"m not sure if that makes the performance goal more or less vague.

Since you only want to run on low, I'm thinking that your GPU is probably OK. Even if it isn't, you definitely need a CPU upgrade, so it won't hurt to upgrade in two phases, CPU then potentially GPU. The absolute cheapest way that I can see to guarantee 50 FPS is:

i5 2400 $190 - the "juice"
ECS H61H2-M2 $35 AR - you said minimum
DDR3 1333 4GB $20 - obviously 8GB of a better brand is preferable, but see above

Hm. Yes. That would work. Thank you.

You need a new CPU, pure and simple. If you have $100, buy VirtualLarry's q6600, if you have $175, but the ECS H61 board linked above and an i3-2100 plus memory. If you have $225, buy exactly what mfenn suggested.

Yes. I agree.

And if you have the budget for it, throw in a $130AR HD6870: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814150561

It's way faster than a 7770.

Wow. I guess I need to pay more attention to rebates. Jebus. What am I missing? How do you find deals so quickly?

 

[Termie]

Wow. I guess I need to pay more attention to rebates. Jebus. What am I missing? How do you find deals so quickly?

Why, the hot deals section of course!

Enjoy!

 

[aaksheytalwar]

Get a Core i3 or C2Q 9xxx with DDR2 800+ OR DDR3 1600 with 6800 or 5800 series GPU

 

[sm625]

I suggested something with a higher base freq than a q6600 because it sounds like the q6600 isnt going to overclock. If an allendale wont overclock then I think that's probably a safe assumption.

Yeah, it's an option. But, why would I buy a new 1155 motherboard, DDR3 memory, and a new processor just so I could have worse performance than a q6600?

Bottom line is, if you got a motherboard that cant overclock an allendale, the last thing you want to do is put another cpu in it, unless you got one that's already clocked high. Like an E8600. A q6600 could be a waste of money if it gets stuck at 2.4GHz. A pentium G860 would be faster. You say you're not concerned with benchmark numbers, but you should be because if you were you'd know that a pentium G860 will game faster than a Q6600 at stock, or anywhere near stock. Even at 3.6GHz, I would much rather have a G860 than a Q6600.

 

[Hubb1e]

Taking a Q6600 to 3ghz is childs play and will get him most of what he wants. My Q6600 does drop to 40fps sometimes though, so the best option is a new platform. BF3 multiplayer stresses quad core cpus a lot.

 

[mfenn]

Good point. 50 was a number I pulled out of my ass. Forgive me for that. I just don't want to be at a disadvantage online. If that means a minimum of exactly 38, or a minimum of exactly 60, I don't care. I"m not sure if that makes the performance goal more or less vague.

To absolutely positively never be at a disadvantage, you'll want to make sure that the framerate never drops below 60. At low settings, that's probably doable on a reasonable budget. At higher detail settings, forget it unless you're willing to drop over a grand. Multiplayer is always hard to judge, but a overclocked i5 2500K on a Z68 board would certainly get you there on the CPU side.

That being said, I think that the i5 2400 will get you most of the way there for much less money.