Battlefield 3 Benchmarked, GPU and CPU Performance Tested

By Julio Franco · 85 replies
Oct 28, 2011
Post New Reply
  1. Arris

    Arris TS Evangelist Posts: 4,730   +379

    Does the computer AI churn out a marine, marauder and medivac deathball too quickly for you to win if you set it to Hard?

    Or did you mean Terrain? ;)
  2. Well I'm running a single GTX 275 with an Intel q9550 @ 3.8GHz and it runs just fine. I play on low detail for competitive play anyway and I'm generally over 60fps unless I jump in a 64 man clusterf*ck server so I'm happy with my performance.

    I will say that overclocking my 275 by roughly 50MHz on the core/shader and memory gave me an additional 10fps which put me over the edge of wondering whether I should upgrade my card or not. Was playable before the OC, but now it's more than acceptable.
  3. Onyx2291

    Onyx2291 TS Rookie

    So my current computer can't run BF3 playably. E6750 + HD 6850. My brother has an i5-750 + HD 5850 and I can play on that pretty well. I'll be upgrading my processor soon to an i7-2600S, hopefully the lower clock won't affect it too much and I'll be able to play it at high/medium 1920x1200.
  4. dividebyzero

    dividebyzero trainee n00b Posts: 4,891   +1,264

    Number of cores generally beats core speed. You're gaining 2 physical cores in addition to hyperthreading, as well as a vastly improved microarchitecture.
    8 threads @ 2.8G / 3.8G Turbo beats 2 cores/2 threads @ 3G hands down.
  5. Wait, wait, WTF?

    So first, you post THIS benchmark:

    That benchmark shows that the AMD FX-4100 is getting ONE frame per second less than a 320$ i7 2600k at 1920x1080.

    Then you have the balls to conclude your article with this:

    "On that same note, we were surprised by the average performance of the FX-4100 (for a quad-core) or the 8-threaded FX-8150, which appeared to be considerably less efficient than the Core i7-2600K. As we recently found out when testing AMD’s new Bulldozer CPUs, the Core architecture of the Sandy Bridge processors remain faster and more efficient and this was again evident when testing with Battlefield 3."

    WTF are you guys smoking over there? Since when does getting 1 FPS less on a benchmark at resolutions almost ALL of us actually use constitute a significant lack of performance? Considerably less efficient? Do you even know what "efficiency" means? Here, let me help you with a basic definition: Efficiency - "Accomplishment of or ability to accomplish a job with a minimum expenditure."

    Do you realize you just said that a 109$ CPU is "less efficient" than a 320$ CPU after it scored IDENTICALLY in performance testing? How can you spout this stuff with a straight face? That -ONE SINGLE SOLITARY- FPS must have really bugged your superhuman eyes.
  6. Steve

    Steve TechSpot Editor Posts: 2,868   +2,035

    I think it is you who is confused by the meaning of efficiency, since when does it have anything to do with the price of the processor? I think you will find that falls under the “value” heading.

    I have to assume that since you quoted text from the article that you actually read it, but then based on your comments I am not convinced that you read it all.

    To clarify we were talking about the efficiency of the processor in the sense that it is not as well utilized by the game as the Intel competition. As we said in the article the AMD FX-8150 saw a utilization level of 46% while the Core i7-2600K only reached 34%. The Core i7-2600K delivered more performance while working a lot less so what was the dictionary meaning you gave again … ohh that’s right “Accomplishment of or ability to accomplish a job with a minimum expenditure”.
  7. dividebyzero

    dividebyzero trainee n00b Posts: 4,891   +1,264

    You know what happens when you selectively highlight portions of the whole to make your argument?

    Maybe you missed this part:
    You know what that translates to ? Core efficiency. Now extrapolate that over a wide range of games.

    Thanks for the trolling- hadn't seen any for twenty minutes- thought you guys might be dying out.

    EDIT: Steve beat me to the punch
  8. Could you benchmark the cpu scaling with The Witcher 2 game please :)
  9. Steve

    Steve TechSpot Editor Posts: 2,868   +2,035

  10. The specs of the Intel plattform were specified, and the AMD ones were missed...
  11. Steve

    Steve TechSpot Editor Posts: 2,868   +2,035

    We only tested GPUs on the Intel platform.

Similar Topics

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...