Battlefield: Bad Company 2 GPU Performance In-depth
- Thread starter Steve
- Start date
This game graphics are amazing and I agree with you its really like as you said "Crysis-like graphics on a Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 type feel." Awesome review I've played this on my 9800 and performance was kinda slow but I'm definitely getting this for the 360 from what I've heard from everyone this game is a lot better than MW2 especially the multi-player which I have yet to play, always go through the story first.
PvillePiper said:
I have a similar system (E6420@3ghz and Gigabyte GTX260 SOC), and I can't seem to get it to run well on high setting, and getting similar results on medium setting.
Given the results posted in the review, I'm thinking we've got a bottleneck at the CPU here. Give me a week, and I should be able to confirm that as I'm upgrading my mobo + CPU then.
G
Guest
Why no Gtx 295 performance?In some times with all settings to high,resolution 1920x1080 i noticed some delay with this game even with the recent patch,always talking about the single player.Using latest drivers with rig details:
Intel i7 920 3.2Ghz OC
6Gb Ram DDR-3 Corsair dominator 1600Mhz
Asus P6T
Intel SSD 80GB second generation
Intel i7 920 3.2Ghz OC
6Gb Ram DDR-3 Corsair dominator 1600Mhz
Asus P6T
Intel SSD 80GB second generation
Great article. I'd like to add an honest review with my 'outdated' system.
My dual core system runs this game okay with a few (1-5) players on medium to low settings. Anymore than 5 players, it's horrible.
So yes, dual core running less than 2.10 mhz may not be a pleasant experience.
My system is AMD Athlon X2 +4000@2.10 / 9800GT / 2gb RAM // Win Vista -- yes, it's pitiful.
My dual core system runs this game okay with a few (1-5) players on medium to low settings. Anymore than 5 players, it's horrible.
So yes, dual core running less than 2.10 mhz may not be a pleasant experience.
My system is AMD Athlon X2 +4000@2.10 / 9800GT / 2gb RAM // Win Vista -- yes, it's pitiful.
I agree with you Steve, completely. Nowdays, you just need, for gaming instead, fast dual core processor. Quad-core processors are for highly demanding applications, and you will hardly find a high end game, that will use your quad-core processor as it would be situation with highly demanding applications. Software designed to be multithreaded -- that performs task parallelism -- does well in systems with mutlicore processors.
G
Guest
I noticed on your Medium settings, HBAO was on. Is there any reason to have this on as it impacts performance by roughy 30%. I have tried comparing screenshots I took of this game with HBAO on and off and can't find any difference (running DX10).
A 30% hit on performance is rather significant for a setting that is hardly perceptible.
A 30% hit on performance is rather significant for a setting that is hardly perceptible.
Oh well, the wait is almost over!
G
Guest
thanks for this review. it is very helpful.
how do you think , is there any hope to get reasonable FPS (50 or more) on high settings with this configuration: core-duo E8500, GTX275?
how do you think , is there any hope to get reasonable FPS (50 or more) on high settings with this configuration: core-duo E8500, GTX275?
G
Guest
Are you sure you have got the graphs correct? The Radeon 4830 for example delivers 32.3 fps on the high setting at 1680x1050 and then apparantly goes down in performance to 28.5 fps on the medium setting. Any explanation for this or why this discrepancy wasn't mentioned in the article?
G
Guest
I suggest you re-test disabling the HBAO (Horizon based ambient occlusion) option.....
You left it enabled for high, medium and low settings. I think that you will find this setting fairly irrelevant at any quality and you will add an extra 30fps to your test results.......
I believe that it is this setting combined with poorly optimized drivers that is creating what appears to be extremely low frames per second.
For example with HBAO disabled and at high quality at 1920x1200 my Powercolor 5850 PCS easily manages an average framerate of 90+ However as I play (not test) with Vsync on to stop tearing and triple buffering I get 60fps all the time and fantastic visuals with 2 x FSAA and 16 x AF.....
Take a look at this setting yourself...
You left it enabled for high, medium and low settings. I think that you will find this setting fairly irrelevant at any quality and you will add an extra 30fps to your test results.......
I believe that it is this setting combined with poorly optimized drivers that is creating what appears to be extremely low frames per second.
For example with HBAO disabled and at high quality at 1920x1200 my Powercolor 5850 PCS easily manages an average framerate of 90+ However as I play (not test) with Vsync on to stop tearing and triple buffering I get 60fps all the time and fantastic visuals with 2 x FSAA and 16 x AF.....
Take a look at this setting yourself...
thatguyandrew92
Posts: 118 +0
Im running all high. 2x AA 2xAF i believe and i get ~38-67FPS. 8800GT 512MB Q6600 3GHz, 4GB DDR2.
Thanks for posting this article. My friends and I are enjoying Bad Company 2 on the PC very much, though some of them are considering getting new graphic cards specifically for this game.
I do have to ask, though... How did you benchmark a game that doesn't have a demo record and playback option???
Fraps will give you an average FPS rating over a set amount of time, but you still need to be playing back the exact same pre-recorded demo file each time you run a test to get numbers that are useful for comparison.
Is there a way to do this in BF:BC2, that I'm not aware of?
I do have to ask, though... How did you benchmark a game that doesn't have a demo record and playback option???
Fraps will give you an average FPS rating over a set amount of time, but you still need to be playing back the exact same pre-recorded demo file each time you run a test to get numbers that are useful for comparison.
Is there a way to do this in BF:BC2, that I'm not aware of?
My bad skitzo, I jumped on it too soon and you are right, Battlefield 1943 was released for consoles only last year and there's a pending launch for the PC. The title shouldn't be missed a lot though now with BC2 out --- 1943 seems to be more of the casual shooter kind, at least that's how it made it big on consoles through digital distribution.
It was stated in the review that we simply tested using the inbuilt quality presets. The screen shots were taken with the advanced setting so we could show what settings were used, or at least what we thought the game was using. If you select the low preset for example and then hit advanced all the low settings remain intact or at least that is how it appears.
EDIT: I just checked the Battlefield: Bad Company 2 quality presets with the patched version which we did not test with as it was not released yet and selecting the medium or low quality presets now disables HBAO. In fact the presets are all different now and medium uses "high" quality textures so it looks like they have tweaked the quality settings.
G
Guest
Make sure HBAO is set to disabled.
Similar threads
