Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

BF3 FPS makes me sad..

Last response: in Video Games
Share
November 13, 2011 12:32:38 AM

When BF3 launched, my computer couldnt run it on low, it was stuttering and lagging and I couldn't play at all. Normally it would be around 20 frames on low settings at 1920x1080. Then when I overclocked my gpu to 850 and 1000 mhz, and overclocked my cpu up to 5% ( I don't know how to overclock, so to play it save i kept it like that in the bios) and BF3 ran great! Most of the time it was 30-50 frames, and I was so happy that I can now actually play BF3. I even can play it around low/medium settings. Then today everything went downhill. I started my computer, ran BF3 and everything went to 20 frames. I don't know what happened.
Anyone please help me so that I can make BF3 playable again?

Specs are down here:

5850 sapphire xtreme 850 core/1000 mhz

AMD phenom ii x2 545 3.16 mhz (stock cooler)

4gb ddr3 ram

ASUS m4n68t-m v2

1920x1080 monitor

500 gb hdd

585 power supply



Also another thing, I'm wondering about my case's airflow. It has a big and huge 200mm intake fan, but no exhaust fan. Will it affect my case's airflow?


Please help me. I don't want to wait for months to buy a new PC and play BF3 again.

More about : bf3 fps makes sad

November 13, 2011 10:33:29 PM

Update your drivers if you have to. Set all settings in the Catalyst Control Center to default.

FXAA/AA can take away a lot of FPS. Run the game without those.
m
0
l
Related resources
Anonymous
November 13, 2011 11:39:51 PM

Set your res down to around 1280x720
m
0
l
November 15, 2011 12:14:44 PM

Time to upgrade that CPU me thinks; a PII X2 is probably too weak the really handle BF3 well.
m
0
l
November 15, 2011 8:00:15 PM

gamerk316 said:
Time to upgrade that CPU me thinks; a PII X2 is probably too weak the really handle BF3 well.

There's really no significant boost in performance when you upgrade the CPU for BF3. A dual-core and a quad core perform practically the same in BF3.
m
0
l
November 20, 2011 3:54:01 AM

Sorry for late reply, but putting down my resolution didnt work that well.. The drivers are 11.10, I think they are the newest. I'll try to put everything on CCC default.
m
0
l
November 20, 2011 3:56:54 AM

Does BF3 use more than 2 cores?
m
0
l
November 20, 2011 4:30:07 AM

monsta said:
Does BF3 use more than 2 cores?

From what I've seen, yes. However, the performance gain using a 4-core vs 2-core is not significant. The game is more reliant on GPU.

Techspot did a BF3 performance analysis with several CPUs and GPUs. This is the CPU scaling/performance part:

http://www.techspot.com/review/458-battlefield-3-perfor...
m
0
l
November 20, 2011 10:36:29 AM

Thanks for that info AbdullahG great read.
m
0
l
November 20, 2011 10:54:26 AM

Hmm...

You should be doing better than that. You should be able to play it on at least medium with a 5850. My laptop has a mobile 5870 in it (the mobile 5870 is based on the 5770/5850) and I can run it on medium with 1600x900 with ease.

I know people are going to say I am crazy, but I think you need to grab some more memory. And upgrade your CPU.

But for starters, listen...

Go into your CCC and set all of the sliders on performance. Override application settings to performance. Turn off edge-detect - in fact, don't even think about using AA or AF in that game. It is a colossal waste of resources.
m
0
l
November 20, 2011 6:06:46 PM

I think the OP isn't here anymore...
m
0
l
November 20, 2011 7:33:57 PM

PCgamer81 said:
Hmm...

You should be doing better than that. You should be able to play it on at least medium with a 5850. My laptop has a mobile 5870 in it (the mobile 5870 is based on the 5770/5850) and I can run it on medium with 1600x900 with ease.

I know people are going to say I am crazy, but I think you need to grab some more memory. And upgrade your CPU.

But for starters, listen...

Go into your CCC and set all of the sliders on performance. Override application settings to performance. Turn off edge-detect - in fact, don't even think about using AA or AF in that game. It is a colossal waste of resources.



I'm a bit confused on which sliders to do. Can you give me a step by step? Also, will this make my GPU more hot? It's already idles at 40 C
m
0
l
November 20, 2011 8:09:55 PM

firexxattxx said:
I'm a bit confused on which sliders to do. Can you give me a step by step? Also, will this make my GPU more hot? It's already idles at 40 C

All of the slides in Gaming. This includes anti-aliasing, tessellation, Catalyst A.I, and all the rest.
m
0
l
November 20, 2011 8:59:55 PM

firexxattxx said:
Sorry for late reply, but putting down my resolution didnt work that well.. The drivers are 11.10, I think they are the newest. I'll try to put everything on CCC default.


newest driver is 11.11
m
0
l
November 22, 2011 5:17:14 AM

The cpu benchmarks were done in singleplayer, which is a lot less stressful on the cpu compared to multiplayer. If the Phenom x2 560 is reaching that high utilization in singleplayer, then there is no doubt it would be a massive bottleneck in multiplayer, especially 64-player maps.
m
0
l
November 22, 2011 8:45:38 AM

From what I have read, the CPU matters very little with regards to BF3. I don't know about your specific cpu (it could be total garbage) but if it's anywhere in the same league as your GPU then don't even bother overclocking it. The GPU is a whole different story.

Turn down your settings and resolution first off. Second, BF3 released a patch today so that could be messing with things a bit. Make sure you have the latest BIOS updates too (both Mobo and gpu).
m
0
l
November 27, 2011 12:56:08 AM

When I put all the slides on gaming, it got even more lagger -_-
m
0
l
November 27, 2011 12:57:00 AM

rcfant89 said:
From what I have read, the CPU matters very little with regards to BF3. I don't know about your specific cpu (it could be total garbage) but if it's anywhere in the same league as your GPU then don't even bother overclocking it. The GPU is a whole different story.

Turn down your settings and resolution first off. Second, BF3 released a patch today so that could be messing with things a bit. Make sure you have the latest BIOS updates too (both Mobo and gpu).



Its right there on the thread. Its a AMD phenom x2 545..
m
0
l
November 27, 2011 1:02:01 AM

firexxattxx said:
When I put all the slides on gaming, it got even more lagger -_-

You put them all the way up? You have to turn them all down. Every slide in gaming has to be set to it's lowest.
m
0
l
November 28, 2011 11:50:36 PM

I put everything down, and it stills not reaching 30 frames.
m
0
l
November 29, 2011 2:37:29 AM

firexxattxx said:
I put everything down, and it stills not reaching 30 frames.


your cpu is slow which makes sense when you lower the details thus putting more load on your cpu. there are still frames to be gained for a 3.5 ghz x4. sorry if it hurts but your cpu is becoming a paper weight
m
0
l
November 29, 2011 2:44:17 AM

There's really no performance boost in BF3 when going from a decent dual core to a quad core:

I'm really not sure what the issue is. I know this step is quite obvious and probably done already, but just run Driver Sweep (Guru3D has instructions on how to use it) and then re-install drivers.
m
0
l
November 29, 2011 3:09:12 AM

thats a bad comparison to use.

thats obviously at a resolution and graphics setting that puts a lot more stress on the gpu. Add lower resolution and a gpu that cant handle high settings and your putting more stress on the cpu. the cpu is proven weak by the OP by lower the resolution and settings and not gaining fps. if his cpu was strong enough his fps would have increased.

i get about 200 fps with an overclocked 6950 and 2600k at low settings and the gpu usage is about 80 so its obviously a cpu bottleneck but my cpu has the power to put out those numbers over about 45 fps at ultra where the cpu doesnt have to work as fast.
m
0
l
November 29, 2011 4:32:11 AM

cbrunnem said:
thats a bad comparison to use.

thats obviously at a resolution and graphics setting that puts a lot more stress on the gpu. Add lower resolution and a gpu that cant handle high settings and your putting more stress on the cpu. the cpu is proven weak by the OP by lower the resolution and settings and not gaining fps. if his cpu was strong enough his fps would have increased.

i get about 200 fps with an overclocked 6950 and 2600k at low settings and the gpu usage is about 80 so its obviously a cpu bottleneck but my cpu has the power to put out those numbers over about 45 fps at ultra where the cpu doesnt have to work as fast.

The OP runs the game at 1900x1080, so the CPU may not be an issue, as the game is primarily GPU driven. I don't see how the CPU is the issue when he had 30 to 50 FPS original, but then it suddenly dropped to 20FPS one day. If he believes the CPU is an issue, then he can go ahead and upgrade. I'm not saying it's unfeasible for the CPU to be the issue, but what explanation is there for his sudden frames drop?

@OP What are your results for singleplayer?
m
0
l
November 29, 2011 8:00:10 PM

The cpu benchmarks are dont on a scripted movie scene in single player. It's very dishonest / lazy of Tom'sHardware and those who did the benchmarks. In a multiplayer server, you can use a dual core and a gtx 580, and still only get 40 frames per second. However if you put a quad in there, you're going to get 150 frames per second. There are legit benchmarks out there for multiplayer, saddly people are looking at the dishonest ones. These benchmarks you are all showing are more of a benchmark on the hard drive and video card than cpu as they claim.
m
0
l
November 29, 2011 9:03:29 PM

Look at the OPs original post ....... he games at 1080, and OCed his CPU and card by 5% and went from 20FPS to 30FPs ...thats alot more than 5% if you ask me.
m
0
l
November 29, 2011 11:39:04 PM

Im running with a stock cooler, and last time i checked back in the bios it says overclocking failed lol. I'll try to get some results in singleplayer asap.
m
0
l
November 29, 2011 11:41:36 PM

The motherboard's bios only allows me to overclock my cpu by percentage ( overclock up to 3%, 5% 7% etc.) I dont know any other way to overclock my cpu in the bios.
m
0
l
November 30, 2011 1:26:34 AM

Odd way to OC...
m
0
l
November 30, 2011 1:48:30 AM

Oh nevermind there is also multiplier frequency (What ever that is) and it will OC it by mhz. I don't really no how to OC though. Campaign was horrible! I couldn't pass the intro at all due to frame rates (1-5). I don't know really know whats wrong :( 
m
0
l
November 30, 2011 1:50:59 AM

AbdullahG said:
The OP runs the game at 1900x1080, so the CPU may not be an issue, as the game is primarily GPU driven. I don't see how the CPU is the issue when he had 30 to 50 FPS original, but then it suddenly dropped to 20FPS one day. If he believes the CPU is an issue, then he can go ahead and upgrade. I'm not saying it's unfeasible for the CPU to be the issue, but what explanation is there for his sudden frames drop?

@OP What are your results for singleplayer?


I didnt had 30 to 50 fps originally. I only got about 20 frames during the beta and after the retail. But one day I got 30 to 50 frames, but it went back to 20 frames.
m
0
l
November 30, 2011 2:10:08 AM

firexxattxx said:
I didnt had 30 to 50 fps originally. I only got about 20 frames during the beta and after the retail. But one day I got 30 to 50 frames, but it went back to 20 frames.


you prolly got higher fps because of your location ie inside a building.

just face it dude. your rig cant handle the settings your trying to play at.
m
0
l
November 30, 2011 2:16:07 AM

Ah now I see. Perhaps your CPU is holding you back.
m
0
l
November 30, 2011 2:26:18 AM

cbrunnem said:
you prolly got higher fps because of your location ie inside a building.

just face it dude. your rig cant handle the settings your trying to play at.



Inside a building? That doesn't even make sense -_- If your talking about inside a building in BF3, then you are wrong. I played through the campaign and multiplayer, meaning I ran the game in different environments. My rig once handled the game pretty well, but the fps dropped for a weird reason. So it can run, we are trying to figure out why it's not running so well when it is suppose to be running decent.
m
0
l
November 30, 2011 2:29:40 AM

AbdullahG said:
Ah now I see. Perhaps your CPU is holding you back.



Possibly. A 5850 should run as good as a GTX 560 ti, which can run BF3 well at 1080p. Any suggestions what to do with my CPU? I'm not planning to upgrade, since I might be able to buy another rig and give this PC to my younger brother next year.
m
0
l
November 30, 2011 4:08:01 AM

firexxattxx said:
Inside a building? That doesn't even make sense -_- If your talking about inside a building in BF3, then you are wrong. I played through the campaign and multiplayer, meaning I ran the game in different environments. My rig once handled the game pretty well, but the fps dropped for a weird reason. So it can run, we are trying to figure out why it's not running so well when it is suppose to be running decent.


you should get better fps inside building as there is not distant things to be render thus the gpu has less of a work load.

but man idk why you havent overclocked your cpu yet cause everyone has hit on that so far. your cpu is weak.
m
0
l
December 1, 2011 2:47:30 AM

cbrunnem said:
you should get better fps inside building as there is not distant things to be render thus the gpu has less of a work load.

but man idk why you havent overclocked your cpu yet cause everyone has hit on that so far. your cpu is weak.



I care about my fps in the whole game, not the building. I have overclocked my CPU before, but I don't know how to overclock it well with a stock cooler. My CPU is not weak. A dual core doesn't mean its weak. Its not great, but its not bad. You should learn some proper grammar, and hopefully know what your talking about.


Anyways, I guess I'm going to give up right now on BF3 until I get a new system. Thanks for everyone who tried to help me. I appreciated it.
m
0
l
December 1, 2011 2:52:49 AM

firexxattxx said:
I care about my fps in the whole game, not the building. I have overclocked my CPU before, but I don't know how to overclock it well with a stock cooler. My CPU is not weak. A dual core doesn't mean its weak. Its not great, but its not bad. You should learn some proper grammar, and hopefully know what your talking about.


Anyways, I guess I'm going to give up right now on BF3 until I get a new system. Thanks for everyone who tried to help me. I appreciated it.


what i said went right over your head but its ok you have the system that cant run the game well while i do.
m
0
l
December 1, 2011 6:26:05 AM

If you open the console ingame there is a command which you can use to eliminate which part of the computer is slowing you down.
by entering the following:

Render.perfoverlayvisible 1

and pressing enter, you will get a graph over CPU and GPU- usage while playing BF3.
Should any of them spike at 100 or close to very often, well thats your problem component :) 
m
0
l
December 1, 2011 1:47:53 PM

cbrunnem said:
what i said went right over your head but its ok you have the system that cant run the game well while i do.

lol he's just angry. His CPU is bottlenecking the system. Multiplayer is extremely CPU intensive, and so is a lot of single player. He's still grasping onto the old incorrect benchmark going around where the cpu is tested on scripted movie scenes in single player.... Gonna buy a new system like a dumby, when he could just get a phenom x4 for 115 bucks and more than double his performance in game. LOL.
m
0
l
December 1, 2011 3:48:49 PM

cbrunnem said:
what i said went right over your head but its ok you have the system that cant run the game well while i do.


Your system is excellent.

And it is somewhat similar to mine, so you should be maxing it out if I am not mistaken...

I max it and get about 40fps on average (1080p).

Is that about what you get?
m
0
l
December 1, 2011 3:51:52 PM

supremeusa said:
lol he's just angry. His CPU is bottlenecking the system. Multiplayer is extremely CPU intensive, and so is a lot of single player. He's still grasping onto the old incorrect benchmark going around where the cpu is tested on scripted movie scenes in single player.... Gonna buy a new system like a dumby, when he could just get a phenom x4 for 115 bucks and more than double his performance in game. LOL.


I could not agree more. I have an i5 2500k which is better than average, and even though I get about 40fps on average, BF3 has crashed twice on me (running it on ultra) due to excessive strain on my CPU.
m
0
l
December 1, 2011 4:23:47 PM

PCgamer81 said:
Your system is excellent.

And it is somewhat similar to mine, so you should be maxing it out if I am not mistaken...

I max it and get about 40fps on average (1080p).

Is that about what you get?


i just went through and played the beginning of the kaffarov mission cause my internet is down on my desktop at home(on laptops wireless on nieghboors wireless....) and i got roughly 40fps but im overclocked to 4.0 ghz and from what ive seen there is performance to be had up to and maybe past 4.0 so maybe thats why im getting about that same as you.

edit to mention that i had everything MAXED at 1080p
m
0
l
December 1, 2011 6:02:09 PM

cbrunnem said:
i just went through and played the beginning of the kaffarov mission cause my internet is down on my desktop at home(on laptops wireless on nieghboors wireless....) and i got roughly 40fps but im overclocked to 4.0 ghz and from what ive seen there is performance to be had up to and maybe past 4.0 so maybe thats why im getting about that same as you.

edit to mention that i had everything MAXED at 1080p


Cool. Unfortunately I can't overclock my CPU (stock heatsink). I am looking into getting a good aftermarket cooler and cranking that baby up to about 4.5GHz - provided my PSU allows for it. Right now I crash to bios if I go above 3.5GHz - and I have crashed twice at stock speeds. :( 
m
0
l
December 1, 2011 6:44:20 PM

PCgamer81 said:
Cool. Unfortunately I can't overclock my CPU (stock heatsink). I am looking into getting a good aftermarket cooler and cranking that baby up to about 4.5GHz - provided my PSU allows for it. Right now I crash to bios if I go above 3.5GHz - and I have crashed twice at stock speeds. :( 


well that makes sense. if you go with the cheap 212+ you will see about 70* c max at 4.5 but if you go with the noctual nh-d14 those should be down to around 60* which is best.

your psu should be fine. i run my setup on a corsair cx500 which is obviously a 500w psu and everything runs fine both gpu and cpu overclocked with the cpu overclocked as high as 5.0 so you should be fine if your psu is a decent one.

get this one if you have the money and want to have a high overclock at great temps for the length of the cpu. if you go the 212+ route you will prolly have to lower the clock speed or you might be lowering the lifespan as the temps get kinda high.
m
0
l
December 1, 2011 7:24:50 PM

cbrunnem said:
well that makes sense. if you go with the cheap 212+ you will see about 70* c max at 4.5 but if you go with the noctual nh-d14 those should be down to around 60* which is best.

your psu should be fine. i run my setup on a corsair cx500 which is obviously a 500w psu and everything runs fine both gpu and cpu overclocked with the cpu overclocked as high as 5.0 so you should be fine if your psu is a decent one.

get this one if you have the money and want to have a high overclock at great temps for the length of the cpu. if you go the 212+ route you will prolly have to lower the clock speed or you might be lowering the lifespan as the temps get kinda high.


I am not so much concerned about the life speed. I plan to OC the hell out of it because I plan on eventually upgrading to the amd fx8150, maybe at the same time I go xfire with another 6970. But I have to save up first, I will need another PSU when the time comes.

Thanks for your advice. I will probably go with the hyper 212 cause I can get it at Microcenter for like 30 bucks, and like I said I plan on upgrading eventually, anyway.

I really appreciate your advice.
m
0
l
December 1, 2011 8:52:05 PM

PCgamer81 said:
I am not so much concerned about the life speed. I plan to OC the hell out of it because I plan on eventually upgrading to the amd fx8150, maybe at the same time I go xfire with another 6970. But I have to save up first, I will need another PSU when the time comes.

Thanks for your advice. I will probably go with the hyper 212 cause I can get it at Microcenter for like 30 bucks, and like I said I plan on upgrading eventually, anyway.

I really appreciate your advice.


upgrade to a fx8150? can you do such a thing going from a 2500k?
m
0
l
December 1, 2011 11:10:47 PM

cbrunnem said:
upgrade to a fx8150? can you do such a thing going from a 2500k?


Yeah, I know that Intel smokes AMD at equal clock speeds, but the fx8150 is a true 8 core that (according to what I have heard) falls somewhere between the i5 2500k and i7 2600k performance wise at stock speeds.

I would love to have one.
m
0
l
December 1, 2011 11:25:22 PM

Not really. In heavy multitasking conditions does it fall between the i5 2500K and i7 2600K. ONLY in this kind of situation. Not really worth the $270 price tag. Even when OC, it doesn't do very well. It's a power hungry and gets pretty hot. Whether it is a true 8-core is debatable. Either way, the 8-cores don't seem to stand up to a quad core that costs less (i5 2500K).

Keep your i5 2500K. The FX 8150 is downgrade for you. It's really only worth considering if you have anything less than the Phenom II/Athlon II or the Core2Quads.

Okay, no more derailing.
@OP If you have any plans on upgrading your CPU, consider the Phenom II X4 955 with a cheap cooler (Hyper 212+/EVO). You can OC it to decent speeds (4.0GHz in some cases).

m
0
l
!