Need upgrade for BC2

[Zen_]

I have a 4870X2, and I can max it with HBAO off. HBAO on causes lag spikes (and I don't think it looks as good anyway).

I play with HBAO off and all settings on low with DX9. Will be using DX10 when I build my new rig and finally upgrade to Win 7 for DX10/11 though.

Again, from my first post FPS is acceptable for me right now (~45-100, average about 65) and I don't really care about eye candy, the problem is physics and FPS dips in large servers. For instance, nearby wall starts collapsing from a tank shell, FPS dips to under 40 and it's hard to aim. Also noticing a lot of FPS dips with sighted weapons and shaking from explosions that make it difficult to aim. Ever since BF1942 introduced vehicles and large multiplayer server it seems to be a rule of thumb that you always want as much raw CPU as possible to avoid huge FPS dips from physics.

I am kinda curious what sort of FPS people with high end rigs (i7, 5850+) get on 32 player servers.

 

[BarbaricSoul]

I am kinda curious what sort of FPS people with high end rigs (i7, 5850+) get on 32 player servers.

Haven't played it online, but single player, everything turned on and maxed out, I get between 60-80 FPS at 1920*1200 resolution.

 

[TRIPTEX_CAN]

a quad would help, but 775 quads arent worth it - thus get the viddie first.

New 775 quads for the money are not really worth it but BC2 runs like gangbusters on quads. The CPU core scaling in this game is impressive.

@ Zen - If you can get a used s775 quad for around $100-150 USD it's worth it to go that rout. I got my quad for a bit more than that this winter and it's been my best CPU yet. Despite being out of production for a while now S775 system are still very capable for games. With that said I think you should dump that mobo for something a little better. A mobo that support at least 4Gb is ESSENTIAL. Finding a good deal on a used mobo/CPU combo would be the best think you could to. I got my mobo/RAM/CPU all from the buy/sell section here at TPU.


You specifically asked for advice in upgrading for BC2 and here it is. Quad cores MAKE A HUGE DIFFERENCE. You should have at least 4gb of ram, BC2 wont use all of it but your system processes + BC2 will use quite a bit. Any GPU worth upgrading MUST have 1Gb on board not just for BC2 but most current games and most future will make great use of the extra memory on the card.

I read some people in here saying that a quad is not necessary in this game but it is simply the most important factor for playing this game the way it was designed.

Battlefield Bad Company 2 BETA
This was just released a few days ago and dispite some server issues, has been filled with players non stop.
This game takes after Bad Company that was a console game which was very successful.
To get these results I ran a good 30 minute game online. I wanted to get a long game in to insure a good average fps. I used FRAPS to record my results.
Tests run in 1920x1080 4xAA HBAO OFF VSync OFF
Dual Core

Quad Core

Well thats a 2:1 performance ratio. Something tells me this game supports quad cores.

http://www.overclock.net/pc-games/659536-contagion-review-dual-core-vs-quad.html

http://www.legionhardware.com/articles_pages/battlefield_bad_company_2_tuning_guide,7.html

 

[Wile E]

I play with HBAO off and all settings on low with DX9. Will be using DX10 when I build my new rig and finally upgrade to Win 7 for DX10/11 though.

Again, from my first post FPS is acceptable for me right now (~45-100, average about 65) and I don't really care about eye candy, the problem is physics and FPS dips in large servers. For instance, nearby wall starts collapsing from a tank shell, FPS dips to under 40 and it's hard to aim. Also noticing a lot of FPS dips with sighted weapons and shaking from explosions that make it difficult to aim. Ever since BF1942 introduced vehicles and large multiplayer server it seems to be a rule of thumb that you always want as much raw CPU as possible to avoid huge FPS dips from physics.

I am kinda curious what sort of FPS people with high end rigs (i7, 5850+) get on 32 player servers.

Even if you really need the power of a quad, buying a 775 quad and a 4GB ram kit is still your cheapest solution. Q9400's go for $190 and a decent 2x2GB 800Mhz CAS4 kit goes for $100. That's still a hell of a lot cheaper than a full build. Even better is grabbing a used 775 quad.

If your mobo didn't support quads, I would agree with the Phenom II build, but you have a mobo that's already capable of supporting a quad, with quads available for it at reasonable prices, so the Phenom II build is an unnecessary expense.

The money you save by getting a 775 quad and 4GB ram kit allows you more money for the video card, which is still the most important factor. The 775 quad upgrade is the best bet in your case.

 

[boomstik360]

775 quads dont really have any good value for money chips.


IMO video card first (my 2x 4870's cant max it out smoothly all the time, his 4770 would be struggling) and then work on a core system upgrade next (i5/AM3)

I was just meaning that along with new GPU instead of a total full upgrade.

 

[Mussels]

Wait what? Your two 4870s have a problem with it? Why? My single 5850 eats it up.



Dude if two 4870s have an issue running it maxed out the 5770 will get raped.

i get lag spikes at 1080P maxed out with 4x AA in DX10.1

i guess its possible its related to me having just a dual core, but shit if thats the case people are screwed, i've got a monster of a dual core...

No I know lol I just wanted to back myself up anyway. Mussels have you tried the 10.4 beta's? Sooo much better lol

no i havent, they dont work on 4K cards yet. i need the new ones to be released this week.

 

[Lionheart]

Well if you've got the money and want to fully upgrade, go with the AM3 setup you mentioned, if your limited in funds, go with mussels idea and grab a HD5770 and a 4gig kit of RAM

 

[BarbaricSoul]

i get lag spikes at 1080P maxed out with 4x AA in DX10.1

i guess its possible its related to me having just a dual core, but shit if thats the case people are screwed, i've got a monster of a dual core...

Well the game keeps my Q9650 1 core maxed and the other 3 cores loaded at 50-70%. Think the days of dual cores being a good choice for a gaming rig are about over. I do have to disagree with your statement that a socket 775 quad isn't worth upgrading to. It gonna be a long time before Ill actually have a need to replace my quad. Granted, I would not advise buying a brand new +$300 q9650 or a $280 9550, but if the OP could find a used one for around $150-200, it would definently be worth buying instead of building a whole new AMD rig which would not out perform a 775 quad system.

 

[TRIPTEX_CAN]

Well the game keeps my Q9650 1 core maxed and the other 3 cores loaded at 50-70%. Think the days of dual cores being a good choice for a gaming rig are about over.

If you set affinity to 3 cores (removing the pegged core) and then set it back to 4 cores you'll see ~70% usage on all 4 cores.

 

[OnBoard]

If you set affinity to 3 cores (removing the pegged core) and then set it back to 4 cores you'll see ~70% usage on all 4 cores.

Is that remembered or one time thing? Got to try it, not that I think it will bring performance increase, just that it would be nicer not to max one core if it's not needed.

edit: tried that, worked pretty nice. Highest core was hitting 78%, two others in the 60% range and one in 25%.

 

[TRIPTEX_CAN]

Is that remembered or one time thing? Got to try it, not that I think it will bring performance increase, just that it would be nicer not to max one core if it's not needed.

It has to be done manually as far as I know unless you know a way to remember affinity setting per process... I've never really looked for a way. Performance should be about the same but the game should crash less if you don't keep one core maxed out.

This idea came from exodusprime1337.

 

[Mussels]

Well the game keeps my Q9650 1 core maxed and the other 3 cores loaded at 50-70%. Think the days of dual cores being a good choice for a gaming rig are about over. I do have to disagree with your statement that a socket 775 quad isn't worth upgrading to. It gonna be a long time before Ill actually have a need to replace my quad. Granted, I would not advise buying a brand new +$300 q9650 or a $280 9550, but if the OP could find a used one for around $150-200, it would definently be worth buying instead of building a whole new AMD rig which would not out perform a 775 quad system.

the value for moneys just not there unless you can get one cheap... all the affordable 775 quads have tiny amounts of cache and low multis

 

[crazyeyesreaper]

if i remember correctly a 940be was pretty much on par with 9550/9650 and half the price and a 955 with DDR3 was about the same. so i dont think 775 is that much better Barbaric. but eitherway any quad should show an improvement in this game even my buddies old Phenom 9600 at stock is faster then his athlon II x2 240 in that particular game even with the x2 at 3.6ghz the extra cores on the old phenom give better stable frame rates. So in that sense even a cheapo Athlon II x4 would show a marked improvement so... $100 athlon II x4 $75 785g board $90 DDR3 4gig kit and problem solved on the cheap really

 

[Mussels]

crazy: athlon II's take a pretty big performance hit from the lack of cache.

 

[MT Alex]

I want a 120mm tower cooler that can mount with the fan pushing air out the back rather than up into the PSU. Doesn't look like the CNPS10X Quiet or HDT-S1283 can do that. Anyone know about the Hyper 212 Plus or Thermalright Ultra 120?

The HDT-1283, as well as any cooler, can easily be set up to any orientaion: http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=100689

Good luck.

 

[crazyeyesreaper]

and you miss my point mussels phenom 9600 with same mobo and gpu ram shows far more stable frame rates not as large a gap as Triptex posted but when theres over a 1ghz difference old arch vs new arch and the old arch shows its better when allowed to apply itself still holds value i know tiger direct nearly gives away the old quads and my major point here is athlon II x2 at 3.6ghz is an old dog compared to a first gen Phenom 9600 in THIS particular game granted the x2 steam rolls it in everything else but it does make you wonder if games were as multithreaded as BC2 was you really wouldnt need the cpus we have now lol

eitherway if his mobo supports it just grab a used q6600 on the cheap overclock it a bit and just hold out for now. would be my suggestion

 

[Mussels]

a 9600 is a good choice, i was merely stating WHY its better than an athlon II - its faster per clock thanks to the cache, let alone cores

 

[BarbaricSoul]

the value for moneys just not there unless you can get one cheap... all the affordable 775 quads have tiny amounts of cache and low multis

read my post alittle closer Mussels

Granted, I would not advise buying a brand new +$300 q9650 or a $280 9550, but if the OP could find a used one for around $150-200, it would definently be worth buying

Never said anything about advising him to buy new. A q9550 just sold for $165 in TPU's B/S/T forum. A deal like that is what I was reffering to.

so i dont think 775 is that much better Barbaric.

Wasn't saying the 775 quad would be faster, I said the AMD quad set up would not be faster than the 775 quad.

instead of building a whole new AMD rig which would not out perform a 775 quad system.

Why spend the money to build a whole new system when he can upgrade his current system for less money and still get the same performance as building a new AMD system?

 

[Dyno]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frostbite_Engine

Recommended Frostbite PC Specifications
Processor: 2.0 GHz Quadcore
RAM: 2GB
Graphics card: GeForce GTX 260 / ATI Radeon 4870
Graphics memory: 512MB
OS: Windows Vista or Windows 7
Direct-X: 10, 11

Note:
These are current specifications announced by DICE for current PC game projects with the Frostbite engine and could be subject to change depending upon the game(s).

GTX 260 vs. ATI 4770
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-charts-2009/compare,1186.html?prod[2463]=on&prod[2482]=on&prod[2481]=on

BattleField Bad Company 2 Benchmark
http://www.overclock.net/8335172-post1.html

 

[crazyeyesreaper]

read my post alittle closer Mussels



Never said anything about advising him to buy new. A q9550 just sold for $165 in TPU's B/S/T forum. A deal like that is what I was reffering to.




Wasn't saying the 775 quad would be faster, I said the AMD quad set up would not be faster than the 775 quad.



Why spend the money to build a whole new system when he can upgrade his current system for less money and still get the same performance as building a new AMD system?

which is why i suggested a Q6600 used there a great alternative and oced to 3ghz they will be more then enough think about it if a phenom 9600 at 2.3ghz with low cache can max BC2 with better minimum frame rates at a dual core at 3.6 tells me a q6600 is more then enough as its far faster then a Phenom 9600

my major point here is upgrade as cheap as possible to get more longevity out of the system and then when the time comes do a full overhaul to a new rig later q6600 will give him more muscle at a cheaper price and will get the job done.

also mussels you gotta remember the older phenoms had tiny L 3 cache aka 2mbs L3

 

[Wile E]

the value for moneys just not there unless you can get one cheap... all the affordable 775 quads have tiny amounts of cache and low multis

It has more value for the OP's money as opposed to having to buy a whole new setup.

I disagree with you Mussels. The 775 quad clearly makes more sense for him in this case. He already has a board capable of using it.

If his board didn't support Yorkfield, I would agree with you, but his board does, so it's definitely the most logical choice. For the same price as the AMD and board, he can have a Q9505, which is the better cpu than a 955. Or, he can save himself $50 over both options, and just go with a Q9400, which will give him exactly what he wants, and leave him a little cash in his pocket for a game or a new mouse or hookers or something.

And lets face it, hookers > Phenom II.

 

[boomstik360]

It has more value for the OP's money as opposed to having to buy a whole new setup.

I disagree with you Mussels. The 775 quad clearly makes more sense for him in this case. He already has a board capable of using it.

If his board didn't support Yorkfield, I would agree with you, but his board does, so it's definitely the most logical choice. For the same price as the AMD and board, he can have a Q9505, which is the better cpu than a 955. Or, he can save himself $50 over both options, and just go with a Q9400, which will give him exactly what he wants, and leave him a little cash in his pocket for a game or a new mouse or hookers or something.

And lets face it, hookers > Phenom II.

Wow.

If I were him, I would find a used cheap quad core, and buy a nice 5770/5830. That should be fine for a nice while.

 

[Zen_]

I looked into used 775 quads, Q6600 is around $150 and Q9550 around $200. Problem is though I don't have an enthusiast grade mobo that can do high FSB speeds. I've read elsewhere that it (MSI Neo3-F) will do around 380, maybe 400 MHz if you're lucky. So I wouldn't be able to do much overclocking with the lower multiplier quads unfortunately.

Figured the difference between upgrading to a new AM3 setup or upgrading what I have now would be under $100 anyway. Might be the difference between a 5770 or 5850 but I don't think the 5850's will fit in my case due to the length. Still looking for size info on the dual fan Gigabyte 5850 with the power connectors on the side rather the rear.

And thanks for those links TRIPTEX_MTL, that was exactly what I've been looking for (dual vs. quad online).

 

[Jamborhgini313]

I run the game at 1920x1080 16xCSAA HBAO On High quality on a 4Ghz i7 and GTX 295 stock. On a 32 Player map, I get around 50-70FPS avg and 35 min