Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

BF3 recording 60fps build help

Last response: in CPUs
Share
September 8, 2012 7:26:11 PM

My goal is to be able to record 720p @ 30fps, while playing @ 60fps stable in bf3. :bounce: 

Right now, I have:

phenom II 965 @ 3.68 ghz
crossfire 7850s @ 950/1300 mhz (supposedly a little better than a gtx 590 :sol:  )
8gb 1600 speed ram
120gb ocz vertex 3 SSD (with windows, battlefield)
1tb 7200rpm HD (to record to)
23.6" 1920x1080 monitor
850w psu

playing bf3 multiplayer online, on all lowest settings @1080p i get 45fps stable (pretty low right? with my gpus?)
even when i turned resolution down to lowest i got basically the same frames. so i think i'm looking at a cpu bottleneck.

and when i record with msi afterburner (30fps @ 720p) i get frame drops to 25. it sucks.
recording with fraps gets me even worse, it stays around 20fps.

here are my 3dmark11 scores using 'performance' test: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/4338383

1. i am recording in the best possible way right? im recording to a seperate drive than what the game is on.
2. is this entirely a cpu bottleneck?
3. would switching to a nice intel chip completely resolve my issue? (because frankly AMD doesnt have any much better chips out)
4. if so, what chip would you recommend? 2600k/2700k/3770k/other?

thank you so much for any of your time! i would really appreciate it.
a b à CPUs
September 8, 2012 7:40:55 PM

Overclock the CPU see if it improves

I dont doubt there is a bottleneck but that doesnt fully explain that you should be getting VASTLY higher FPS than that

Are all temps etc within spec?
Score
0
September 8, 2012 8:16:27 PM

Most people don't take into consideration that a map like gulf of oman requires more CPU than nosahr canals. I drop to 35-40 fps on gulf of oman and that's without recording and I have the same CPU as you overclocked. You are definitely being bottle necked by your CPU.

Also I have a GTX 670
Score
0
Related resources
September 8, 2012 8:54:22 PM

ChaseCTech said:
you set CrossfireX in AMD Catalyst, right?


I'm sorry but I don't know a thing about crossfire or SLI :p 
Score
0
September 8, 2012 8:56:34 PM

vickus420 said:
Most people don't take into consideration that a map like gulf of oman requires more CPU than nosahr canals. I drop to 35-40 fps on gulf of oman and that's without recording and I have the same CPU as you overclocked. You are definitely being bottle necked by your CPU.

Also I have a GTX 670
you set CrossfireX in AMD Catalyst, right?
Score
0
a c 141 à CPUs
September 8, 2012 9:08:05 PM

Fast i7 & a capture card are your only hopes. I think you will still see dips below 60fps but for the most part you should be ok and stay above 30 for your recordings.
Score
0
a c 471 à CPUs
September 8, 2012 11:46:48 PM

Encoding video takes a lot of CPU processing power.

I recommend looking into one of Intel's 6 core Sandy Bridge-E socket 1156 CPUs such as the i7-3930k for $560. The other choice is the i7-3930X, but you will be paying a very steep price for only an extra 100MHz; $1,030.

You also need a very fast graphics card like on OC'ed GTX 680 assuming you want to max out the graphics to "ultra". While the GTX 680 can manage to get around 70FPS - 75FPS, that is generally the peak or max FPS which is different from the minimum FPS. Therefore, it is still possible (very likely in fact) that your FPS will drop below 60FPS. Which means you need more GPU processing power.

Don't get caught up with an absolute minimum of 60FPS unless you are willing to spend over $2,000 for a complete system.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 9, 2012 7:55:50 AM

Guys when he is not recording he is getting 45 FPS at lowest settings thats more than a CPU bottleneck something is wrong an entry level card with a weaker CPU would do that he should be getting alot better.
Score
0
a c 185 à CPUs
September 9, 2012 8:09:50 AM

Something is wrong!
Score
0
September 9, 2012 11:03:27 PM

wr6133 said:
Overclock the CPU see if it improves

I dont doubt there is a bottleneck but that doesnt fully explain that you should be getting VASTLY higher FPS than that

Are all temps etc within spec?



Thanks for the response. all of my temps are solid, yes. and i shouldntve said 45fps stable, i meant to say 45fps ish minimum. I'd like 60ish to be my minimum with rarely dropping below 45. i consistently drop below 45fps currently. usually i can get between 50-90 otherwise, depending on the map/whats going on/etc.

i'd be okay with this if i wasnt trying to record myself playing, but since i am, my frames take a drop to unenjoyable levels. i'm consider overclocking my cpu since im sure thats the problem but i only have its stock fan atm and i have zero experience with overclocking a cpu.

Encoding video takes a lot of CPU processing power.

I recommend looking into one of Intel's 6 core Sandy Bridge-E socket 1156 CPUs such as the i7-3930k for $560. The other choice is the i7-3930X, but you will be paying a very steep price for only an extra 100MHz; $1,030.

You also need a very fast graphics card like on OC'ed GTX 680 assuming you want to max out the graphics to "ultra". While the GTX 680 can manage to get around 70FPS - 75FPS, that is generally the peak or max FPS which is different from the minimum FPS. Therefore, it is still possible (very likely in fact) that your FPS will drop below 60FPS. Which means you need more GPU processing power.

Don't get caught up with an absolute minimum of 60FPS unless you are willing to spend over $2,000 for a complete system. said:
Encoding video takes a lot of CPU processing power.

I recommend looking into one of Intel's 6 core Sandy Bridge-E socket 1156 CPUs such as the i7-3930k for $560. The other choice is the i7-3930X, but you will be paying a very steep price for only an extra 100MHz; $1,030.

You also need a very fast graphics card like on OC'ed GTX 680 assuming you want to max out the graphics to "ultra". While the GTX 680 can manage to get around 70FPS - 75FPS, that is generally the peak or max FPS which is different from the minimum FPS. Therefore, it is still possible (very likely in fact) that your FPS will drop below 60FPS. Which means you need more GPU processing power.

Don't get caught up with an absolute minimum of 60FPS unless you are willing to spend over $2,000 for a complete system.


also thanks for the response. I didn't know that encoding video takes a lot of cpu power! unfortunately i don't quite have the budget to get a $500+ processor but <$300ish is possible. Maxing out graphics is not a priority here, i'll probably be playing on lower graphics just to maximize my frames (i'm a competitive player). that being said, i'm pretty sure 2 crossfired 7850s beats out a 680; regardless though, i'm sure i have enough gpu power as it is.

is there a particular intel processor you would recommend me within that budget though? thanks again for the response i appreciate it
Score
0

Best solution

a b à CPUs
September 9, 2012 11:39:41 PM

what motherboard do you have? BF3 actually scales very well with core count.

There is one website I know of that actually tested MULTIPLAYER and not the stupid single player loop


http://www.sweclockers.com/artikel/14650-prestandaanaly...

45fps is about right for the pheonm X4.

Other people's random comments :

Quote:
Well I can say im happy now!

Bought the 1090T left it at stock for right now, and its a massive improvement for me. BF3 scales well to the extra cores..

These are fraps benchmark numbers (same map except with the 1090T there was more people)


X2 Unlocked to X4 @3.5
Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
8158, 120000, 23, 57, 42.958

1090T Stock, More People
Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
8392, 120000, 46, 110, 69.933


I run BF3 on the fx 8120@4.7ghz with 6970 cf, im pushing 120s most of the time with low fps in the 80s. I haven't ran fraps in a while but while recording my low was about 75 fps running 1900x1200 maxed out settings with 64 players.

Just for fun I tested my system as a 41xx and 61xx. the 41xx sucks, 80fps max dips to 40s. 61xx wasn't bad, 120 max, dips to 60s.
Share
September 10, 2012 4:15:04 AM

Best answer selected by Ecklerov.
Score
0
September 10, 2012 4:19:25 AM

noob2222 said:
what motherboard do you have? BF3 actually scales very well with core count.

45fps is about right for the pheonm X4.

Other people's random comments :

Quote:
Well I can say im happy now!

Bought the 1090T left it at stock for right now, and its a massive improvement for me. BF3 scales well to the extra cores..

These are fraps benchmark numbers (same map except with the 1090T there was more people)


X2 Unlocked to X4 @3.5
Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
8158, 120000, 23, 57, 42.958

1090T Stock, More People
Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
8392, 120000, 46, 110, 69.933


I run BF3 on the fx 8120@4.7ghz with 6970 cf, im pushing 120s most of the time with low fps in the 80s. I haven't ran fraps in a while but while recording my low was about 75 fps running 1900x1200 maxed out settings with 64 players.

Just for fun I tested my system as a 41xx and 61xx. the 41xx sucks, 80fps max dips to 40s. 61xx wasn't bad, 120 max, dips to 60s.


wow i had no idea bf3 would scale so well with extra cores, so at least i have the option to stick with AMD. I have the ASUS sabertooth 990fx board so i know i can upgrade to BD, or PD when it comes out.

i'm assuming ivy bridge doesnt make a huge improvement on SB 2600k/2700k BF3 frames. My only concern would be whether intel or AMD cpus make a difference while not only playing the game (as shown in those benchmarks) but also recording. Any ideas?
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 10, 2012 4:46:28 AM

I know the 8120 at 4+ ghz can record while playing, cpu usage most of the time was ~60%, leaving plenty of room for fraps. If your really concerned about maxing the ability, you could force windows to utilize cores 0-6 for bf3 and the 7th core just for fraps so they don't interfere with each other.

This close to PD release, id wait and see how it turns out and the price. That sabertooth is what I use, so its more than capable of pushing the limits.
Score
0
October 29, 2012 4:37:28 PM

just in case anyone is looking at this down the road, i bought the FX-8350 and I can now record 60fps in fraps no problem :sol: 

this processor is awesome.
Score
0
!