Battlefield 3 system requirements revealed

how well do you think i could run it? parts in sig

Sounds about right.. Infact, sounds awesome.. Can't wait to be playing as max as possible on my resolution with my rig.... jedikevin2

[QUOTE="markko84"]

Processor wise

the engine is the same

why ps3/xbox 360 processors will handle the game, but a 1.7 C2D won't, for example?

all the diferences betwenn PC version and ports will be graphic details, filtering (aa and anisotropic), resolutions and all.

I doubt that a C2D 1.7 with a mid range VGA won't play BF3 in 720p on everything on LOW.

feel free to correct me if i'm wrong

Mystic-G

I have a E7500 and used to have a 9800GT (fried 3 days ago, next week i'm buying a 450 GTS) and BC2 ran with High Details, High textures, High Special Effects, High Shadows and 1333x768 resolution, AF16x (AF on this game didn't gave any fps diference, be it 0 or 16x) with no AA and no HBAO with average 55-70 fps, even more depending on the map. Even with your powerful card, if you're trying to run on 1920x1080 you'll get yourself a bottleneck because of the C2D. If you do play like this, low the resolution, so you can crank up details and even AA and get a smooth fps. My rig is worse than yours and I managed to get a smooth gameplay with some detail quality. But if you feel the necessity to play on the monitor native resolution, there's nothing I can say.

For me, textures, details and AF are more important than resolution or AA.

and I agree

dice could make the game uses better the core2duo.. my processor even being old its way better than those of current consoles, so if xbox 360 and ps3 can play bf3 with whatever detail settings on 720p, my rig can too.

and I agree

dice could make the game uses better the core2duo.. my processor even being old its way better than those of current consoles, so if xbox 360 and ps3 can play bf3 with whatever detail settings on 720p, my rig can too.

markko84

[QUOTE="markko84"]

and I agree

dice could make the game uses better the core2duo.. my processor even being old its way better than those of current consoles, so if xbox 360 and ps3 can play bf3 with whatever detail settings on 720p, my rig can too.

i5750at4Ghz

so, you're saying that, running games, the PS3 and Xbox360 processor are better than a E7500 or E8400?

(i'm asking, because I really don't know)

I have a E7500 and used to have a 9800GT (fried 3 days ago, next week i'm buying a 450 GTS) and BC2 ran with High Details, High textures, High Special Effects, High Shadows and 1333x768 resolution, AF16x (AF on this game didn't gave any fps diference, be it 0 or 16x) with no AA and no HBAO with average 55-70 fps, even more depending on the map. Even with your powerful card, if you're trying to run on 1920x1080 you'll get yourself a bottleneck because of the C2D. If you do play like this, low the resolution, so you can crank up details and even AA and get a smooth fps. My rig is worse than yours and I managed to get a smooth gameplay with some detail quality. But if you feel the necessity to play on the monitor native resolution, there's nothing I can say.

For me, textures, details and AF are more important than resolution or AA.

markko84

Markko.. You would do better getting a AMD 5770 then a gts 450.. the gts 450 is fairly bad for the price... Here is a quick suggestion.. Here

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"][QUOTE="markko84"]

and I agree

dice could make the game uses better the core2duo.. my processor even being old its way better than those of current consoles, so if xbox 360 and ps3 can play bf3 with whatever detail settings on 720p, my rig can too.

markko84

so, you're saying that, running games, the PS3 and Xbox360 processor are better than a E7500 or E8400?

(i'm asking, because I really don't know)

[QUOTE="markko84"]

I have a E7500 and used to have a 9800GT (fried 3 days ago, next week i'm buying a 450 GTS) and BC2 ran with High Details, High textures, High Special Effects, High Shadows and 1333x768 resolution, AF16x (AF on this game didn't gave any fps diference, be it 0 or 16x) with no AA and no HBAO with average 55-70 fps, even more depending on the map. Even with your powerful card, if you're trying to run on 1920x1080 you'll get yourself a bottleneck because of the C2D. If you do play like this, low the resolution, so you can crank up details and even AA and get a smooth fps. My rig is worse than yours and I managed to get a smooth gameplay with some detail quality. But if you feel the necessity to play on the monitor native resolution, there's nothing I can say.

For me, textures, details and AF are more important than resolution or AA.

jedikevin2

Markko.. You would do better getting a AMD 5770 then a gts 450.. the gts 450 is fairly bad for the price... Here is a quick suggestion.. Here

thanks for your tip mate, 'ill check out

http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/07/08/battlefield-3-system-requirements-revealed/

Minimum

• Hard Drive Space: 15 GB for disc version or 10 GB for digital version
• OS: Windows Vista or Windows 7
• Processor: Core 2 Duo @ 2.0GHzRAM2GB
• Video Card: DirectX 10 or 11 compatible Nvidia or AMD ATI card

Recommended

• Hard Drive Space: 15 GB for disc version or 10 GB for digital version
• OS: Windows 7 64-bit
• Processor: Quad-core Intel or AMD CPURAM 4GB
• Video Card: DirectX 11 Nvidia or AMD ATI card, GeForce GTX 460, Radeon Radeon HD 6850

TheShadowLord07

Its probably me that's stupid, but why do you need 15GB Hard Drive space for disc version but only 10GB for digital version???

If that's true, I can run it on lowest settings. I think I will hold off on getting it like I did with The Witcher 2, until I build my next PC.

I can easily run it.............on my PC.

Fizzman

Wow ,I take it you don't need any heating in your house? xD

Awesome. My new 6870 and i5 2300 should run it nicely. Definitely won't be maxing it. But I should be able to pump out a 1080p resolution with no AA and things like texture details at Medium, shouldn't I?scar-hawk

you have a awesome hardware and will put texture to medium? Whats the point of playing on full hd with bad texturized environments/carachters? crank texture (and a little of AA) up and low down a bit the resolution, . Spenting a holy cow of cash on a rig to turn down textures is something I dont understand. Lower resolutions do not make the game ugly like non-high textures.

[QUOTE="scar-hawk"]Awesome. My new 6870 and i5 2300 should run it nicely. Definitely won't be maxing it. But I should be able to pump out a 1080p resolution with no AA and things like texture details at Medium, shouldn't I?markko84

you have a awesome hardware and will put texture to medium? Whats the point of playing on full hd with bad texturized environments/carachters? crank texture (and a little of AA) up and low down a bit the resolution, . Spenting a holy cow of cash on a rig to turn down textures is something I dont understand. Lower resolutions do not make the game ugly like non-high textures.

How will this build perform when I build it? -i5 2500k overclocked -GTX 570 -4GB RAM-RocBoys9489-

That's a nice build. Even though these requirements are fake, hopefully they're close. The GTX 570 is a solid card which generally outperforms the GTX 480 with a lower power consumption. I dunno how they overclock though.

[QUOTE="Fizzman"]

I can easily run it.............on my PC.

stvee101

Wow ,I take it you don't need any heating in your house? xD

My room is 15 degrees hotter than the rest of my house. With central air. I have a tiny room though.

[QUOTE="markko84"]

[QUOTE="scar-hawk"]Awesome. My new 6870 and i5 2300 should run it nicely. Definitely won't be maxing it. But I should be able to pump out a 1080p resolution with no AA and things like texture details at Medium, shouldn't I?scar-hawk

you have a awesome hardware and will put texture to medium? Whats the point of playing on full hd with bad texturized environments/carachters? crank texture (and a little of AA) up and low down a bit the resolution, . Spenting a holy cow of cash on a rig to turn down textures is something I dont understand. Lower resolutions do not make the game ugly like non-high textures.

mate, put 1600x900 and keep the textures on high! set AA to 2x, and that's it! You'll be fine!

peope are way too obssessed with 1920x1080!

If true I'm in luck. i have two 6850's and everything else.

Whether these are official or not, they're probably not too far off. I'm not too far off recommended, only thing is my GPU and even that isn't far off a GTX 460.

I should max it. :) Currently have a Hex core CPU, 8GB of Ram, and two GTX 460's in Dual SLI.

Not official yet, but I have a 5850, how does that stack up against GTX 460/6850? I know it's better than a 460 for sure. If recommended is highish settings at 60fps (they keep talking about 60fps in PC version) then I will be fine either way.SaltyMeatballs

I actually meet the recommended spec so I look forward to playing. Having said that, i'm putting together a new box in September that should eat it for breakfast...

My rig will run it.. But, I do plan on upgrading to something faster, anyway. I'm really hoping the NVidia 600 series cards will drop in time. If not, my 285GTX is gonna be screaming for mercy for a little bit lolShewgenja

Good thing I got a GTX 570 I'll be playing it maxed out in 1080p and wizzing everywhere.

Well, if this is true then it looks like I'll be upgrading my video card in a couple of months.

WOW! Good thing I'm upgrading my PC later in the summer =D