Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Could this setup run bf3?

Last response: in Video Games
Share
May 1, 2012 2:33:39 AM


SAPPHIRE AMD Radeon HD 6870 1GB GDDR5 PCIE Graphics Card


Corsair Vengeance Blue 16 GB DDR3 SDRAM Dual Channel


Intel Core i3-2120 Processor 3.3 GHz 3MB Cache Socket LGA1155



Would it run the newer games in high ultra?

More about : setup run bf3

May 1, 2012 3:32:12 AM

Medium yes but it would be laggy on ultra.
m
0
l
May 1, 2012 3:45:47 AM

logox said:
Medium yes but it would be laggy on ultra.


*on 1280x1024
m
0
l
Related resources

Best solution

May 1, 2012 4:24:10 AM

Gumbii said:
*on 1280x1024

In that case high. BF3 is one of the most demanding games out at the moment, keep that in mind.
Share
May 1, 2012 4:45:44 AM

Best answer selected by gumbii.
m
0
l
May 1, 2012 5:06:39 AM

wow... your kiddin right... the guy will be able to play on high in campaign at 1920/1080 and medium high 60 fps in multiplayer... the i3 is a quad threaded cpu and will handle the game just as well if not better than most quad cores... if your gonna give an answer at leat read the sites own review b4 you post. even what above links to says high settings not medium and at 12/10 you should defiantly be ok for high settings in multiplayer.
m
0
l
May 1, 2012 5:26:09 AM

HEXiT said:
wow... your kiddin right... the guy will be able to play on high in campaign at 1920/1080 and medium high 60 fps in multiplayer... the i3 is a quad threaded cpu and will handle the game just as well if not better than most quad cores... if your gonna give an answer at leat read the sites own review b4 you post. even what above links to says high settings not medium and at 12/10 you should defiantly be ok for high settings in multiplayer.

I know in campaign but multiplayer is more demanding and the GPU used in the benchmark link I posted is a 6950. At 1680x1050 using 2 cores on ultra they got 25-42 fps. So that average is 33.5 fps (that is about the minimum >I< would play a game at). So on a 1280x1024 with a less powerful card he should get around the same-a little more FPS. So thats why I said that. And I DID read the sites review!
m
0
l
May 1, 2012 8:04:15 AM

thats where you made the mistake. the guys were testing on ultra. if you drop down to high which is what the game would do anyway the fps jumps dramatically...

GameTime.MaxVariableFps 60.000000
render.drawfps 1
Render.DrawScreenInfo 0 (cpu and gpu info)
RenderDevice.Dx11Enable 0 (set to 1 to enable dx11 tesselation and render)
RenderDevice.TripleBufferingEnable 1
render.perfoverlayvisible 0 (set to 1 show cpu/gpu usage and net info)
Screenshot.Format jpg
UI.DrawEnable 1
WorldRender.DxDeferredCsPathEnable 0 (set this to 1 to enable dx11 extras but only if you enabled the other dx11 cvar)
WorldRender.SpotLightShadowmapResolution 1024

also creating a user.cfg file with the above will also help... just put it in the install folder and remove the bracketed infos.
m
0
l
May 1, 2012 3:54:13 PM

HEXiT said:
thats where you made the mistake. the guys were testing on ultra. if you drop down to high which is what the game would do anyway the fps jumps dramatically...

GameTime.MaxVariableFps 60.000000
render.drawfps 1
Render.DrawScreenInfo 0 (cpu and gpu info)
RenderDevice.Dx11Enable 0 (set to 1 to enable dx11 tesselation and render)
RenderDevice.TripleBufferingEnable 1
render.perfoverlayvisible 0 (set to 1 show cpu/gpu usage and net info)
Screenshot.Format jpg
UI.DrawEnable 1
WorldRender.DxDeferredCsPathEnable 0 (set this to 1 to enable dx11 extras but only if you enabled the other dx11 cvar)
WorldRender.SpotLightShadowmapResolution 1024

also creating a user.cfg file with the above will also help... just put it in the install folder and remove the bracketed infos.

Yea, I know that too... Did you not see where I said he COULD run it on high ?... For some reason I assumed he was going to use a 1920x1080 1080p so thats why I said medium. Then he said he was using a 1280x1024 so I corrected myself and said high.
m
0
l
!