Minimum card needed to play BF3 on high settings?

[bigsandwich732]

With BF3 coming out I'm going to upgrade my card and need some suggestions. My processor (x6 athlon)and PSU (750 watts) are fine but I need a card upgrade. I don't think the recommended specs for BF3 are out yet and since its a new engine I'm not sure what I would need.

I'm not worried about running it on Ultra, but I would like to be able to run it on High settings with great FPS. The most I would like to spend is 200-250 bucks.

[Fuzzykins]

We can't tell you until the game comes out.

[georgevonfranken]

Ya we have no way of knowing yes so either you wait or get something now

[Herecius]

Probably a safe bet that it'll require a planet-smashingly powerful card.

[Fuzzykins]

Probably a safe bet that it'll require a planet-smashingly powerful card.

The difference between high and ultra in some of the most recent games tends to be a massive performance gap. I'm willing to bet most average graphics cards will handle high alright, but it'll take a pretty nice GPU to run ultra.

[Herecius]

The difference between high and ultra in some of the most recent games tends to be a massive performance gap. I'm willing to bet most average graphics cards will handle high alright, but it'll take a pretty nice GPU to run ultra.

I suppose it would depend on your definition of what an acceptable framerate for an FPS like BF3 would be. :P

[Asrialol]

I'm pretty sure the HD5770 can handle it just fine.

[Fuzzykins]

I'm pretty sure the HD5770 can handle it just fine.

I beg to differ.
Don't quote me on this.
For high, I'd say you'll get acceptable framerates on a 560.
For ULTRA, it'll take a 580, no doubt.

[Saithes]

BF3 is already set to fully utilize DirectX 11 so I have no doubt that it'll take some beefy setup to run it. Just go run Heaven 2.5 and see your performance in that since its the closest thing right now to utilizing DirectX 11 at its fullest.

[bigsandwich732]

Thanks for the replies. Most likely will get http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814133380

I'm not going to buy it till the game comes out. Maybe a card higher then that will drop a few bucks by the end of October.

[Deleted]

We can't tell you until the game comes out.

EA recommended the following specs for Battlefield 3 prior to the E3.


Minimal Requirements

Windows Vista / 7
Dual-Core Processor with 2,0 GHz
2 GByte RAM
GPU with 512 MByte dedicated video-memory (DirectX 10 / DirectX 11)
15 GByte free harddrive space (10 GByte with the digital version)

Recommended Specs

Windows 7 (64 Bit)
Quadcore processor
4 GByte RAM
GPU with 1 GByte dedicated video-memory (DirectX 11)
15 GByte free harddrive space (10 GByte with the digital version)

Source (German): http://www.gamestar.de/spiele/battle...2,2323438.html

In summery, the requirements are roughly equal to Bad Compay 2 but you need a DX 10 card. 64 bit OPs is also highly recommended. I'm confident a Geforce 460 should be able to handle it just fine as long as you don't go above 1080p.

[Fuzzykins]

Recommendations for games are bullshit. You need a 1GB DX11 GPU. My 450 fits that requirement. I doubt I'll see my 450 run it on high.

[Ezzme]

GTX 560 Ti, it can do the job, DX11, Higher than 1080p resolutions, and the fact it can easily play Crysis and Crysis two on high or max settings.

It's also very cheap, 250$ for a superclocked edition which is pretty much a GTX570 which is more.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-610-_-Product

[Doylez]

I'm probably going to upgrade from this one
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-518-_-Product
to this one
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-578-_-Product
for Battlefield.

[Hellfury]

The ppl forget that BF3 also will come for PS3 and a Xbox360, The PC version while Iam sure will be bette, it wont be that much different from the consoles for obvious reasons so Iam sure a 6950 or a 560ti will run it just fine on highest possible settings at 1080p.

[Fuzzykins]

The game also runs on a PS3 and a Xbox360, The PC version while better for sure wont be that much diferent from the consoles so Iam sure a 6950 or a 560ti will run it just fine on high settings at 1080p

Crysis 2's custom settings beg to differ.

[Hellfury]

Crysis 2's custom settings beg to differ.

So? Crysis2 at max possible custom settings run just fine on a 6950 or 560ti. So you are just proving my point

[Hellfury]

Except unlike pretty much every single title since 2005 or so, BF3 is designed for the PC, and THEN being ported to consoles, not the other way around. PC Gamers get the best quality, and console gamers get better quality than most other games on console. DICE have even stated they intend for it to be this way, and not to simply cater to the console market leaving the PC gamers disappointed that another company decided to shaft them with a huge title (look at Crysis 2, we're still waiting on DX11 support, not to mention the texture quality in it, while not bad, certainly isn't anything to shout about).

I know that and I applaud DICE but still Iam sure the Consoles version wont be that much different, PC version will have more geometry(dx11 tessellation) and I hope higher resolution textures(where crysis2 failed), probably higher draw distance, but thats it they cant stray that much far.

I dont think will be like Arma II that needs a monster PC.

[Saithes]

Don't forget that BF3 is going to have 64 person multiplayer and if you think WoW is intense just wait for that lol

[Saithes]

You'd be surprised. I imagine consoles have texture size limits of 256x256 (maybe 512x512), while PC's can theoretically handle anything, where 2048x2048 is become more and more common for "HD"/Ultra modes. I'm not sure of the exact hardware in PS3 or 360, but i don't imagine they've got the power behind them to handle realistic large scale particle emitters like the PC can, at least not directly via the graphics section of the chip.

I've not looked into ARMA 2 yet but i have heard they're releasing (or have released) a free multiplayer version soon/quite recently.

With that said, i do believe it'll look truly breathtaking on every format



I wonder if that includes bots
To be honest, 256 bots on BF2 (the maximum allowed) comes close to tearing down my 2600K, but it's well worth the drop in FPS in order to experience it. BF has been about massive skirmish since that title, so i expect BF3 to not disappoint at all. 64 Players was my favourite whenever i did go online (nothing short of awesome), and i guess playing AV in WoW reminded me of that style of gameplay (back when teamwork was so crucial).

Yeah I loved BF2 but I haven't tried it on my 2600K @5GHz + my 6970s yet... Was sort of disappointed with BFBC2 though so I'm hoping BF3 lives up to what they are saying and showing. AMRA2 was sort of a disappointment too but it definitely is hardware intensive.