Benchmark analysis: Battlefield V Open Beta: PC

hehe maybe it's an inside job to kill EA and free Dice from it's publisher's iron clutch again

 

I think this game needs a lot of work. As you can see in my recorded gameplay footage, it just doesn't run as well as their previous Battlefield game. I'm looking forward to see some real benchmarking of their game when it comes out. Thank you very much Hilbert for this information so far.

 

Wow... I looked at your gameplay briefly and I salute you, I couldn't play at those settings... I understand why you are not happy with the game's performance. Then again, you're essentially running 4K, and we know 4K/60Hz isn't really around yet...

 

I see what you mean, but the thing is with Battlefield 1 @ the same settings I run almost 150 frames per second and I guess it's also because the game is in beta it will get better results in a more official release I hope. Therefore I've tested this game on a variety of graphical settings and for me the most playable on the 4k resolution it's when I change it to (ultra) low through nVidia Control Panel and in-game then I'll be able to run it @ almost 120 frames per second.

 

Well i run a single 1080Ti i7-8700k 5Ghz so in regards of hardware i shouldnt really need better hardware but i agree its a beta but often there will only be minor tweaks to the end product however i think that Nvidia will launch some better drivers once the game is out and i run with everything on ultra and 3440x1440 and get around 70-100 fps but i see some strange drops from time to time which is what i mean that it isnt optimized yet.

 

BTW their squad system is completly FUBAR we were 3 guys trying to play together but when ever we tried leader could see squad but other members got unable to join squad message lol

 

I do often wonder why EA exists right now in the guise that it does, I really do.

Totally Off-Topic comment below:

Spoiler

In the 90's, I could understand why publishers were so utterly necessary: retail.

Publishers have got their seller/reseller/logistics/marketing down to a tee, but if I were to look now at the market, EA just doesn't really make any sense.

If you take the big sports franchises they got their mits on: NHL, FIFA, NBA, Madden and UFC. Now, they would have paid money to the governing respective bodies to obtain those franchises, and I must say that when retail was the only option, they had a lot of weight. Not anymore.

ANY one of those governing bodies (NHL, FIFA, etc) could-

1. Create their own computer games/entertainment division(s).
2. Hire talented games designers/teams to work in these divisions.
3. Publish online through digital download, and even ship to retailers/online shops - most of which have digital download online stores/presence anyway.

I honestly do not know why EA exists - they really are an unnecessary layer of what the goal is: to put sports titles in the hands of consumers. This layer should really be thinned out, and removed. NHL, FIFA ét all are literally giving money away for no reason that makes any sense Anno 2018.

What makes this even more prevalent are the platform owners such as Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo - and then SDK/propriety/bespoke owners like iOS/Android. Does anyone truly think that removing EA would stop these platforms from having content?

These governing bodies could do all the work, take all the money, and who knows - maybe the actual teams involved would get more money net profit, and the tickets for the games would decrease?

It's gotta suck, when you're a father and the cost of taking your boy to a game of (anything) can be $2,000*.

Let's take this a step further - these teams and governing bodies already have got merchandising stores...is a computer game really any different?

They are being lied to, and have been given the keys to Fort Knox...for no reason.

What has made this all the more transparent is EA themselves, by creating the Origin app. This just furthers the point by showing just how easily digital downloads are! They have really given every one of these governing bodies more proof that, well, the emperor is not really wearing any clothes.

*NY Nicks 'best seat' ticket via official webstore, 1st October

 

His PC is way underspecced for that anyway with a i5 8400k...

 

Lol I just bought this new cpu in stead of my 'old' buggy (motherboard or) 4930K cpu, you don't need a super high end cpu for running games. And for optimized games in 4k you need a good GPU. But that's another subject, maybe for some other topic.

 

I know you're trying to be funny, but your sarcasm is 180 degrees miss-pointed. In the words of that guy who constantly cries about BF5: you are overly representing.

Because in the real world, I've yet to see woman en mass complaining about being under-represented in games, while OTOH social networks are filled with hordes of full grown men and boys, who love to use the word snowflake (oh the sweet irony), while themselves being delicate like a butterfly, suffering from a victim complex, and crying and whining about.... wait for this... ABOUT GAMES!

 

Dead? maybe in your head lol

https://s33.**********/auzzwidgv/20180907_132707.jpg

https://gamegpu.com/action-/-fps-/-tps/battlefield-v-open-beta-test-gpu-cpu

 

Yeah but like you said, it comes from the times where the business as such wasn't recognized by people as the multi billion $ industry it is. And nowadays EA and the likes are running a neat cartel and I honestly believe they'd use mafia methods to stay where they are.
From a business point of view the companies / franchises probably let them do their stuff because they know nothing about games, but mainly because they are more willing to take 50% of the profit with no risk than 90% of the profit with full risk... that's where the publishers come in. Sadly though, if a game tanks (more often than not due to bad publisher forced decisions) the game studio closes... and that's the real reason why it's all bugged.

I wouldn't say that the 8400K is the main problem, but the resolution is getting tough on a 1080Ti. The higher his resolution the less his 8400K makes a difference.

 

I agree totally. They took away the random spread per gun that was added in BF1 and the gun play is great. My can't we re-assign the damn revive/squad revive key binding? It's always E. Horseshit, most BF players use 3 or 4 etc for the defib or needle. Coming from previous BF games, I've had to adjust to not having spot markers. I like it, but a few of my friends who love the BF series but aren't very skilled at it, played it for 5 minutes, realized they couldn't spot, they left and haven't been back.

 

Replying to my own post to have all my impressions together.

Damn, played some BF1 just now & it runs way better (144 fps mostly constant) than BF V even at higher graphics settings, while looking loads better too! Also, loads more atmosphere and more dynamic play than BF V. I hope they do some more work to BF V, it runs like ass and looks rubbish, being able to disable TAA would be one step forward, plus some more performance optimisations I hope.

 

There's no indication of framerate in your stream. How are we supposed to know how it performs? Video streaming stutter?

Why are you running the game at 4K 60Hz only to run it at 1) Ultra Low and get 2) 120 frames per second? What's the point?

 

It's a ****ing game. Not a single Battlefield game had accurate history. There is nothing wrong with the direction the game has taken. It does not impact you one bit. Stop whining and move on.

 

5930k 3.5ghz beating 4ghz 6700k
Check min fps

4 core is dead
gamers nexus dot net /game-bench/2673-battlefield-1-cpu-benhmark-dx11-vs-dx12-i5-i7-fx/page-2

 

It's called "margin of error"...

The entire graph scales with frequency. Quad core is not anywhere near dead. There is no need to justify your purchase by spreading misinformation.

 

Have fun in BF V with quadcore and lagspikes

Quadcore is dead

 

I've just tested some new (Ultra) settings and recorded it and still got 50-60 frames per second with my 1080Ti Xtreme Edition and my i5 8400.