As you may have heard, some guy at another forum said that Battlefield 3 is very CPU dependent in MULTIPLAYER. I am quite skeptical of this claim, and since i will be wanting to buy a computer particularly for BF3, i want to know what you guys think. And possibly any evidence.
He said that he got MORE FPS when he changed his CPU to a 2500k with his 2x 560 Ti's in SLI. This is where i am very curious, and not sure why people at that forums did not pick up. It's in SLI. He probably only got more FPS because his previous CPU was bottlenecking the GPU's.
Anyway, what do you guys think? BTW, i do not want to say the other forum outright, since i do not know if it is against the rules. i'll give you a hint if you dont know the forum already. It is the opposite to soft, and starts with the letter 'H'. The name ends with the letter D and has a total of 4 letter
Last replyBest Answer
GPUs are more important in gaming no matter what are you playing. I5-2500K is the best CPU for gaming. no doubt he could get more fps if he had I3 for example.
In multiplayer BF3 does lean alot on the CPU as that chart shows though obviously you still need a good GPU. The link above shows that you can see meatier CPU's and quads and hex's are utilised while the dual core drags behind. Those benches are multiplayer nearly everyone else benches singleplayer so never show this.
I have crossfire AMD Radeon 5770's and a Phenom II x4 965. BF3 completely saturates my CPU with 100% on all 4 cores. Both gfx cards hover around 80 - 90%. But this is in multiplayer, not even played singleplayer yet.
With a GTX570 and my core 2 duo e8400 overclocked to 4ghz I had horrendous stuttering in BF3 w/ 64 players. When I got my i7 2600k everything was better