Can anyone get 40-50fps on a dual core ?

Spunge

Can anyone achieve above 30 fps on a dual core setup?
I have an e7200@3Ghz, and in heavy fights it will stay very low, in the 20s 30s.
I know i definitely need a quad, and am gonna get one for BF3, but just was curious .

EDIT: btw i was asking about BFBC2

spooky donkey

no you wont get any better from a dual core. its the only gama that I know that benifits for a quad core and was my reason for getting one.

BULLER

spooky donkey wrote: »

no you wont get any better from a dual core. its the only gama that I know that benifits for a quad core and was my reason for getting one.

Civilization V uses 3 cores I think. All new PC games that aren't cheap console ports will/should use more than 2 cores.

johnboysligo

Spunge wrote: »

Can anyone achieve above 30 fps on a dual core setup?
I have an e7200@3Ghz, and in heavy fights it will stay very low, in the 20s 30s.
I know i definitely need a quad, and am gonna get one for BF3, but just was curious .

EDIT: btw i was asking about BFBC2

drop your audio settings to the lowest settings and try again, at the highest settings BC2's audio quality is incredible but all that processing work to figure out what gunfire sounds like relative to your position and the guns position can tax all but the best cpu's.

One really good thing about Dice, they know how to create some impressive audio.

Dublin_Gunner

Spunge wrote: »

Can anyone achieve above 30 fps on a dual core setup?
I have an e7200@3Ghz, and in heavy fights it will stay very low, in the 20s 30s.
I know i definitely need a quad, and am gonna get one for BF3, but just was curious .

EDIT: btw i was asking about BFBC2

What video card do you have? I've never seen limitation to limit it that low before.

BULLER wrote: »

Civilization V uses 3 cores I think. All new PC games that aren't cheap console ports will/should use more than 2 cores.

Civ V can scale to 12 cores. Nvidia unlocked DX11's 'multi threaded rendering' in Civ V, and the results are amazing.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=31520674&postcount=28

Look here:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/293?vs=315

Even the GTX460 768 beats a HD6950 in Civ 5.

lahcen86

Hey

So I have/had the same problem with my set up. Im running a Core 2 Duo E6750 2.66GHz. I haven't overclocked it, which I really should. I have a GTX 460 1GB, and 3 GB of DDR2 RAM for windows 7 32 bit. On average I would get between 25 - 30 fps. After watching some BF3 footage I got really annoyed with the laggy fps I was getting, which over the past while seems to getting worse. Anyway, I decided to try and get the most out of it by doing a few simple things:
-make sure you anti virus software is in game mode, or at least on low settings.
-If you have windows 7, turn off the fancy set up for task bars etc. Use windows 7 basic.
- kill explorer.exe to ease load on CPU.
- kill pretty much any background processes that are not necessary.
- Prioritize the CPU to run Battlefield, use "set priority" in task manager (I select HIGH).

After I did this I have been able to get up to 55 fps at best. Under heavy fire Ill usually get like 35 fps, but its a lot more stable and doesn't drop to ~20 when the **** really hits the fan.

Give this a go and see what you can get, Id love to hear if its works for you too (and how well).


L.

Dublin_Gunner

lahcen86 wrote: »

Hey

So I have/had the same problem with my set up. Im running a Core 2 Duo E6750 2.66GHz. I haven't overclocked it, which I really should. I have a GTX 460 1GB, and 3 GB of DDR2 RAM for windows 7 32 bit. On average I would get between 25 - 30 fps. After watching some BF3 footage I got really annoyed with the laggy fps I was getting, which over the past while seems to getting worse. Anyway, I decided to try and get the most out of it by doing a few simple things:
-make sure you anti virus software is in game mode, or at least on low settings.
-If you have windows 7, turn off the fancy set up for task bars etc. Use windows 7 basic.
- kill explorer.exe to ease load on CPU.
- kill pretty much any background processes that are not necessary.
- Prioritize the CPU to run Battlefield, use "set priority" in task manager (I select HIGH).

After I did this I have been able to get up to 55 fps at best. Under heavy fire Ill usually get like 35 fps, but its a lot more stable and doesn't drop to ~20 when the **** really hits the fan.

Give this a go and see what you can get, Id love to hear if its works for you too (and how well).


L.

All you've said is irrelevant unless you post what settings the game is at!

When I had a 460 1GB on my Phenom II x3, I got easily 50+ average with the following settings:

All game settings at max, HBAO off. 1920x1080, 8xCSAA, 16xAF.

Check your settings, because it really shouldn't be that low, even on a dual core.

Overclock your CPU, and overclock the 460. The 460 screams when its overclocked, one of the best OC:performance increase cards I've ever had.

lahcen86

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

All you've said is irrelevant unless you post what settings the game is at!

When I had a 460 1GB on my Phenom II x3, I got easily 50+ average with the following settings:

All game settings at max, HBAO off. 1920x1080, 8xCSAA, 16xAF.

Check your settings, because it really shouldn't be that low, even on a dual core.

Overclock your CPU, and overclock the 460. The 460 screams when its overclocked, one of the best OC:performance increase cards I've ever had.

Good point there man. Just in work so was rushing the reply.

Anyway,

I use 1920-1080 res. I have all graphics setings at high, except for effects quality which is on medium. Im only using 4xAA, no AF (which I find makes no difference at all), HBAO off.

I have to look into my mobo to find out how to go about over clocking my CPU. I use MSI afterburner to overclock my card, but I haven't really been pushing it though, pussing out I guess :P

Im gonna buy a new mobo and quad core soon though for BC3 so I should really get on over clocking my setup now while im still using it.

Dublin_Gunner

lahcen86 wrote: »

Good point there man. Just in work so was rushing the reply.

Anyway,

I use 1920-1080 res. I have all graphics setings at high, except for effects quality which is on medium. Im only using 4xAA, no AF (which I find makes no difference at all), HBAO off.

I have to look into my mobo to find out how to go about over clocking my CPU. I use MSI afterburner to overclock my card, but I haven't really been pushing it though, pussing out I guess :P

Im gonna buy a new mobo and quad core soon though for BC3 so I should really get on over clocking my setup now while im still using it.

Always use 16xAF. Little or no performanc epenalty, but textures look so much sharper.

The 460 will go to 850Mhz no problem. I ran mine at 870Mhz core for gaming 24/7.

You'll need to bump the voltage a bit in afterburner though.

Even with a dual core you should get much better frames.

jesus_thats_gre

I currently have a dual core E8400 and a Radeon 5870. The framerate is starting to bother me but I just can't be arsed upgrading to a quad core processor.

Does anyone fancy sourcing a processor and installing it for me? Will pay 50 euro

KilOit

jesus_thats_gre wrote: »

I currently have a dual core E8400 and a Radeon 5870. The framerate is starting to bother me but I just can't be arsed upgrading to a quad core processor.

Does anyone fancy sourcing a processor and installing it for me? Will pay 50 euro

I have the same specs, ain't too bothered right now, get about 30fps on bc2 with max settings in heavy combat.
you'll want to upgrade the mobo aswell since that cpu is a old socket and the quad cpu's in that range aren't all that better than the E8400.
Wait out a few months and upgrade it for bf3, might get better kit for lower price at that stage, but that setup runs bc2 with ease

jesus_thats_gre

Yeah, will probably end up doing that. Was toying with a Q9300 or something.

What config are you using?

cherryghost

Just to iterate, the dual core i3's and i5's can handle more than 30fps, my dual core i5 can handle up to 50-60fps maxed out without any problem. The i series processors are far more optimized than the Core 2 Duo counterparts.

Of course I'd only recommend such a setup if you're on a very tight budget and even at that I'd probably recommend you go for the cheaper Phenom II X4's instead.

If you just need a CPU upgrade on your PC, then adverts.ie would be the best way to go, a nice cheap Q6600 or something would be right down your alley. Otherwise you can probably go for the Q8300 which goes for between 120-140 new, and can overclock to about 2.8ghz on stock fan. Its stock speed should be more than adequate for good BC2 performance (ie 60fps) as long as you have a GPU that can keep up.

Spunge

Im running an e7200@3.2Ghz and a 6870 1GB.
I get pretty much the same FPS with my 6870 as i did with my previous 4850, so obviously the CPU is a huge-ass bottleneck.

Id rather not have to upgrade the whole mobo, ram and new cpu, since ill need to get a new socket for a proper upgrade, but if i cant find a really cheap 2nd hand socket 775 quad-core im gonna have too.

Should i aim for i5 over the phenoms, i know they are more expensive but surely they are more future proof.

cherryghost

There's a Q6600 here for 100, but I wouldn't pay any more than 70 max.

There's a Q8300 here for 99, but I wouldn't pay more than 80ish, unless he has proof of purchase that its actually brand new.


The quad's would be sufficient for smooth gaming. If you want to upgrade have tight budget, go for the Phenom's. They'll do the job, nothing spectacular. Just don't expect a massive performance jump over the 775 Quad's.

The 2nd gen i5's are stunning speeds and very good prices, if you need raw power then get them, and if you have the money of course. They'll do way more than you currently need and will last a few years!