#1 Edited by JeZuzzz (8 posts) -

Hey all, I kinda want to know if my new pc will be able to run games like bf3/4 smoothly.

These are the specs I know for now;

Windows 8 (Dont know which version)

Processor: i7 4770 3.40Ghz

Videocard (Will be overclocked): AMD Radeon 7700 graphics

Memory: 8GB

Free space (ssd): 140GB + 1TB

I will give it maximal energy for the best performance in the configuration settings.

#2 Edited by 04dcarraher (18915 posts) -

7700 series are weak gaming gpu's, Need to find out which one is it a 7750, 7770 or 7790? if 7750 you will be forced to use some low settings. You will have to set BF4 to medium settings if your playing at 1080p to get around 60 fps average with a 7770.

#3 Posted by JeZuzzz (8 posts) -

Maybe I'll buy the new R9 series videocard, does that makes much difference?

#5 Posted by 04dcarraher (18915 posts) -

@jezuzzz said:

Maybe I'll buy the new R9 series videocard, does that makes much difference?

Yes it does make a huge difference. But few problems need to solved first, What PSU do you have and will the computer case fit a large gpu.

#6 Edited by PredatorRules (7047 posts) -

@jezuzzz said:

Hey all, I kinda want to know if my new pc will be able to run games like bf3/4 smoothly.

These are the specs I know for now;

Windows 8 (Dont know which version)

Processor: i7 4770 3.40Ghz

Videocard (Will be overclocked): AMD Radeon 7700 graphics

Memory: 8GB

Free space (ssd): 140GB + 1TB

I will give it maximal energy for the best performance in the configuration settings.

get cheaper CPU like the 4670 and a stronger GPU like the GTX760 or R9 280/X

Also SSD is not a must so you can get even a better GPU this way like the GTX770 or even the 780/R9 290

#7 Posted by Rousie14 (52 posts) -

Basically whats been said above, if your wallet ain't that big sacrifice a GPU upgrade for a slight CPU downgrade, it'll pay off in the long run for a game like Battlefield 3.

#8 Posted by JeZuzzz (8 posts) -

Thanks for the information!

#9 Edited by kraken2109 (12948 posts) -

I'm assuming this is a prebuilt, where are you getting it from?

#10 Posted by Horgen (109953 posts) -

@jezuzzz said:

Hey all, I kinda want to know if my new pc will be able to run games like bf3/4 smoothly.

These are the specs I know for now;

Windows 8 (Dont know which version)

Processor: i7 4770 3.40Ghz

Videocard (Will be overclocked): AMD Radeon 7700 graphics

Memory: 8GB

Free space (ssd): 140GB + 1TB

I will give it maximal energy for the best performance in the configuration settings.

get cheaper CPU like the 4670 and a stronger GPU like the GTX760 or R9 280/X

Also SSD is not a must so you can get even a better GPU this way like the GTX770 or even the 780/R9 290

4670K so you can overclock it. Need Z87 mobo for that though.

#11 Posted by GabranthXIII (989 posts) -

Get the i7, a lot of games are already asking for processors like 4770k or 3770. For example Shadow of mordor and Watch dogs.

#12 Edited by 04dcarraher (18915 posts) -

@GabranthXIII said:

Get the i7, a lot of games are already asking for processors like 4770k or 3770. For example Shadow of mordor and Watch dogs.

Not a valid reason, alot of those same games are recommending AMD FX 8's along with those i7's. There is only a couple of reasons why these developers are suggesting i7's FX 8's for recommended specs.

1. The Games do support 8 threads so you get abit more performance vs i5's AMD quads/hexacores.

2. They are being promoted to get a *bonus* for suggesting both brands best cpu's

3. Or the game/s coding with the lack of correct cpu usage require hefty cpu processing from both brands best cpu's to get the job done right. Plenty of examples of developers suggesting the best cpu's and or upper end ones when in fact only use a portion of the cpu's processing power and have to use brute force from 1-2 cores to get through. And if that is the case the AMD cpu's are in trouble.

Chances are its combination of 1&2. The difference between i5's and i7's even with games that make use of 8 threads is small your talking about single number digits for FPS. And i7's processing power is nearly the same as i5's. And then i5's perform equal or better then those FX 8's with those games that make use of 8 threads and are usually on the coat tails of the i7 within 2-3 fps average behind

#13 Edited by GabranthXIII (989 posts) -

@04dcarraher said:

@GabranthXIII said:

Get the i7, a lot of games are already asking for processors like 4770k or 3770. For example Shadow of mordor and Watch dogs.

Not a valid reason, alot of those same games are recommending AMD FX 8's along with those i7's. There is only a couple of reasons why these developers are suggesting i7's FX 8's for recommended specs.

1. The Games do support 8 threads so you get abit more performance vs i5's AMD quads/hexacores.

2. They are being promoted to get a *bonus* for suggesting both brands best cpu's

3. Or the game/s coding with the lack of correct cpu usage require hefty cpu processing from both brands best cpu's to get the job done right. Plenty of examples of developers suggesting the best cpu's and or upper end ones when in fact only use a portion of the cpu's processing power and have to use brute force from 1-2 cores to get through. And if that is the case the AMD cpu's are in trouble.

Chances are its combination of 1&2. The difference between i5's and i7's even with games that make use of 8 threads is small your talking about single number digits for FPS. And i7's processing power is nearly the same as i5's. And then i5's perform equal or better then those FX 8's with those games that make use of 8 threads and are usually on the coat tails of the i7 within 2-3 fps average behind

@04dcarraher said:

@GabranthXIII said:

Get the i7, a lot of games are already asking for processors like 4770k or 3770. For example Shadow of mordor and Watch dogs.

Not a valid reason, alot of those same games are recommending AMD FX 8's along with those i7's. There is only a couple of reasons why these developers are suggesting i7's FX 8's for recommended specs.

1. The Games do support 8 threads so you get abit more performance vs i5's AMD quads/hexacores.

2. They are being promoted to get a *bonus* for suggesting both brands best cpu's

3. Or the game/s coding with the lack of correct cpu usage require hefty cpu processing from both brands best cpu's to get the job done right. Plenty of examples of developers suggesting the best cpu's and or upper end ones when in fact only use a portion of the cpu's processing power and have to use brute force from 1-2 cores to get through. And if that is the case the AMD cpu's are in trouble.

Chances are its combination of 1&2. The difference between i5's and i7's even with games that make use of 8 threads is small your talking about single number digits for FPS. And i7's processing power is nearly the same as i5's. And then i5's perform equal or better then those FX 8's with those games that make use of 8 threads and are usually on the coat tails of the i7 within 2-3 fps average behind

It's better to be safe than sorry. I would pay the 70 extra and get an i7. It was already shown that in heavy cpu situations like BF4 MP the i7 shines compared to i5's. 20 more minimum fps and about 15 more average. It's definitely worth it for next gen games. I think Watch dogs will see similar results.

#14 Posted by PredatorRules (7047 posts) -

Get the i7, a lot of games are already asking for processors like 4770k or 3770. For example Shadow of mordor and Watch dogs.

I like the phrase of "a lot of games" and then you give the exact 2 future games that require those i7 CPUs, is something innovative or graphically stunning about them? No, they called bad ports, it's cheaper to buy a console for such games.

#15 Posted by 04dcarraher (18915 posts) -


@04dcarraher said:

@GabranthXIII said:

Get the i7, a lot of games are already asking for processors like 4770k or 3770. For example Shadow of mordor and Watch dogs.

Not a valid reason, alot of those same games are recommending AMD FX 8's along with those i7's. There is only a couple of reasons why these developers are suggesting i7's FX 8's for recommended specs.

1. The Games do support 8 threads so you get abit more performance vs i5's AMD quads/hexacores.

2. They are being promoted to get a *bonus* for suggesting both brands best cpu's

3. Or the game/s coding with the lack of correct cpu usage require hefty cpu processing from both brands best cpu's to get the job done right. Plenty of examples of developers suggesting the best cpu's and or upper end ones when in fact only use a portion of the cpu's processing power and have to use brute force from 1-2 cores to get through. And if that is the case the AMD cpu's are in trouble.

Chances are its combination of 1&2. The difference between i5's and i7's even with games that make use of 8 threads is small your talking about single number digits for FPS. And i7's processing power is nearly the same as i5's. And then i5's perform equal or better then those FX 8's with those games that make use of 8 threads and are usually on the coat tails of the i7 within 2-3 fps average behind

It's better to be safe than sorry. I would pay the 70 extra and get an i7. It was already shown that in heavy cpu situations like BF4 MP the i7 shines compared to i5's. 20 more minimum fps and about 15 more average. It's definitely worth it for next gen games. I think Watch dogs will see similar results.

Few problems with that bench its old, not verified and to boot that is retail version 1.0 aka beta stage of the game. Now fast forward to some real tests

http://pclab.pl/zdjecia/artykuly/chaostheory/2014/02/mantle/charts/bf4_mp_cpu_radeon_dx.png

Even with Mantle

http://pclab.pl/zdjecia/artykuly/chaostheory/2014/02/mantle/charts/bf4_mp_cpu_radeon_mantle.png