Will Battlefield 3 utilize 6 or 8 cores?

Supposedly it will use 4+ core CPUs. But I haven't been able to find anything from the dev's.
 
It uses more than 4 threads, so it will use more than 4 cores.

But that isn't the same thing as saying you will get a performance increase from more than 4 cores.

This is something that seems to be missed a lot to when people discuss this, especially when using task manager to point out core utilization.
 
ive seen it used upto 90%+ of my amd FX 8120 in co-op so it easily will use plenty of cores

normal MP uses around 75-80% for me.
 
BF3 CPU Performance at bit-tech and techspot. Based on those it looks like the game will use Multi threads, but past 2cpus you will not get (it does not need) 100% usage. Also clockspeed doesn't seem to matter much either. She's a GPU bound game through and through. (Read yourself to get more articulate conclusions)

Based
 
Or is 4 the max?

In the beta my G19 perfomance manager was looking at max 80% CPU utilization (hyperthreading is off). Also the memory usage was much higher also. But now with the retail BF3. I am getting around 50%-60% CPU utilization (hyperthreading is off). Also the memory usage isn't as high as it was in the beta. So far it appears it does use four cores. But my other two cores remain idle from the looks of it.
 
BF3 CPU Performance at bit-tech and techspot. Based on those it looks like the game will use Multi threads, but past 2cpus you will not get (it does not need) 100% usage. Also clockspeed doesn't seem to matter much either. She's a GPU bound game through and through. (Read yourself to get more articulate conclusions)

Based

Someone tell that to my Core2Duo 2.66ghz and 800mhz DDR2. My ATI 5850 should be able to handle this game just fine with high settings, but my frame rate isn't smooth at all. For instance, I can turn everything up to ultra and get 20-40 fps. When I set it to medium settings, I get the same frame rate. The only conclusion is my older C2D and DDR2 is the bottleneck. I want them to bench mark the game using a older cpu like mine with a decent videocard and let see if they come to the same conclusion.

ive seen it used upto 90%+ of my amd FX 8120 in co-op so it easily will use plenty of cores

normal MP uses around 75-80% for me.

Hey, what videocard do you have and how is your performance? I am thinking about going AMD this time (on a very light budget for the next 6 months and I really need an upgrade to my C2D). BF3 and a few other games are really pushing my system, and I know my videocard is up to the challenge to run these games on high settings and give me at at least 50+ smooth fps. What say you?
 
BF3 CPU Performance at bit-tech and techspot. Based on those it looks like the game will use Multi threads, but past 2cpus you will not get (it does not need) 100% usage. Also clockspeed doesn't seem to matter much either. She's a GPU bound game through and through. (Read yourself to get more articulate conclusions)

Based

Thanks for this... I was wondering which to upgrade between my Phenom 2 and my HD 4850.... looks like its the 4850 (even tho I play on all med-low settings..). I don't care about graphics almost at all, but smooth gameplay is a must, and this card can't squeeze out solid FPS at all ....

looks like this ancient AMD quad core of mine is gonna keep its spot for years to come...
 
Someone tell that to my Core2Duo 2.66ghz and 800mhz DDR2. My ATI 5850 should be able to handle this game just fine with high settings, but my frame rate isn't smooth at all. For instance, I can turn everything up to ultra and get 20-40 fps. When I set it to medium settings, I get the same frame rate. The only conclusion is my older C2D and DDR2 is the bottleneck. I want them to bench mark the game using a older cpu like mine with a decent videocard and let see if they come to the same conclusion.



Hey, what videocard do you have and how is your performance? I am thinking about going AMD this time (on a very light budget for the next 6 months and I really need an upgrade to my C2D). BF3 and a few other games are really pushing my system, and I know my videocard is up to the challenge to run these games on high settings and give me at at least 50+ smooth fps. What say you?

i got an i5 2500k for $180, z68 $130 (could have gone much cheaper mb), 8gig ram for $50. So for $350 have an awesome system. My son is using an e8400 with a 5850 and it is running great for him.
 
Someone tell that to my Core2Duo 2.66ghz and 800mhz DDR2. My ATI 5850 should be able to handle this game just fine with high settings, but my frame rate isn't smooth at all. For instance, I can turn everything up to ultra and get 20-40 fps. When I set it to medium settings, I get the same frame rate. The only conclusion is my older C2D and DDR2 is the bottleneck. I want them to bench mark the game using a older cpu like mine with a decent videocard and let see if they come to the same conclusion.



Hey, what videocard do you have and how is your performance? I am thinking about going AMD this time (on a very light budget for the next 6 months and I really need an upgrade to my C2D). BF3 and a few other games are really pushing my system, and I know my videocard is up to the challenge to run these games on high settings and give me at at least 50+ smooth fps. What say you?

i have 2 6870's but imo if you are getting a new mb and cpu go with a 2500k.

theres really no reason to go amd atm. i went with it because i already had the mb for it.
 
i got an i5 2500k for $180, z68 $130 (could have gone much cheaper mb), 8gig ram for $50. So for $350 have an awesome system. My son is using an e8400 with a 5850 and it is running great for him.

Not bad. That's about in my range too. That e8400 is 3ghz. Wonder maybe my slower ghz might be the issue along with the 800mhz DDR2. Wwhich z68 mobo you got with? And I assume Newegg? That's where I generally get all of my stuff.

i have 2 6870's but imo if you are getting a new mb and cpu go with a 2500k.

theres really no reason to go amd atm. i went with it because i already had the mb for it.

Yeah, I was only going to go with AMD because it's relatively cheaper. I know in the long run I would probably regret it. But considering that the i5 2500 is so cheap, spending an extra $80 on the whole combo would be more beneficial. OK, i5 2500 it is :) (ps, been a while, what speed of ram would everyone recommend? I most likely won't be overclocking, I prefer stability over that extra % performance. I will be going with 8 gigs, 4 gigs just won't cut it with the amount of stuff I run at one time lol)
 
Not bad. That's about in my range too. That e8400 is 3ghz. Wonder maybe my slower ghz might be the issue along with the 800mhz DDR2. Wwhich z68 mobo you got with? And I assume Newegg? That's where I generally get all of my stuff.



Yeah, I was only going to go with AMD because it's relatively cheaper. I know in the long run I would probably regret it. But considering that the i5 2500 is so cheap, spending an extra $80 on the whole combo would be more beneficial. OK, i5 2500 it is :) (ps, been a while, what speed of ram would everyone recommend? I most likely won't be overclocking, I prefer stability over that extra % performance. I will be going with 8 gigs, 4 gigs just won't cut it with the amount of stuff I run at one time lol)

i had an e8400 and upgraded to the i5, wow what a change. I normally get everything from newegg as well, but this month microcenter has the i5 2500k for $180 and $60 off any z68 board. I picked up the mis z68a-gd65 g3 for only $139. Bought my memory from newegg for $50

with msi, they have an overclock for dummies button called oc genie. Press it and you get instant stable 4.2ghz from the i5/i7.
 
Back
Top