Battlefield V Open Beta Benchmarked

Julio Franco

Posts: 9,092   +2,043
Staff member
Do you have an i5-4690k lying around or something close to it? If Yes, please do include that in your CPU testing. If not, please do include that in your CPU testing :p
 
Do you have an i5-4690k lying around or something close to it? If Yes, please do include that in your CPU testing. If not, please do include that in your CPU testing :p

Expect to lose frames and stuttering with that CPU in this game. The newer battlefield games like at least 8 threads. 4 core 4 thread is now considered entry level.
 
Do you have an i5-4690k lying around or something close to it? If Yes, please do include that in your CPU testing. If not, please do include that in your CPU testing :p
Article already said goodluck with quad cores. Did you somehow miss that.
 
It's understandable to choose i7 8700K for benchmarks, but I wish it's used at stock speed without manual/enthusiast overclocking to test them.

Almost anyone can get a 8700K processor but not all will be overclocking to 5GHz. A stock speed (not overclocked manually) would have showed practical results for most users. Anything higher clocked will only be an improvement from the stock speed in the FPS figure, so that would be a plus anyway.
 
It's understandable to choose i7 8700K for benchmarks, but I wish it's used at stock speed without manual/enthusiast overclocking to test them.

Almost anyone can get a 8700K processor but not all will be overclocking to 5GHz. A stock speed (not overclocked manually) would have showed practical results for most users. Anything higher clocked will only be an improvement from the stock speed in the FPS figure, so that would be a plus anyway.

It's a GPU benchmark ;)
 
It's understandable to choose i7 8700K for benchmarks, but I wish it's used at stock speed without manual/enthusiast overclocking to test them.

Almost anyone can get a 8700K processor but not all will be overclocking to 5GHz. A stock speed (not overclocked manually) would have showed practical results for most users. Anything higher clocked will only be an improvement from the stock speed in the FPS figure, so that would be a plus anyway.

It's a GPU benchmark ;)
You have to repeat that in pretty much every comment section on every GPU benchmark you post :D
 
Do you have an i5-4690k lying around or something close to it? If Yes, please do include that in your CPU testing. If not, please do include that in your CPU testing :p
Article already said goodluck with quad cores. Did you somehow miss that.

The article didn't actually do a cpu test. Just because a cpu can use 6+ threads doesn't mean it needs that many to be payable. Increased core and CPU usage often results in diminishing returns anyways.
 
Do you have an i5-4690k lying around or something close to it? If Yes, please do include that in your CPU testing. If not, please do include that in your CPU testing :p
Article already said goodluck with quad cores. Did you somehow miss that.

This wasn't a cpu test. A game being able to utilize 6+ threads doesn't mean it will run poorly on a quad core with only 4 threads. You get dimishing returns with cpu core and utilization anyways.
 
I recently sold my i5 4460 and was planning on getting another but in light of all the new games coming out I expect it's time to upgrade to Ryzen 1600x. Or would an i7 4770 be fine? Thinking of getting an i7 4770 so I don't need a new motherboard and ram, etc. Though it is high time I upgrade. Definitely wanna get a 6 core CPU and 16gb of ram. Wish ram prices weren't so darn high.
 
I really looking for to see if bf v is the game that will finnally bring old i7 980x down and give me a reason to upgrade cpu. Bf1 failed to do so like whise dit exsample far cry 5.

What game can fannally bring x58 down in the the drain.
 
Hello guys! Does anyone know if this game have a dynamic resolution scaling or just a fixed scaling?

I don't know but past battlefield games have had fixed scaling both up and down. I don't remember any previous BF games with dynamic scaling
 
Any chance you could test how "future frame rendering" impacts performance and if it's the same as setting pre-rendered frames to 1 in driver and or user.cfg?
 
Your 8700K might be hitting 60-70% load but according to the screenshots it's pushing 130-140fps. Seems pretty standard for CPU bottlenecks these days.
 
Do you have an i5-4690k lying around or something close to it? If Yes, please do include that in your CPU testing. If not, please do include that in your CPU testing :p
Article already said goodluck with quad cores. Did you somehow miss that.

This wasn't a cpu test. A game being able to utilize 6+ threads doesn't mean it will run poorly on a quad core with only 4 threads. You get dimishing returns with cpu core and utilization anyways.
That entirely depends on the game in question.

Battlefield, with 64 player multiplayer, showed nothing short of massive gains with 8 thread usage.

You get diminishing returns if your CPU cant handle the game you are playing too. Battlefield multiplier is one of the few games that can push quad cores to breaking point on higher framerate systems.
 
That entirely depends on the game in question.

Battlefield, with 64 player multiplayer, showed nothing short of massive gains with 8 thread usage.

You get diminishing returns if your CPU cant handle the game you are playing too. Battlefield multiplier is one of the few games that can push quad cores to breaking point on higher framerate systems.

Well, I think the person wanted to know whether the game will be playable or run smoothly (eg. Upper 40s to 60 fps average) at decent settings, on an average system rather than getting high benchmarks on a higher end system. For most gamers with a budget, pushing 100+ framerates (or even past 60 with vsync) isn't important. Upper 40s fps is probably playable and 50s fps is probably good enough to be considered smooth - especially when using an average 60-75 htz monitor.
 
Back