Battlefield 4 Tested, Benchmarked

Decent Review. thankyou..
During the Beta I read that ultra settings in the final release would be harder on hardware than it was in the Beta ,I guess ultra is the same ,retail or beta?

I played at ultra on Dual 4 gig 670's @ 2560x 1600 and managed to hang in the 50 + f/s range, no complaints here. glad too see cpu not such an impact to gameplay.
 
Personally, I would like to see more CrossfireX and SLi setups for the 1600p benchmarks. For a game of this magnitude please include CrossfireX 7950's/7970's and SLi 670's, 680's, 770's and 780's.
Having SLi 660Ti's in a benchmark here or there to go off of is not enough. Not saying every review needs this, but this is a very hardware intensive game and I was really looking forward to seeing how SLi 670's, not 660Ti's, would do at 1600p for High and Ultra settings.
Other then that, awesome review.

Techspot said:
To which we should note that while AMD's GPUs currently have an edge in this title, Crossfire isn't scaling nearly as well as SLI.
Click to expand...
Very interesting indeed.
 
GhostRyder said:
Well remember Burty117 it is all dependent on the map and the players, in BF3 Caspian border for instance was more stressful on my GPU's for some reason than Wake Island even though Wake island should have been more stressful due to its size and what's going on on the map. Have not done much of the campaign as of yet, mostly multiplayer and it seems pretty nice so far in terms of optimizing, though im anxious now to upgrade because im keeping my Cards overclocked to ensure the 60 FPS is constant on a 64 player map (well as constant as possible, its still battlefield)
Click to expand...

Ooowww I know, That's why I mentioned the fact only 12 people were playing! BF3 maps (Close Quarter one's in particular) were very harsh on the FPS with 64 players compared to say 32 or below, I think I'll just turn 4xMSAA off for now until I have a more beast card (or two 780's whatever happens) and keep 1.1GHz overclock on the card. I only got into BF4 by using a VPN to Korea, I'll do some more testing once the game officially releases (in about 6 and a half hours) so I don't have to keep VPN'ing in to play.
 
Burty117 said:
Ooowww I know, That's why I mentioned the fact only 12 people were playing! BF3 maps (Close Quarter one's in particular) were very harsh on the FPS with 64 players compared to say 32 or below, I think I'll just turn 4xMSAA off for now until I have a more beast card (or two 780's whatever happens) and keep 1.1GHz overclock on the card. I only got into BF4 by using a VPN to Korea, I'll do some more testing once the game officially releases (in about 6 and a half hours) so I don't have to keep VPN'ing in to play.
Click to expand...
lol yeah, its so dependant on players that many times it can cause issues just because a certain kit is the only one selected. Like on Operation Metro and Conquest when 75% of the people took RPGs and would camp/spam shots down corridors.

Right now, im safe on Ultra though ive bumped the MSAA down to 2x to keep 60FPS more stable while maintaining the 1ghz overclock on my cards. Since im in a rut on being able to buy some new cards because of the limited availability. Ill have to wait I guess till they come back in stock or wait and see if the 780ti is worth its up charge over the 780, I don't really care at this point either way since Dual GPU cards this round are sounding farther and farther stretched for both sides. I just want to have at least 1 GPU that can almost guarantee 60FPS at 1080p and a second for the 5760x1080 resolution.
 
howzz1854 said:
Is anyone with ATI cards having crashing issues with the game?

I am getting decent frame rate in 2550x1440 but I am getting the infamous BSOD anywhere between every 20~60 mins.

it's all documented here http://answers.ea.com/t5/Battlefield-4/Battlefield-4-keeps-crashing-on-PC/td-p/1724995

the latest beta 8 driver only prolonged the game from 20 mins per crash to roughly an hour. just wondering if any other ATI owners are also having this issue.
Click to expand...

Im on Beta 11 version 7, however even on the previous one I had I have not had a crash yet, what cards are you using?
 
GhostRyder said:
howzz1854 said:
Is anyone with ATI cards having crashing issues with the game?

I am getting decent frame rate in 2550x1440 but I am getting the infamous BSOD anywhere between every 20~60 mins.

it's all documented here http://answers.ea.com/t5/Battlefield-4/Battlefield-4-keeps-crashing-on-PC/td-p/1724995

the latest beta 8 driver only prolonged the game from 20 mins per crash to roughly an hour. just wondering if any other ATI owners are also having this issue.
Click to expand...

Im on Beta 11 version 7, however even on the previous one I had I have not had a crash yet, what cards are you using?
Click to expand...

HD7950
 
howzz1854 said:
HD7950
Click to expand...
Odd, well I looked at the thread you posted and it looks like it does not have to do with cards because it seems a wide variety is having the issue. I would update to the latest beta version and then just try again. I have not personally had a crash and I played a couple rounds of BF3 with some lasting more than an hour and have not had a problem yet, though I was playing at 1080p because 5760x1080 meant low FPS for me.

In case your wondering, Dual HD 6990's, sorry I have not had the issue yet, if it comes up ill let you know, but im running Windows 8.1, Beta 11v7 Cataylst, 1920x1080p with 3 monitors active (Only using one for the game), CFX enabled.
 
I am already on the latest beta 8, which was suppose to fix the BSOD / Red screen of death issue. but it seems it has only prolonged the game play. with beta 7, I was crashing average every 15~20 mins, with the beta 8, I can make it to an hour.
 
howzz1854 said:
I am already on the latest beta 8, which was suppose to fix the BSOD / Red screen of death issue. but it seems it has only prolonged the game play. with beta 7, I was crashing average every 15~20 mins, with the beta 8, I can make it to an hour.
Click to expand...
Well thats odd, im on 6 right now, I need to update to 8, let me see what happens then and if it has to do with that. But ive played multiple games now with one conquest lasting 67 minutes without a hitch and ive stayed on the same server 3 times in a row, so I dunno.

JC713 said:
Dat 290X....
Click to expand...
R9 290X OP

Honestly, im going to have to play this some more before I make my judgements, im curious about the campaign actually and if its really as bad as some say. I thought it looked pretty cool, nothing spectacular, but at least decent.
 
Where did that extra R9 290X performance come from (over a GTX 780) ? The few other benchies I'd found on the net had the two neck and neck, but here they leave the 780 for dead! New drivers?
 
Nice review. I too would like to see some MP tests. Just to get a general idea of the difference in performance.

I upgraded to Windows 8.1 for this game, bought Startisback for $3cdn, and set OS to boot directly to desktop and I haven't seen the Metro UI since. I'm amazed how well an OC'd 7870 GHz Ed can do on HIGH. I'll probably drop it to Medium anyway, but a second 7870 is also a possibility.
 
Did I miss where you listed the specs of the benchmarking rig (particularly hardware used for the video tests)?

Also - I noticed the HD7990 seemed to drop off the DX11 (HIGH) HBAO tests for all resolutions?
 
EEatGDL said:
I'm sorry, maybe I came here with wrong expectations but... is this supposed to use Mantle? Or what is the title that will make use of Mantle?
Click to expand...
BF4 will get an update in December for Mantle. Until then we can only speculate on what the possible benefits will be. (10-30% more FPS maybe?)
 
Guest said:
Where did that extra R9 290X performance come from (over a GTX 780) ? The few other benchies I'd found on the net had the two neck and neck, but here they leave the 780 for dead! New drivers?
Click to expand...
check what drivers they are using. beta7 improves FPS quite a bit. (latest driver is beta8, but both are only a few days old)
 
I cant understand - on my configuration Phenom 2 X4 965 3.4Ghz/OC 3.9Ghz, 8Gb DDR3, MSI 970A-G46, HIS IceQ X Radeon 7850 2Gb game shows very low FPS regardless of what settings are currently set - on high, low and medium settings it shows 24-35 FPS. Could anyone help with this issue? Drivers are the most fresh, 13.11 beta 8, Windows 7 x64.
 
Betailas said:
I cant understand - on my configuration Phenom 2 X4 965 3.4Ghz/OC 3.9Ghz, 8Gb DDR3, MSI 970A-G46, HIS IceQ X Radeon 7850 2Gb game shows very low FPS regardless of what settings are currently set - on high, low and medium settings it shows 24-35 FPS. Could anyone help with this issue? Drivers are the most fresh, 13.11 beta 8, Windows 7 x64.
Click to expand...
Check if it's set to border less or full screen and set to full screen. Also tell us what resolution your running at because a 7850 on high get 45 average.
 
GhostRyder said:
Betailas said:
I cant understand - on my configuration Phenom 2 X4 965 3.4Ghz/OC 3.9Ghz, 8Gb DDR3, MSI 970A-G46, HIS IceQ X Radeon 7850 2Gb game shows very low FPS regardless of what settings are currently set - on high, low and medium settings it shows 24-35 FPS. Could anyone help with this issue? Drivers are the most fresh, 13.11 beta 8, Windows 7 x64.
Click to expand...
Check if it's set to border less or full screen and set to full screen. Also tell us what resolution your running at because a 7850 on high get 45 average.
Click to expand...
I'm playing with full screen mode, resolution is 1680*1050
 
I read all article but I can't see nothing in this benckmark about the amount of cpu usage in sp and multiplayer, I would like to know what the % of cpu usage on intel cpu versus fx vishera
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

TechSpot
CPU Cache vs. Cores: AMD Ryzen Edition
2 3
Replies
50
Views
761
Strawman
S
TechSpot
Is Your Older Ryzen CPU Fast Enough for the RTX 4080?
2
Replies
42
Views
498
scavengerspc
scavengerspc
TechSpot
Nvidia GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Review: Quiet Release, Dodgy Name
2
Replies
33
Views
540
captaincranky
captaincranky

Latest posts

Back