Battlefield 1 performance

[FanBlade]

Will bf 1 benefit from more cores like the fx 6300 or fewer more powerful cores like an i3? What is the cheapest gpu that will be able to run it at 30 fps at low or medium graphics? Should I wait for amd zen and Polaris before building a rig for it? 

[Manage My Cables]

7 minutes ago, FanBlade said:

Will bf 1 benefit from more cores like the fx 6300 or fewer more powerful cores like an i3? What is the cheapest gpu that will be able to run it at 30 fps at low or medium graphics? Should I wait for amd zen and Polaris before building a rig for it? 

Most likely the i3 over amd's counter part. But early speculation is hinting towards a i5

[Bl00dgod]

AFAIK MMO or RTS are more CPU bound than shooters, so i guess a strong graphics card will be more important for BF1

[Kobathor]

1 minute ago, Manage My Cables said:

Where did you get this information from no official information about system requirements have been released?

It's Frostbite 3, should have similar requirements to Battlefront and Battlefield 4.

 

OP: Lucky for you, Frostbite 3 loves cores. My FX-8350 was great for Battlefield 4 and Battlefront, when I swapped it for my 4790k I saw no difference on Battlefield. You should be fine with the 6300. As for GPU, if you have $250 by the time the RX 480 is out, I'd pick one of those up. Doesn't use much power, and it's at least as powerful as a 390/x. My HD-7970 @1100Mhz runs BF4 Ultra 1080p at 60 FPS minimum, and the card cost me $125. Older GPU's like the 7970, R9 280, and R9 285 will fare just fine at medium settings.

 

IF YOU'RE BUILDING A NEW COMPUTER- Go with a Haswell or Skylake i3, or i5 if you have the dough. My reasoning is this: the i3's will have similar and better performance in newer titles, BF1 included. If you have an i3, you can upgrade to an i5, or even an i7 down the road- if you have the 6300, the most you can get later is the 8350, and that CPU is not impressive in the slightest nowadays.