Battlefield: Bad Company 2 GPU Performance In-depth

PvillePiper said:
I am running an E6300 Pentium Dual-Core running at 3.4 ghz in a Gigabyte GA-EP45-UDR3 motherboard, 4 gigs of DDR2 1100 ram and an MSI Twin Frozer GTX-260 OC and at medium settings playing online I average upper 30's on most maps. I see very little lagging at these settings. I am using the Afterburner software program to get the framerates. I am thinking of getting a Q9550, do you think I will see much of a boost in frame rates?
Click to expand...

Dude, you will probably get 10-15fps extra and less gerkeness while in game play. plus an overall computer speed boost.
 
I'm really surprised that it had such a big impact on performance when overclocking the i7 920 cpu to 3.7Ghz, but at 2560x1600 there was no difference
 
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.
 
hello ...

humm, if i can build my new PC soon, will go for the PC version instead of the PS3 one. I played the demo & really liked it to even start liking the genre.

cheers!
 
PvillePiper said:
I am running an E6300 Pentium Dual-Core running at 3.4 ghz in a Gigabyte GA-EP45-UDR3 motherboard, 4 gigs of DDR2 1100 ram and an MSI Twin Frozer GTX-260 OC and at medium settings playing online I average upper 30's on most maps.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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
 
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 I'd like to add an honest review with my 'outdated' system.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.
 
[-Steve-] said:

So again in conclusion a decent dual core processor such as a Core 2 Duo E8xxx or Phenom II X2 should be enough to get the most out of your graphics card in this game. While it is quad-core optimized the game is not demanding enough on the CPU to warrant it based on what I have seen so far. Still quad-core processors are ideal but not entirely necessary.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Good write-up and thanks for the follow-up on the dual vs. quad core. Those screenies look exactly like it's something out of Crysis. This is one game I don't have, but I'll put it into the queue.
 
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.
 
z0phi3l said:
Been playing it on Medium settings so far on my PC
Running a GTX260 and it looks really good, going to try a higher setting and see if my System can handle it fine
Click to expand...
I'm also running it on a GTX 260 with a Core i7 920. The only settings I had to knock down from high were the AA down to 1x and turn off the HBAO. I'm now getting about 40 fps, which in my opinion is very playable.
 
Obviously, Radeon 5850 and 5870 cards come out on top. I wish the Fermi was in there too, but I know nVidia won't allow it yet. :) Oh well, the wait is almost over!
 
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?
 
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?
 
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...
 
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?
 
skitzo_zac said:
1943 hasn't actully been released for the PC yet has it? According to EA, Wikipedia, Gamespot it hasn't. Seems to be implied you are talking about the PC version, can this be clarified please?
Click to expand...
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.
 
Well I don't know about you guys, but I find 30 FPS to be perfectly playable for BC2 (and Crysis too).

So as long as a GPU can manage 30 FPS, I'm a happy man :)
 
this will be a good test for the new rig im building =) Not sure if i should wait for the new nvidia card coming out... (that gonna take all my money =P but probably worth it)
 
I'm not a fan. I think that when one do a job, two makes it better. When software use all hardware power we have the top, and we see the result. We can say "wow" but also "damn why MS and others dont use this?".
 
Thanks again Steve for going back and clearing that Dual verses Quad core debate up. Now I just hope my 8800 Ultra can play on high settings.
 
Guest said:
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.......
Click to expand...

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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Daniel Sims
Intel XeSS 1.3 improves performance with new presets, intros DLAA alternative
Replies
12
Views
187
Disiw
D
Jimmy2x
Modern Warfare 2's season 4 update continues to miss the mark
Replies
10
Views
536
Nobina
Nobina
D
AMD's new flagship Radeon RX 7900M mobile GPU comes with 4,608 cores & 16GB VRAM
Replies
12
Views
545
Watzupken
W

Latest posts

Back