Battlefield 4 FPS

[ker2015]

What FPS are you getting on average in Battlefield 4? Add your settings and specs to the table. I get an average of about 130 FPS at the high preset, 1440p. I use an overclocked 980 Ti and an i5-4690k.

-Chickenpuffball

[Praesi]

1440p with max settings and full AA 100FPS

[ker2015]

1440p with max settings and full AA 100FPS

Nice! What specs?

[alexhelvetica]

I read that title that you were getting 4 FPS is Battlefield.

I was about to tell you to get a computer!

[ker2015]

I read that title that you were getting 4 FPS is Battlefield.

I was about to tell you to get a computer!

lol!

[Praesi]

Nice! What specs?

See Signature.

[ker2015]

See Signature.

Thanks.

[Minzo]

1440p max settings and around 70-100 fps.

[iTuAnh]

inno3d GTX 970, intel xeon 1231v3, i dont know how many i get because i always turn on v-sync lol 

[ker2015]

inno3d GTX 970, intel xeon 1231v3, i dont know how many i get because i always turn on v-sync lol

I might me wrong, but isn't that a $4k CPU?

[DEDRICK]

I might me wrong, but isn't that a $4k CPU?

 

No, its a cheaper 4790K "equivalent".   It costs around the same as the 4690K but has hyperthreading and is ratio locked

[ker2015]

No, its a cheaper 4790K "equivalent". It costs around the same as the 4690K but has hyperthreading and is locked

Nice, I don't know my Xeons.

[iTuAnh]

[Th3 Mans1ay3r]

Like 140+ fps at 1080

 

-R9 280X

-i5-4690K

[Monarch]

What FPS are you getting on average in Battlefield 4? Add your settings and specs to the table. I get an average of about 130 FPS at the high preset, 1440p. I use an overclocked 980 Ti and an i5-4690k.

-Chickenpuffball

 

I see this kind of posts all the time on BF4 forums. But I'd hoped never to see such BS on tech forums.

 

130 fps on average in BF4 with an i5 + 980 Ti at 1440p? Nope. Unless you're playing on a server with like 10-20 players with very little action going on and/or you're indoors. Do what all other people bragging about their PC and framerate do: take this BS to BF4 forums. There are a ton of people that will be impressed there.

 

Also, average framerate doesn't mean anything. Minimum fps is the most important value, not average. Have some smoke and explosions on the screen on 64p servers and you'll dip to 40 fps. 

[ker2015]

I see this kind of posts all the time on BF4 forums. But I'd hoped never to see such BS on tech forums.

130 fps on average in BF4 with an i5 + 980 Ti at 1440p? Nope. Unless you're playing on a server with like 10-20 players with very little action going on and/or you're indoors. Do what all other people bragging about their PC and framerate do: take this BS to BF4 forums. There are a ton of people that will be impressed there.

Also, average framerate doesn't mean anything. Have some smoke and explosions on the screen on 64p servers and you'll dip to 40 fps.

130 FPS on Operation Locker. Should have clarified. By the way it's not at Max settings. It's at the high preset.

[Monarch]

130 FPS on Operation Locker. Should have clarified. By the way it's not at Max settings. It's at the high preset.

 

Thought so. Operation locker is one of the least demanding maps in BF4. Especially if you're not playing with 48-64 players. Try Siege of Shanghai on a 64-player server.

[ker2015]

Thought so. Operation locker is one of the least demanding maps in BF4. Especially if you're not playing with 48-64 players. Try Siege of Shanghai on a 64-player server.

I did play with 64 players. I also tested Siege of Shanghai and got above 100 FPS.

[Monarch]

I did play with 64 players. I also tested Siege of Shanghai and got above 100 FPS.

 

I also get above 100 fps in some non-demanding situations, like looking at the wall, or being in a small corridor, etc. But even then, you wouldn't get 100+ fps average unless you spent majority of time doing that. Whenever there's a lot of action on the screen, you will dip way below 100 fps, perhaps even to around 60.

 

I don't see a point of this thread other than bragging about fps. Framerate varies significantly from map to map, and even within a single map it depends on what's going on and what you're doing.

[ker2015]

I also get above 100 fps in some non-demanding situations, like looking at the wall, or being in a small corridor, etc. But even then, you wouldn't get 100+ fps average unless you spent majority of time doing that. Whenever there's a lot of action on the screen, you will dip way below 100 fps, perhaps even to around 60.

Maybe it's because my graphics card is over locked.

[Monarch]

Maybe it's because my graphics card is over locked.

 

Nope. i5 will not let you go anywhere near 100 fps in resource intensive situations. You're mostly CPU-bound on maps like Siege of Shanghai. And at ~100 fps you're GPU bound, so even if you had a better CPU 2xMSAA and 1440p wouldn't allow the GPU to render more frames.

[ker2015]

Nope. i5 will not let you go anywhere near 100 fps in resource intensive situations. You're mostly CPU-bound on maps like Siege of Shanghai. And at close to 100 fps you're GPU bound, so even if you had a better CPU 2xMSAA and 1440p wouldn't allow the GPU to render more frames.

I dunno. This is getting nowhere. You can believe me or not believe me.

[Guest trucker2]

Medium setting no AA I am getting 28 to 30 at 1080, around 50 fps at 720.

Still trying to find the sweetspot for my A10 7850k barefoot and stock in a msi 68 MB, 8gig EVGA 2133 ram

[ker2015]

Medium setting no AA I am getting 28 to 30 at 1080, around 50 fps at 720.

Still trying to find the sweetspot for my A10 7850k barefoot and stock in a msi 68 MB, 8gig EVGA 2133 ram

:'( At least 720p is kinda playable.

[Guest trucker2]

Considering the parts cost me under 200 bucks heck ya.

Allot better then this poor guy :

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/440925-computer-cant-handle-minecraft-with-a-gtx-970-an-i5-4690k/