BC:2 Performance Tests

Ponster

Very good article here for those who are not too sure if their PC is good enough for BC:2

Add to this the fact that two years have passed since Crysis was released, and the average gaming PC has got a lot faster in the process. We must agree with DICE's assessment of recommending a Radeon HD 4870 or GeForce GTX 260 graphics card as a minimum if you want to enjoy all the eye candy this game has to offer.

Battlefield: Bad Company 2 doesn't scale down very well, as we saw roughly a ~5 fps performance gain when going from the high to the medium quality preset. At the same time, there was very little difference in graphics quality or detail.

When going from the medium to the low quality settings we saw anywhere from a 10 – 20fps increase, which allowed graphics cards as slow as the Radeon HD 4830 or GeForce GT 240 to deliver an acceptable level of performance at 1680x1050.

http://www.techspot.com/article/255-battlefield-bad-company2-performance/

Dcully

Cherryghost posted this the other day


http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055849692

Ponster

Remind me to ban Cherryghost.

Did he post this one ?


http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/battlefield-bad-company-2.html

cherryghost

Ponster wrote: »

Remind me to ban Cherryghost.

Did he post this one ?


http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/battlefield-bad-company-2.html

d22ontour

Ponster wrote: »

We must agree with DICE's assessment of recommending a Radeon HD 4870 or GeForce GTX 260 graphics card as a minimum if you want to enjoy all the eye candy this game has to offer.

Boo.

TheFairy

D22 some of the guys are running on 8800* cards and are having no probs at all.

dreamers75

d22ontour wrote: »

Boo.

You will be fine if you ever get the damn game


TIGgers its d22s birthday on saturday cough steam gift cough

Wonda-Boy

What do you expect a game this BEAUTIFUL to run on real old tech. It will run pretty well on old tech but you really cant expect to have full eye candy on....come on guys.:rolleyes:

I will tell you this....I changed the game from DX11 to DX9 last night to see would it help with the random disconnects and it did not....but the difference graphically is HUGE....would not have taught it but it was.

dreamers75

Wonda-Boy wrote: »

What do you expect a game this BEAUTIFUL to run on real old tech. It will run pretty well on old tech but you really cant expect to have full eye candy on....come on guys.:rolleyes:

I will tell you this....I changed the game from DX11 to DX9 last night to see would it help with the random disconnects and it did not....but the difference graphically is HUGE....would not have taught it but it was.

He has a 4770 and a monitor with max res of 1280, he will be fine.

gollem_1975

I bought BFBC2 on the back of enjoying BF2 towards the latter half of 09.

my XPS plays BF2 very smoothly ( I've only played single player )

my setup doesn't appear to be able to handle BFBC2. I have changed the system res to 800 * 600 . I have set the in game video settings to 1240 * 768. I have updated the NVIDIA driver.

Is there anything else I can look at in order to improve performance ?

I got a taste for the action in the Cold war campaign.. its frenetic! much different to BF2. and thats even when the mouse/keys are so unresponsive I can't get a bead on the enemy and am effectively a sitting duck.

cheers,

Gollem

dreamers75

gollem_1975 wrote: »

I bought BFBC2 on the back of enjoying BF2 towards the latter half of 09.

my XPS plays BF2 very smoothly ( I've only played single player )

my setup doesn't appear to be able to handle BFBC2. I have changed the system res to 800 * 600 . I have set the in game video settings to 1240 * 768. I have updated the NVIDIA driver.

Is there anything else I can look at in order to improve performance ?

I got a taste for the action in the Cold war campaign.. its frenetic! much different to BF2. and thats even when the mouse/keys are so unresponsive I can't get a bead on the enemy and am effectively a sitting duck.

cheers,

Gollem

you need a nmew GPU tbh, does the XPS take GPU upgrades?

gollem_1975

dreamers75 wrote: »

you need a nmew GPU tbh, does the XPS take GPU upgrades?

don't know (much about hardware ) if it does. I can check.

I have access to a Dimension 5100 that will.

at the moment I think it has an ATI X1650 512MB card in it so I can check to see how it runs on that over the weekend.

Blazer

gollem_1975 wrote: »

I bought BFBC2 on the back of enjoying BF2 towards the latter half of 09.

my XPS plays BF2 very smoothly ( I've only played single player )

my setup doesn't appear to be able to handle BFBC2. I have changed the system res to 800 * 600 . I have set the in game video settings to 1240 * 768. I have updated the NVIDIA driver.

Is there anything else I can look at in order to improve performance ?

I got a taste for the action in the Cold war campaign.. its frenetic! much different to BF2. and thats even when the mouse/keys are so unresponsive I can't get a bead on the enemy and am effectively a sitting duck.

cheers,

Gollem

unfortunately you're stuck with waht you have...the 8400gs is little better than integrated graphics and definitely not able for BC2..
Best thing if you're really into gaming is flog it and either buy a good desktop with the money or get another laptop such as the xps 1730 etc..you can pick them up cheap enough if you look around.

Blazer

turning off bloom really makes a difference on this game.
Running at 1920x1200 (1xAA, 1xAF) and all settings on high gives me an avg of 134fps . I could up the AA but I'd much prefer the fps.
System spec is Core i7-950 with 6gb of ram and 2x5870s.
Have to say BC really looks beautiful and at first I though "meh" but now I'm getting to enjoy it..

gollem_1975

Berkut wrote: »

unfortunately you're stuck with waht you have...the 8400gs is little better than integrated graphics and definitely not able for BC2..
Best thing if you're really into gaming is flog it and either buy a good desktop with the money or get another laptop such as the xps 1730 etc..you can pick them up cheap enough if you look around.

cheers for the info.. not looking good.

do you know anyone looking to buy a used(once) copy of BC2

youcancallmeal

Has anyone seen any comparison shots with bloom on/off, tried googling couldnt find any pics?

death1234567

youcancallme>al wrote: »

Has anyone seen any comparison shots with bloom on/off, tried googling couldnt find any pics?

+1, Can someone upload pics please? I have ATI 4850 I will probably need to turn it off, just want to see what I will be missing out on.

Ponster

youcancallme>al wrote: »

Has anyone seen any comparison shots with bloom on/off, tried googling couldnt find any pics?

Seems to make little difference but turning 'effects' from high to medium willr reduce the 'bloom' effect.

youcancallmeal

Ponster wrote: »

Seems to make little difference but turning 'effects' from high to medium willr reduce the 'bloom' effect.

I though turning Bloom off in settings.ini increases FPS significantly? Gonna try it tonight and see how I get on

dreamers75

Bloom had no effect when i turned it off using a 4870

the_syco

youcancallme>al wrote: »

Has anyone seen any comparison shots with bloom on/off, tried googling couldnt find any pics?

Bloom on: the sun bounces off buildings, and on certain maps makes flying one direction is blinding.

The sun bouncing off buildings is not too bad, but if you are trying to snipe someone in a window, it's fairly blinding.

TheDoc

TheFairy wrote: »

D22 some of the guys are running on 8800* cards and are having no probs at all.

running fine on my 8800gts 320mb

Wonda-Boy

I had all the bells and whistles on for about a week before I quickly realised that you are at a serious handicap when it comes to actually playing the game....bloom and wind dust on certain maps etc and the snow level with the snow breeze you can see jack shi.t....so all the EYE CANDY had to go....Shame really coz it looked the part. But dam am I getting stabbed coz the sun looks PREEETTTTYYY!!!! :rolleyes:

Komplett-Tech: Ryan

Some of these benchmarks provided by the likes of xbit ans so on so forth dont seem to be too accurate, here is the reason why:

My pc specs are as follows:

I7-860 @4.4ghz
8GB 1666mhz dominator ddr3 @ stock speeds, but 6-6-7-19 timings
2 x 5970 in crossfire @ stock speeds

When i play on a single screen at 1920*1080 with everything maxed out with the highest AA + AF settings in game, and in the CCC with everything set to quality my FPS never drop below 100. Some of the sites seem to point towards this game being very badly optimized for CF regulary with a dual/quad gpu setup only gaining 10-15% of a performance boost.

What are you guys getting, out of interest?

stephenmarr

i5 750 2.67ghz with gigabyte p55a-ud5 mobo running a single 5850 card on a Dell 24' screen @ 1920 x 1200 everything on max
getting a steady 50 fps if i turn off aa and bloom it shoots up to about 80fps

Dcully

Seasonic M12 700W PSU
Gigabyte GA-P35-DS3P, P35, Socket-775,ATX, GbLAN, DDR2, 1333FSB, 2xPCI-Ex16
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz
8 gig Corsair DDR2 1066mhz
Powercolor ATI Radeon HD 4870 1024MB GDDR5 PCI-Express
windows 7 64 ultimate
2 X Samsung SpinPoint T166 500GB SATA2 16MB 7200RPM

Im running at my 24" monitors native res of 2048 X 1152 [to me this res is just beautifull so id rather sacrifice eye candy instead of dropping resolution]
Getting a minimum of 50 fps max of 90 fps everything set to medium except texture detail which is set to High , FSAA X4 AF X4.
Theres not much difference visually between medium and high but a loss of about 5-10 fps for me.
DX9 offers less framerate for me than set to auto ie DX10 on my card.

If i drop everything to low except shadows [it looks crap with low shadows imo so i leave them at medium] my fps shoots through the roof with a minimum of 80 fps and in all honesty theres isnt a massive difference in visual quality on urban maps but maps with trees and foilage you can see the poor quality trees etc.

Hope that helps you Ryan
As you can see im not top end but the game looks and runs great imo.

A friend of mine got a new rig a few weeks ago similar to your spec except he has one 5970 and like you runs everything totally maxxed,hes running on a 32" LCD TV @ 1920X1080 , i didnt see him running fraps so cant say what fps was for sure but considering im insanely fussy about framerate id estimate he never dropped below 80-100 fps, the thing was smooth as butter

Grim.

i7 920 at 2.8ghz/6gigs of gskill/gtx295

everything maxed at 1920x1200 i get 60/70 fps

Joeface

Spec in sig
what should I Change
60-75fps using fraps

"[WindowSettings]
Width=1680
Height=1050
Fullscreen=true
RefreshRate=60
VSync=false
[Sound]
Quality=medium
VoipEnable=true
SpeakerCount=0
[Graphics]
Effects=medium
Soldiers=high
Vehicles=high
Overgrowth=high
Undergrowth=high
StaticObjects=high
Terrain=high
Shadows=low
Bloom=true
HSAO=false
MSAA=0
Water=medium
MainQuality=custom
Texture=high
DxVersion=auto
Aniso=0
Detail=high
RenderAheadLimit=2
Fov=55"

Ponster

> 60-75fps using fraps

Why do you want to change anything if your fps is ok ?

Joeface

oh sorry my bad ,not the fps ....thats fine ,,,
but it looks kinda horrible, could just be me but I expected more .

Whats the norm on FOV

yankinlk

i sent this to you last week! http://rjdown.co.uk/projects/bfbc2/fovcalculator.php

Joeface

So you did , forgot about that .. thanks

Gaid1n

Maybe someone here can offer up som clues as to why it's running so **** on my rig.
Same sort of rig as Cully's
Q6700 stock
4870 1 gig
4 gig RAM
P35 mobo
Win XP Pro 32bit
Thing runs like a dog. Some serious artefacts along the terrain. Maybe 30fps measured in Fraps. No clue why it's so bad. Running latest drivers 10.2 Catalyst. Stumped.

Gonzovision

Defrag you hard drive

Dcully

Gaidin drop graphics to medium, looks almost identical to high but lot better fps.
Medium has plenty of fsaa and af so you wont have jaggies etc.
The artifacts sound like the dx 9 rendering.
If your on dx9 set to auto in the settings ini,dx 10 gives me much better fps than dx9.
I was planning on getting a new gfx card but tbh im delighted with performance now [i might wait to see if 5870 prices drop when nvidia bring out their next cards at end of month]
I never drop below 50 fps and usually stays around 60-90,im running @ 2048X1152,dropping to 1650X1050 might give me 5 fps boost max so im staying with monitors native.
However ive OCed my Q6600 to 3.0ghz and shes never above 45-58 c on stock cooling, ya gotta love intels stock cooling

XP could be an issue? im on windows7 untimate 64 but in fairness XP aint like vista in terms of system hog.

Good to see ya man, havent games with ya in ages.

Hellrazer

Same here--dx9 gives me wierd artifacts--kinda like a hexagon over the terrain and also some texture swapping ie sand is grass and vice versa and also slower frame rates than dx10.

Im on Vista running a Phenom x3 @ 2.9ghz.
Dx10 with all at medium Im getting 60-80 never drops below 60.

Can XP run dx10??Might help you out Gaid1n if you could force it to use 10 instead of 9.

Cuddlesworth

Hellrazer wrote: »

Can XP run dx10??

No.

Joeface

edit