Building or upgrading a PC for BF3?

Spear

With the upcoming release of BF3, and the beta before that, there'll be a surge in people upgrading or building PCs to play this.

From the pre-existing PC side, Dice have said that if you can run BC2 okay, you'll run BF3 okay. Personally, I'm skeptical of this, the single player videos released already show an increased granularity in the destruction, and when combined with the doubled player count and greatly increased map size I don't believe there's enough optimization room to counteract these.


From the console side, with the cut down player count (32 compared to 64), reduced map size, reduced resolution, reduced graphics detail, there's no way to describe as being other than the lesser experience. And so to play the game as intended, that means building a gaming PC.


This thread isn't an attempt to replaced the Building and Upgrading Forum, so if you have suggested builds, they should go there for comment.

What will go here, are the points specific to BF3 that you need to keep in mind.


Frostbite 1.5 had separate DX9 and DX10/11 paths. FB 2.0 has dropped the DX9 path, which means it's DX10/11 only, and in turn this means it's Vista/Win7 only now, and XP isn't an option any more.


These were EA's minimum and recommended spec for BC2:

Minimum Frostbite PC Specifications for BFBC2 & BF1943
Processor: Core 2 Duo @ 2.0GHz
Main memory: 2GB
Graphics card: GeForce 7800 GT / ATI X1900
Graphics memory: 256MB
OS: Windows XP
Free HDD space: 15GB for Digital Version, 10GB for Disc Version (BFBC2)
10GB for Digital Version, 4GB for Disc Version (BF1943)


Recommended Frostbite PC Specifications for BFBC2 & BF1943
Processor: Quadcore
Main memory: 2GB
Graphics card: GeForce GTX 260
Graphics memory: 512MB
OS: Windows Vista or Windows 7
Free HDD space: 15GB for Digital Version, 10GB for Disc Version (BFBC2)
10GB for Digital Version, 4GB for Disc Version (BF1943)


Even a year ago, with FB 1.5, they were recommending a decent DX11 capable card, such as the nVidia GT260. The older minimum cards there, such as the nVidia 7800 don't support DX10, let alone 11.

jetski

Looking forward to this game myself and hope im not let down like i was with aram2 / flashpoint DR.... my advice would be to upgrade one part at a time! ive I myself have a tasty little asus g73sw so should have no issues please god...

johnboysligo

as long as it doesn't crash out on day one and the server browser works those specs seem reasonable

profitius

I'm getting a new laptop with a second generation i5 core processor. Will that be good enough for BF3 or would it be better to get the xbox version?

Whats the difference between DX9/10/11 etc? Could somebody explain it in plain English.

Spear

profitius wrote: »

I'm getting a new laptop with a second generation i5 core processor. Will that be good enough for BF3 or would it be better to get the xbox version?

Whats the difference between DX9/10/11 etc? Could somebody explain it in plain English.

A quad core i5? If so it should be fine.

DX 9/10/11 are revisions of graphics libraries and APIs. A video card with hardware support for DX10 or 11 support is required, as is Vista or Windows 7.

profitius

Spear wrote: »

A quad core i5? If so it should be fine.

DX 9/10/11 are revisions of graphics libraries and APIs. A video card with hardware support for DX10 or 11 support is required, as is Vista or Windows 7.

I think its a dual core i5.

Spear

profitius wrote: »

I think its a dual core i5.

You want to go with a quad core from the start, otherwise performance will suffer.

Joseph

This may be a silly question but why is the digital version so much bigger than the disc version?

Spear

Deaddude wrote: »

This may be a silly question but why is the digital version so much bigger than the disc version?

Those refer to BC2 and can't be applied to BF3. No idea why on the difference though.

Hercule

For me, running bf2 and bfbc2 at an acceptable performance required hardware that didnt exist yet or had a ridiculously high cost at the time of launch - given the jump in graphics I worry, I simply dont trust EA/Dice's ability to release a game that runs smoothly with current hardware - I have the recommended tech or better and I really doubt the game's performance will meet my expectations (which would higher then most given that I play CoD4 and would expect similar cost/performance ratio it had it when it was launched)

cherryghost

Spear wrote: »

Those refer to BC2 and can't be applied to BF3. No idea why on the difference though.

Download buffer onto the drive

KilOit

Hercule wrote: »

For me, running bf2 and bfbc2 at an acceptable performance required hardware that didnt exist yet or had a ridiculously high cost at the time of launch - given the jump in graphics I worry, I simply dont trust EA/Dice's ability to release a game that runs smoothly with current hardware - I have the recommended tech or better and I really doubt the game's performance will meet my expectations (which would higher then most given that I play CoD4 and would expect similar cost/performance ratio it had it when it was launched)

If it can run Metro 2033 at 40fps max settings it will run anything for next year or so.
Crossfire a 5850 gpu with a 2500k cpu and a p67 mobo for about 500€ will run BF3 no problem

Hercule

I don't think you have understood the problem for me - 40fps is not a satisfactory framerate for a competitive FPS. The game will no doubt play on a machine that's worth €500 but how well it runs is the issue - given that I would look to play at at least 60 smooth - most CoD4 players play at 125/250fps smooth so we have artificially high expectations.

EA/Dice have never made a game that runs well on existing/cheap hardware

KilOit

Well if being competitive is your priority and if you want to compare it to MW's 6 year old engine, go right ahead and put the graphic settings low so it will look like MW and enjoy your 250fps.

profitius

I've checked on other sites.Its seems what I have won't be powerful enough to play BF3 at full settings. Even with medium settings according to some people.


I have the following...

1GB NVIDIA® GeForce® GT 550M Graphics Card

http://www.nvidia.co.uk/object/product-geforce-gt-550m-uk.html

2nd generation intel® coretm i5-2410m processor 2.30 ghz with turbo boost 2.0 up to 2.90 ghz. There are 2 cores and 4 threads in that processor.

http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=52224


I presume that'd be more powerful than 5 or 6 year old xbox 360 equipment but I don't have any figures.

cherryghost

profitius wrote: »

I've checked on other sites.Its seems what I have won't be powerful enough to play BF3 at full settings. Even with medium settings according to some people.


I have the following...

1GB NVIDIA® GeForce® GT 550M Graphics Card

http://www.nvidia.co.uk/object/product-geforce-gt-550m-uk.html

2nd generation intel® coretm i5-2410m processor 2.30 ghz with turbo boost 2.0 up to 2.90 ghz. There are 2 cores and 4 threads in that processor.

http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=52224


I presume that'd be more powerful than 5 or 6 year old xbox 360 equipment but I don't have any figures.

I have a laptop with similar spec (GT540m instead of 550M). Bad Company 2 at medium settings clocks in at around 50fpsish, looks a tad worse than the console but not by much at all. Considering the console version runs at 30fps thats a net win in my book.

And yes, you're right, its more powerful than an old 360 (about 20% or so only due to graphics limitations). If you ran the PC Bad Company 2 in 720p alongside the console counterparts (console versions only run at 720p, 360 can upscale to 1080i) you'll notice the difference big time in FPS.

To conclude, BF3 should be playable at low/medium settings at a good framerate. If you want max settings you'd be looking at under 30fps, which is about console grade framerates.

Ponster

World of Tanks killed my gfx card so I have a decent-enough 560Ti which should do the job for BF3.

Spear

Official Alpha specs:



Q: What are the minimum hardware recommendations for the Alpha Trial? A: RECOMMENDED WINDOWS PC SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS

• OS: Windows 7 or Vista (SP1)
• Installed: Origin
• CPU: Quadcore @ 2.0 GHz or faster
• RAM: 4GB or more
• Hard Drive: 7.25 GB free disk space
• Video: 256 MB or greater
• DirectX 10 or 11 compatible card with latest drivers (AMD 11.5 or later, nVidia 275.33 or later)
• Sound: DirectX 10 or 11 compatible card
• Internet: broadband connection

Note that these do not necessarily represent the requirements for the final game.

Dublin_Gunner

I'd say for a decent experience with it without having to run everything down low, you'd be looking at a HD 5750 or GT 240 or better.

Performance will shape up similar to Bad Company 2 at the low / middle settings, but wil be a bit tougher with max settings.

fergus1001

I have 4 gig of ram a 2.8 intel dualcore (overclocked)
And a 6850 1gig graphics card
(overclocked to same spec as a 6870)

How do you think I'll fair ?

Upgrading would involve a new mobo new ram and a new processor ( would look at an i7) not really pushed at upgrading at the minute for money reasons (I'm a student)

cherryghost

Spear wrote: »

Official Alpha specs:



Q: What are the minimum hardware recommendations for the Alpha Trial? A: RECOMMENDED WINDOWS PC SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS

• OS: Windows 7 or Vista (SP1)
• Installed: Origin
• CPU: Quadcore @ 2.0 GHz or faster
• RAM: 4GB or more
• Hard Drive: 7.25 GB free disk space
• Video: 256 MB or greater
• DirectX 10 or 11 compatible card with latest drivers (AMD 11.5 or later, nVidia 275.33 or later)
• Sound: DirectX 10 or 11 compatible card
• Internet: broadband connection

Note that these do not necessarily represent the requirements for the final game.

I ran Alpha on an i5 Dual Core. Ran no bodger. Looks sick on my i7 rig though.