will i be able to run battle field 4 with this

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
J

jrbar89

Honorable
Dec 1, 2013
24
0
10,520
I was going to get an xbox one but heard a lot of bad things about it. i have been having freezing problems with bf4 on xbox. so i have decided to give up on console gaming and go to pc.
this is my first build and was wonder what you think?

cpu amd fx6350 3.9ghz 6 core
gpu powercolor ax7870 2gb
mobo GIGABYTE GA-970A-D3P
650wt corsshair powersupply

i use to have a low grade gaming computer that i bought. this will be the first i built and was just wondering if im heading in the right direction. and if it will handle bf4 on ultra or high
 
Solution
Tom Tancredi
Uhm NO, I am not justifying my 'i7 purchase' (I am in fact still on my Gen 1 i7 and waiting on AMD to get its act together I will have you know). Your responses, and SOLE FOCUS on i7 hatred (it appears) is jilting your comments then focusing on what I DID say, now what you want to 'vent' about.

The OP asked is those specs would do for Ultra or High (i.e. ULTRA being the preference, and most go balls to the walls on the settings: 1900x1080 8AA 8AF ULTRA playing 64Man maps and wonder why they go below '60fps' is a problem). I made the point that to achieve that level you need, and with JUSTIFICATION OF REAL WORLD EXAMPLES a i7 purchase instead. IF the OP does not wish it, then I DID suggest a "best bang for the buck" solution (IF YOU...
Sort by date Sort by votes
Tom Tancredi

Tom Tancredi

Judicious
May 9, 2013
4,999
0
32,960
ANY AMD CPU system is only equivalent to a i3Core normally, and the most expensive AMD CPUs reach i5Cores levels (FOR ANY AMD FANBOYS I MEAN CURRENT GEN not 2nd/3rd Gen iCore). That said, Ultra is normally only for i7 cores (and most people say ultra they mean ultra 8AA 8AF etc. on full 1900x1080) and higher end video cards (r9 or 7xx) for BF4 to crank out 'decent' frames (watch this for example http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Cj8RP4kEGo) .

That said, you can go normally HIGH on it for cheap, get a i5Core Desktop (8GB DDR3 RAM, 500+GB HDD, etc.) from Walmart for only $395, then upgrade the PSU as intended, add the video card, and you will achieve the levels for low cost, includes the cost of Windows (on your build you need to buy Windows seperately, at least another $179 on top of your costs) for a gaming system that will last you a long while.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Tom Tancredi

Tom Tancredi

Judicious
May 9, 2013
4,999
0
32,960
KristianAA, it isn't about 'maxing out' it is playing at reasonable frames, and all the videos, games reviews, etc. show the 'best' performance ALWAYS appears for the HIGH END video cards playing BF4 is on i7 Core, period. I love AMD, and SAD to see they can't get thier act together to challenge this, but (see the link) the scores are real. That said, I quantified the OP request "most people say ultra they mean ultra 8AA 8AF etc. on full 1900x1080" to make sure they understand what I am saying as compared to what they 'expect'. If that is the expectation then NO the OP system WILL NOT support that level at 'decent' playability (see any videos, reviews, etc. including THE LINK).

It all depends what the OP wants to play the game at, what the OP expects, then what is the OP willing to pay for that will resolve it. And yes there is a BIG difference between a AMD CPU and i7 Core, and a i5Core for that matter (see the bottlenecking for BF4).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Tom Tancredi

Tom Tancredi

Judicious
May 9, 2013
4,999
0
32,960
Wow really? Okay how about a whole PAGE of it with multiple sources http://techreport.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=89356

How about this specific video discussing the issue http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Cj8RP4kEGo and @ 2:50 it shows the chart, showing older i7 (GulfTown) 930 to 3970 (Sandy Bridge) and not even including current Ivy/Haswell architecture, but still i5 Cores (with higher end video cads) bottleneck the game (duh see what Intel says below!).

This Poland site: http://pclab.pl/zdjecia/artykuly/chaostheory/2013/10/bf4_beta/charts/bf4_cpu_radeon.png

Another frank discussion using Guru3d's test results http://www.overclock.net/t/1438477/techspot-battlefield-4-benchmarked-graphics-cpu-performance/240

PCGames Denmark I believe (.DE) http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Battlefield-4-PC-238749/Tests/Battlefield-4-Beta-Test-Prozessor-Benchmarks-Cores-1091016/

I dunno what your source of information but this all comes from the basics of computing. While AMD decided to add 'cores' to their computers they didn't include proper threading (organizing and ordering of information processes being / to be / were completed) as Intel does with hyperthreading with LESS cores. The effect is Intel iCore series performs BETTER at step levels (see Intel's own leveling as it describes the proper FUNCTIONAL USE of each iCore level http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processor-comparison/compare-intel-processors.html) as compared to AMD (sadly :( ) . The hyperthreading is the key difference between the designs and REPEATEDLY gives the INTEL systems the HIGHER performance then AMD, and additionally as designed, each level (i3 vs i5, i5 vs i7) more performance and capability for the more intensive tasks, such as BF4 demands. So YES even INTEL tells you a i5 Core PERFORMS BETTER then a i3, a i7 even better then a i5.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Tom Tancredi

Tom Tancredi

Judicious
May 9, 2013
4,999
0
32,960
Uhm NO, I am not justifying my 'i7 purchase' (I am in fact still on my Gen 1 i7 and waiting on AMD to get its act together I will have you know). Your responses, and SOLE FOCUS on i7 hatred (it appears) is jilting your comments then focusing on what I DID say, now what you want to 'vent' about.

The OP asked is those specs would do for Ultra or High (i.e. ULTRA being the preference, and most go balls to the walls on the settings: 1900x1080 8AA 8AF ULTRA playing 64Man maps and wonder why they go below '60fps' is a problem). I made the point that to achieve that level you need, and with JUSTIFICATION OF REAL WORLD EXAMPLES a i7 purchase instead. IF the OP does not wish it, then I DID suggest a "best bang for the buck" solution (IF YOU READ WHAT I SAID)

" you can go normally HIGH on it for cheap, get a i5Core Desktop (8GB DDR3 RAM, 500+GB HDD, etc.) from Walmart for only $395, then upgrade the PSU as intended, add the video card, and you will achieve the levels for low cost,"

So how am I "going extreme out of the boundries" ??? How am I not objective?? I presented INDEPENDENT examples that show EACH level achievement by BOTH makers across MULTIPLE models, and repeated (sorry it is a fact) AMD isn't achieving the same level. So offering a 'AMD High End Gaming Rig' solution (as you seem to infer I should) would still cap out at a i5 Core, but why would I suggest that when a i5 can be bought on the cheap ($395) with only smaller add on investment ($99+ for a 600W PSU then $129-$500 for whatever video card OP chooses) and get that SAME PLAY LEVEL as the 'AMD HIGH END Gaming rig'.

There is no 'trash and treasure' here, just simple numbers and what the OP is willing to accept for the playlevel, and then pay for that level of play.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom