Thread: Battlefield 3
View Single Post
Old Oct 26, 2011, 05:41 PM   #3630
shoman24v
Radeon Southern Islands
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: United States CA
Posts: 2,811
shoman24v is still being judged by the masses


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by schwartz View Post
I can't answer this question directly, but I can tell you my experience with an q6600 g0 @ 3.2ghz and a 470gtx, that the game runs great.

I'm currently playing on high with *i think* 16x aa and pulling frames that are above 30fps. That rate dips in maps that are much tighter quarters but I was overall surprised (a) how good the game looks and (b) how merciful it is on my system.

While there's also opinions on either side of the fence re: GPU/CPU intensive, my experience is that this thing is eating up my 470gtx more than the q6600 though I wouldn't be surprised to hear that there is a bottleneck there as well. Heard a few comparisons to similar performance as Crysis 2 but YMMV
Ok! Then I take it you are getting more than 25-35 fps? cause that's what I'm getting pretty much all the time. Unless I look at the floor it goes up to 50. I have a GTX 260, but even with the resolution lowered it still runs like ass. Only upping the settings to Ultra does it run in the teens.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roxen View Post
If it's a 3+ghz c2q you'll be fine. Bad Company 2 was the same way, you get a huge boost going to even a mediocre quad core.

Those procs give roughly the same performance as my Phenom II and Bf3 runs excellent for me, I could max it out if my 6870 had more than 1gb of vram.
Ok, sounds good. I think I may be on the hunt for a C2Q...

Last edited by shoman24v : Oct 26, 2011 at 05:42 PM. Reason: can't spell
shoman24v is offline   Reply With Quote