Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

GTX 680 and Battlefield 3 Performance? fps ?

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • Gtx
  • FPS
  • Graphics
  • Product
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
May 9, 2012 9:10:37 PM

i want to know .... can i have 60+ alltime on karkand maps with gtx 680 and my i7 950 +6 gigs of ram ?

i mean ... i saw some videos when gtx 680 has 30 fps dips from high 60-100 :)  is it driver error and after fixing fps will be all time 60+ ? 30 dips are horrible for gtx 680 i think... i just plan to buy it but don't know does it worth or not ;/ .... if performance will be fixed with drivers and fps will be 60 + in BF3 .. then i will buy it for sure .. if not then i will wait for maxwell ;/ ....

i saw many benchmarks on sites but there are minimum framerates like 55 or 60 ... i though that it was based on single player not mp ... but i saw even on singleplayer like 38-40 dips :( 


so what to do ?

1 ) pick gtx 680 and wait for driverers fix and then get like 60+ (if it happens sure)
2) or don't risk and wait for maxwell ?

More about : gtx 680 battlefield performance fps

May 9, 2012 9:19:13 PM

no its because in multiplayer is cpu intensive at times. the dips are cuase by the cpu.
May 9, 2012 9:43:49 PM

not really .... 680 has same dips on 2600k with 4.5 ghz ... i can even show you video if you don't believe me ;/ and as i said even on sp there is a 38-40 dips ... so how u can tell that it's cpu bottleneck ???? and when there is cpu or ram bottleneck , gpu usage is under 99% .... but gpu usage was alltime 99%.... so no !!! i'ts because of drivers or card for sure ...


here look .. from constant 60 ... to 32 fps :)  and he has 2600 overlocked to 4.5 as i know ...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cr0AJ5pE5ZI

look at 5:45 :) 
Related resources
May 9, 2012 10:01:12 PM

My system runs BF3 maxed out at 1920x1080 @ 60FPS 99% of the time. I am not sure where those dips are coming from, but I can say that if I were recording video I wouldnt be running at 60FPS, and also, using vsync would make me drop to 30FPS due to the nature of the feature. I framerate limit at 60FPS.

Best,

3Ball
a c 247 U Graphics card
May 9, 2012 10:03:08 PM

If you see a large and definite drop in frame rates in multi-player mode versus single player mode, since not a a lot of pixels are being added I would suspect a CPU issue.
a c 89 U Graphics card
May 9, 2012 10:04:20 PM

No dips here with my 680
a c 184 U Graphics card
May 9, 2012 10:04:32 PM

The CPU as a bottleneck is extremely unlikely.

The GTX680 is an awesome card, and IMO the best single-GPU card ever made. Even if you get occasional dips things won't stutter with Adaptive VSync enabled.

I can see waiting if there were something horrendously wrong with the card but there isn't. It's just launched, in fact supply is limited, so why wait for the NEXT generation of cards?

There will always be a better card in the future. you have to buy in sometime.

Plus, if you DO get dips below 60FPS and it is too frequent and bothers you, you can always adjust the quality to raise the frame rate.
May 9, 2012 10:09:18 PM

yes, a gtx 680 will easily obtain 60+ fps depending on your settings. With mine, and a 2500k @ 4.3ghz, I get 80+fps no lower, on 64 player gulf of oman.
May 9, 2012 10:40:54 PM

also people, lets not forget that battlefield 3 uses a lot of vram, so it could be a vram bottleneck if the settings are to high
May 10, 2012 5:26:04 AM

wait so my i7 950 bottlenecks me at stock clocks ? not sure .. then who nvidia ahs tested all gpus with i7 3.2ghz only .. even gtx 690 ;/ .... my friend has gtx 590 and he has alltime 60+ fps even with i7 870 on stock clock 2.9 ghz ;/

and i even asked before here that can i7 950 bottleneck on stock clocks gtx 680 or gtx 590 and all answered no ..... i don't understed .. you all ahve different answers now .... it's confusing ....
May 10, 2012 5:31:27 AM

3Ball


can you set your cpu at stock clocks ? on 2.9 ghz ? and tell me difference ? do some benchmark plz ... just few minutrs on karaknd map with 64 palyers and show me video :) 
a b U Graphics card
May 10, 2012 5:34:59 AM

Turn off Vsync, what are your settings at? 32x AA/AF?
May 10, 2012 5:43:08 AM

darksalvatore said:
wait so my i7 950 bottlenecks me at stock clocks ? not sure .. then who nvidia ahs tested all gpus with i7 3.2ghz only .. even gtx 690 ;/ .... my friend has gtx 590 and he has alltime 60+ fps even with i7 870 on stock clock 2.9 ghz ;/

and i even asked before here that can i7 950 bottleneck on stock clocks gtx 680 or gtx 590 and all answered no ..... i don't understed .. you all ahve different answers now .... it's confusing ....

u must have not heard me say 2-3 fps. maybe 5 at max. its not that high if u clock a bit more.
May 10, 2012 6:24:18 AM

aznplayer213


you mean that if i OC my cpu i will get only extra 3-5 fps ya ? sorry i don't understand english perfectly :) 


mouse24

i don't like tearing so i have to allways set vsync on .... it seems that adaptive v sync does not work ;/ i tryed hafl refreshrate to but no difference ...
May 10, 2012 9:06:54 AM

I'd say a 950 on stock clocks could bottleneck the game, but it wouldn't put the frames at under 60+ it would just prevent the game from reaching 100+ if the GPU were capable (which the 680 is).

May 10, 2012 9:53:57 AM

graemevermeulen said:
I'd say a 950 on stock clocks could bottleneck the game, but it wouldn't put the frames at under 60+ it would just prevent the game from reaching 100+ if the GPU were capable (which the 680 is).


what?! maybe at short instances but theres no way it pushes 100+ with ultra setteing even 680s sli won't reach 100+ 100 percent of the time. those dips are the most important part when your talking about performance.
May 10, 2012 10:44:19 AM

graemevermeulen

if after 100 fps i wil lget 5-7 less fps on stock clocks on i7 950 then on overlocked 950 .... then ithink OC is useless :) 

recon-uk

you mean that drivers won't impreve gtx 680 performance in battlefield 3 ya ? and i will ahve 30-40 fps dips on single 680 anyway ya ? even if i get six core cpu with 4.0ghz speed :) 

zakattak80


i worry about dips to .... 680 can reach even 100 and more max fps but if i will get 30 fps drips ... well that terrible :( 

a c 89 U Graphics card
May 10, 2012 11:17:17 AM

You will never get 30 fps dips on the 680 in BF3, it runs a good solid 80 FPS with an overclock completely maxed out,the only dip if you want to call it that is when it downclocks, which is a new feature on these cards.
With the 680 you gotta tweak the fan curve and not allow it to get hotter than 70 degrees celsius, as the gpu boost will lower and downclock the speed. This is where people see a change in fps. If you adjust the fan curve and keep the temps low the card will run at full speed and never downclock. You just have to get familiar with how the card works cos of the changes with the power saving, downclocking and gpu boost that it has , its not like the previous graphics cards which do not have this feature.

Best thing to do is read what others experience with the card hands on. Look at the reviews here and it will tell you alot about the card.
You are worrying about nothing to be honest.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
May 10, 2012 11:24:11 AM

monsta

i don't like OC ing ... you said it has 80 when it is OC ed .... you meant auto OC or manual OC ? :/  i will not OC card manualy ... 680 is still out of stock .... i think that gtx 670 TI will be good choice to .... anyone have seen it's benchmarks ? it will be like 10-15% slower only then 680 :)  as i know ...
a c 89 U Graphics card
May 10, 2012 11:28:15 AM

You dont have to overclock , some cards like mine are overclocked out of the box and the results are impressive , so you really dont have to overclock them, just adjust the fan curve and you are good to go.
The 670 is looking amazing, the performance is not far from the 680.

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/4710/nvidia_geforce_g...
May 10, 2012 11:34:41 AM

monsta

wow ! sad that there is no BF3 benchmark ^^ but i think stock OC ed 670TI will be same as gtx 680 at stock clocks :p 


it's good that 680 can self overclock ^^ but i think 670 TI will be better perfoermance/price ^^ i have now single gtx 560 ti 1gb version and i think upgrading to 670 TI or gtx 680 will be good ....
a c 89 U Graphics card
May 10, 2012 11:42:08 AM

Its a really good idea to go with the 670, the price for its performance is excellent , and is 100 dollars cheaper than a 680.
Sell your 560ti and grab a 670, it will be worth it, and later on if you like you can always get another 670 and SLI.
I uprgraded from a 560ti SLI to 680 , its much smoother , to be honest it was the 560ti SLI that suffered the dips in fps.
a c 130 U Graphics card
May 10, 2012 11:45:51 AM

I had an i7-960 running at stock with 2 GTX 580s. These two cards in SLI outperform a single 680 and the i7-9xx series processors will not be a bottleneck.

During BF3 multiplayer, both 580s would regularly reach the high 90%s GPU load. There is no bottleneck with a stock i7-950 unless you're running some low resolution or some older title that is less than capable of passing the graphics load onto the GPUs.

The processor, the VRAM, or anything else with the X58 architecture are not going to bottleneck your performance with a 680.

In the video you saw, there was probably something else software-related going on with the person's PC causing the large framerate drops.
a c 89 U Graphics card
May 10, 2012 11:48:31 AM

Quote:
1GB for SLi is a little low...


It sure was recon, once I installed more ram it alleviated the problem , but you could still feel it was just pushing it
May 10, 2012 11:52:46 AM

ubercake

anything you said seems realistic :)  if on gtx 580 sli it was like 90% gpu usege then on gtx 680 or even on gtx 590 there will be 100% for sure :)  so you all guys agree that with my system + gtx 680 or gtx 670 TI ... i will have smooth multipalyer gampelay on battlefield 3 yes ? even on karkand maps with 64 palyers :)  it will never drop below 60 fps ya ? even if it will have like 50 fps dips on ctitical sitations .. it's not a problem :)  i will not notice it im sure
a c 89 U Graphics card
May 10, 2012 11:58:48 AM

Most definately darksalvatore ,a 670 or 680 will perform great with your system and it will run much better than going with 560ti SLI.
May 10, 2012 12:06:40 PM

recon-uk

i saw your gtx 480 in sli to :)  sure it beats 680 and even 590 i think :)  as i know BF3 used only 1.5 gb vram .... so you have no bottleneck even with single card and gtx 480 is good enough to ... it is a reason why gtx 570 can't run bF3 with 4x msaa :)  it has better clock speed at stock but less vram ^^

monsta


then i will order GTX 670 TI i think ...it will be enough to :)  hope it will not be listed above 400$ :( 

a c 130 U Graphics card
May 10, 2012 12:13:54 PM

darksalvatore said:
ubercake

anything you said seems realistic :)  if on gtx 580 sli it was like 90% gpu usege then on gtx 680 or even on gtx 590 there will be 100% for sure :)  so you all guys agree that with my system + gtx 680 or gtx 670 TI ... i will have smooth multipalyer gampelay on battlefield 3 yes ? even on karkand maps with 64 palyers :)  it will never drop below 60 fps ya ? even if it will have like 50 fps dips on ctitical sitations .. it's not a problem :)  i will not notice it im sure

There are no guarantees you won't ever drop below the 60fps mark, but the 680 gives you the best chance of any single video card out there that it won't happen.
a c 89 U Graphics card
May 10, 2012 12:14:05 PM

The price should be $400 - $420 depending on the model you choose.
May 10, 2012 12:16:16 PM

ubercake

what will be expected drop ??? like 45 fps or even less ? :(  radeon 7970 has 30 dips on karkand maps ... i hope it will not happen with gtx 670 or gtx 680 to ....

monsta

420$ will cost oc edition i hope ^^
a c 89 U Graphics card
May 10, 2012 12:20:46 PM

Yes I believe so , the time difference here is confusing, think you guys get the 670 tommorow on the 10th. They have been available here for a week now, strange because we had to wait a couple weeks more than the US to get the 680.
The Gigabyte Windforce OC 670 is a monsta ;) 
a c 130 U Graphics card
May 10, 2012 12:28:58 PM

You can pretty much rely on what you see in the Tom's review of the 680:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-680-rev...

This is single-player mode. I would say, with a single card and video in ultra mode, HBAO and AA cranked all the way around you will be sitting around 60 for the most part in multi-player. I run with two with everything cranked and my framerates run 100-130 almost continuously in multi-player. Additionally, I turn on Transparency AA in control panel which also adds some overhead. I have seen it drop into the high 70s on rare occasion and when it does, it is for a second or two.
May 10, 2012 12:36:39 PM

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-680-rev...

77 fps is an average .... not min :( 


can you disable 1 card and test single gtx 680 with 4x msaa on 1920x1080 full ultra ofc ... only turn off motion blur ... it's useless anyway ....

run just a few minutes and try to fly on the map .... best will be gulf of oman or sharqi penisuila :)  most demanding maps :)  i just want to know how good is gtx 680 for BF3 ... if it does not drop bewlo 45 fps when you face whole map and + explosios ... that will be great deal for me :) 
a c 130 U Graphics card
May 10, 2012 12:42:48 PM

Try to find something with a better average framerate. If you can (ie 690) and you have it in your budget, get it.

I can't do any testing from my current location.
May 10, 2012 12:56:29 PM

i don't say that 77 average is bad. ... bad thing is that even on average 100 fps there can be 30 fps dips :)  ... sad that u can't make benchmarks ^^
a c 89 U Graphics card
May 10, 2012 1:18:32 PM

See its definately worth getting the 670, get it quick tho because they will sell out fast and you will have to wait for new stock again.
a c 130 U Graphics card
May 10, 2012 1:19:49 PM

darksalvatore said:
i don't say that 77 average is bad. ... bad thing is that even on average 100 fps there can be 30 fps dips :)  ... sad that u can't make benchmarks ^^

This is why I like at least two cards. Any dips are minimized. The dips don't happen often; not even every day that I play. It's usually something that happens when it happens to everyone on the server. Shortly thereafter, the game chat will fill with 'Did that just happen to everyone?'.

There are so many factors that go into the performance of the multi-player game that have nothing to do with the graphics cards. All we can do is try to minimize anything that might cause decreases in performance. Some of it could also have to do with the server side of the multi-player game and how its getting packets to everyone's machines.

No review site reviews the multi-player aspect of any game where they can help it because of all the unknowns and unexpecteds.
a c 89 U Graphics card
May 10, 2012 1:22:55 PM

Exactly , dips are often related to the servers not your graphics card.
All of a sudden everyone types "Lag"
a c 89 U Graphics card
May 10, 2012 1:29:17 PM

It actually beats the 7970
a c 130 U Graphics card
May 10, 2012 1:32:04 PM

Quote:
+1, just to emphasise ubercakes point, here is my single 480 running BF3 maxed out on a 4.5ghz 2500k:

...

Nice video! I saw no lag or noticeable dips on Caspian Border which is one of the larger maps.
May 10, 2012 1:35:50 PM

here 41 fps dips vs 45 on single palyer ;/

http://www.hardwareheaven.com/reviews/1494/pg7/nvidia-g...


yes there is like 7-10% difference vs gtx 680 ... but where there is so terrible dips :(  ?
gtx 680 radeon 7970 or 670 all have terrible dips ...............


anyway ..if i buy card from 600 series .. it will be gtx 670 .... and waht guys ... it's just a gtx 670 ? there won't be gtx 670ti ?
a c 89 U Graphics card
May 10, 2012 1:37:35 PM

You are worrying too much about the dips , only worry when they go below 30 fps, because thats when its noticeable.

Don't think theres going to be a 670ti , probably a 660ti to stay consistent with the last series of cards and replace the 560ti.
May 10, 2012 2:08:59 PM

recon-uk

im sure you don't lie and even if gtx 480 oc ed can have 37 fps dips ... then how can gtx 670 has 40 ? ;/ i think if compare to gtx 480 oc performance ... gtx 670 will have minimum 47-50 dips and gtx 680 50-53 ...........
May 10, 2012 2:22:07 PM

recon-uk thank you but don't forget show fps !!! if you don't know how to do it on fraps .. do it ingame .... type in console ! (~)

render.drawfps 1


and you will see fps :) 
a c 130 U Graphics card
May 10, 2012 2:24:15 PM

No one is trying to fool you into making a wrong choice.

We are trying to help you based on our personal experience. recon-uk showed you a video of the gameplay that looked absolutely smooth even while dipping down to 37 fps. This minimum framerate was unnoticeable in the video so it was probably for a fraction of a second depending on the polling interval of the framerate measurement software.

Personally, I like both of my 680s. Knowing they perform better than any other single-GPU card on the market should help ease your mind. There is consensus with regard to this on any given reputable review site.
May 10, 2012 2:28:35 PM

ubercake

sure i know bro and i trust you :)  tahnk you for help really :)  680 is jsut to expensive for me and i thnik gtx 670 oc edition or normal gtx 670 will have good fps on BF3 :) 

if gtx 670 never drops below 45-50 ... then no problem :)  do you think that gtx 670 will drop even lower then 45 ? i don't think so but maybe im wrong :) 

there is just too mcuh benchmarks site .. witch show me different numers ;/ ..... some shows that gtx 670 can have 35 dips ... some 40 ... some even 55 .... idk who trust ... so i prefer uploaded videos from nice forum users like you and recon-uk :) 
May 10, 2012 2:33:29 PM

ubercake said:
This is why I like at least two cards. Any dips are minimized. The dips don't happen often; not even every day that I play. It's usually something that happens when it happens to everyone on the server. Shortly thereafter, the game chat will fill with 'Did that just happen to everyone?'.

There are so many factors that go into the performance of the multi-player game that have nothing to do with the graphics cards. All we can do is try to minimize anything that might cause decreases in performance. Some of it could also have to do with the server side of the multi-player game and how its getting packets to everyone's machines.

No review site reviews the multi-player aspect of any game where they can help it because of all the unknowns and unexpecteds.


thats very true i should have thought about that when i posted.
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!