1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Hardware Battlefield 4 Performance Analysis

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Meanmotion, 27 Nov 2013.

  1. Hustler

    Hustler Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    8 Aug 2005
    Posts:
    1,033
    Likes Received:
    34
    Nicely done but kind of pointless when you consider the only frame rate that matters with this game is multi player.

    The single player campaign is an after thought, which many won't even bother with, I know I haven't even played the campaign in Bad Company 2 never mind BF 3 or 4.

    People need to know what hardware is needed to play @1080p med/high/ultra detail with 64 players and get 50-60fps...anything else is irrelevant with a game like this.
     
  2. Shirty

    Shirty W*nker! Super Moderator

    Joined:
    18 Apr 1982
    Posts:
    12,474
    Likes Received:
    1,694
    I think the point of this is that BF4 will be used as a GPU benchmark for the next year or two, and it's impossible to replicate multiplayer results accurately, so think of this as an introduction to the BF4 benchmark.
     
  3. Hustler

    Hustler Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    8 Aug 2005
    Posts:
    1,033
    Likes Received:
    34
    Which is why I think it's a pointless benchmark to use, when the results won't be applicable 99% of the time to the use it's being put to.
     
  4. Asouter

    Asouter --------

    Joined:
    18 Jan 2012
    Posts:
    1,031
    Likes Received:
    62
    Not the typical yadda, yadda, yadda GPU test ... thanks for posting those screen shots for comparison. very useful ....
     
  5. Shirty

    Shirty W*nker! Super Moderator

    Joined:
    18 Apr 1982
    Posts:
    12,474
    Likes Received:
    1,694
    You're applying the wrong logic. It isn't possible to benchmark the multiplayer part of the game reliably and consistently, because there are too many variables.

    Therefore the only way to produce consistent benchmarks is to use the single player part of the game. I appreciate that the results of these tests will not strictly ape the multiplayer results, but they actually provide better guidance than multiplayer because they are repeatable.

    This feature is as much (if not more) about the cards as it is about the game. If a card performs well in SP, then the chances are higher that it will perform well in MP too.
     
  6. GeorgeStorm

    GeorgeStorm Aggressive PC Builder

    Joined:
    16 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    6,656
    Likes Received:
    396
    +1

    I wouldn't take the raw numbers, as they aren't going to reflect multiplayer gaming very well.
    But it should be a good comparison between cards, so you can see how cards compare to each other, even if the raw data doesn't apply, it will be good for relative performance.
     
  7. David

    David Take my advice — I’m not using it.

    Joined:
    7 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    14,784
    Likes Received:
    3,230
    If it's anything like the last one, I'll pick it up if I have a sudden craving for "mash E to survive" cutscenes. With the occasional smattering of "oh no, mashing E won't cut it anymore, please mash the much more challenging F key" :lol:
    And I yours, sir! ;)
     
  8. MrJay

    MrJay You are always where you want to be

    Joined:
    20 Sep 2008
    Posts:
    1,290
    Likes Received:
    36
    My Little bro had some frame-rate issues due to poor Core utilisation with his PileDriver CPU (FX 8350).
    I think thats more of a Windows issue as there is a hotfix but the core parking only occurred on the larger maps which was quite interesting!

    My 2pence
     
  9. Saivert

    Saivert Member

    Joined:
    26 Mar 2005
    Posts:
    390
    Likes Received:
    1
    So Bit-tech's definition of playable framerates is 30 fps or more?
    I want 60fps or more. I just think it seems weird. okay for consoles maybe but not for PC gaming.
     
  10. Shirty

    Shirty W*nker! Super Moderator

    Joined:
    18 Apr 1982
    Posts:
    12,474
    Likes Received:
    1,694
    30 consistent fps is actually smoother and more playable than 60+ fps with any degree of frame pacing variance. It's one of the reasons that up until very recently Crossfire was unpopular among enthusiasts - 120fps sounds impressive on paper but when it still feels juddery and inconsistent there is genuine cause for grievance.

    Of course, higher fps is always desirable though ;)
     
  11. bawjaws

    bawjaws Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    5 Dec 2010
    Posts:
    4,041
    Likes Received:
    690
    Well, at the end of the day it's up to you to decide what your idea of a playable frame rate is. You might think that a game is "unplayable" below 60fps, the next guy might insist on 120fps and I might think 25fps is acceptable. The point is that bit-tech have chosen to take a view based on their opinion of a playable rate, but if you disagree then the numbers are there for you to take your own view :)
     
  12. Shirty

    Shirty W*nker! Super Moderator

    Joined:
    18 Apr 1982
    Posts:
    12,474
    Likes Received:
    1,694
    I think they based it on the fact that moving pictures have generally been shot/broadcast at 24-30fps for the past century and nobody's complained that they're too choppy :p
     
  13. rollo

    rollo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    16 May 2008
    Posts:
    7,823
    Likes Received:
    118
    30 is fine for most games and all films. Driving games require 60fps though.
     
  14. thogil

    thogil New Member

    Joined:
    4 Feb 2011
    Posts:
    24
    Likes Received:
    1
    Film as massive motion blur between frames, making it look smoother than a game at the same frame rate would. Even then, 24fps film does look awful and juddery, especially on camera pans.
     
  15. Shirty

    Shirty W*nker! Super Moderator

    Joined:
    18 Apr 1982
    Posts:
    12,474
    Likes Received:
    1,694
    I was being slightly facetious, as evidenced by the :p

    In reality, for most gamers an average fps or around 45 with a low of 25 is perfectly playable, some prefer to aim higher but that only helps in certain types of games if you're already really, really good.
     
  16. the_kille4

    the_kille4 Chaos will rule da world.eventually

    Joined:
    28 Aug 2009
    Posts:
    215
    Likes Received:
    5
    Currently own the GTX 690, getting tons of stutter after going through the latest update. Although I do get the reported numbers here, the worst will be low three digits straight to 30 and back. Just now when I played I'd play on high with 70 to 90 fps and it will drop to mid-40s. Still unplayable in my opinion. Doesn't really matter how high the fps is, as long as the numbers are constant and decent it will be playable.

    Next year, I'll be buying a 2160p monitor... hopefully there will be a high end card that can play BF4/GTA V with a single card.
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page