140°
Submitted by MajorAly 451d ago | news

Battlefield 4 PC Beta benchmarks hint at brighter prospects for AMD CPUs

Hardcore Russian GPU website, GameGPU has posted a detailed bechmark analysis of Battlefield 4′s multiplayer beta on a number of hardware specs. Key attention is paid to the Frostbite 3 graphics engine, the DirectX API, graphics quality settings and important visual aspects. (AMD, Battlefield 4, PC)

Lolrus  +   451d ago
AMD has always been my choice for CPU and GPU due to price/performance but now it seems, their lineup is looking mighty enticing for even the detractors. Most sensible approach for those building PCs as engines will be orientated to AMD hardware.
WarThunder  +   451d ago
Watch out for the Intel/nvidia fanboys they don't like it when people say the truth. It hurts their Purchases.

From Article "What’s most impressive is that Battlefield 4 can completely use up to eight CPU threads. The distribution of load on AMD processors calibrated much better than it did for Intel. If this is a sign of things to come for multi-threaded CPU utilization in games, the prospects for AMD CPUs may well be brighter than what we have today. Couple with the potential of Mantle, this could very well lead to an edge for AMD’s PC components at we we enter the next-gen era of gaming."

AMD is better than Intel and nVidia. With AMD you get the best Price /performance cards and CPUs

Intel i7-2600K $300
AMD FX-6300- $100

And its faster than i7 2600K
#1.1 (Edited 451d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(10) | Report | Reply
CGI-Quality  +   451d ago
As an Intel/nVIDIA buyer, I couldn't careless what AMD purchasers think. As in, it's pretty irrelevant.

OT: AMD needs to catch up in the CPU area, but all the recent news has been nothing but positive.
WarThunder  +   451d ago
"AMD needs to catch up in the CPU area"

AMD CPUs are catching something that Intel well never catch: the performance for the the best price and if you look at the FX8350 it costs $180 and it is as fast as Intel i7-3770K that cost around $320. Intel is better with single threaded applications...

http://youtu.be/rIVGwj1_Qno

With AMD u can actually build a $450 PC, that can play most games on high settings.
#1.1.2 (Edited 451d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(4) | Report
CGI-Quality  +   451d ago
In regards to the CPU, you completely missed the point.
vulcanproject  +   451d ago
If you look at the graph then you can see it clearly isn't fully loading 8 threads of the AMD 8350. Its loading one to 95 percent, one to 77 and the rest to 50-60.

The 6 'core' AMD FX6300 is fully loaded but then it would be, its much slower than the 4 core 8 thread Intel tested (the i7 2600k) which also doesn't manage to load every core/thread near 100 percent. Between 60-70 percent, much like the FX 8350. SURPRISE!! Not.

Basically this game is totally not CPU bound. It'll not matter a great deal what CPU you have as long as you have a decent quad core.

Frankly it was exactly the same for Battlefield 3, so before anyone proclaims a bunch of rubbish again I should set you all straight.

http://www.techspot.com/rev...

Frostbite just isn't a CPU bound engine here. It hardly mattered if you ran a FX 4100 @ 2ghz or at 4ghz. It didn't matter if you had a 2600k or a lower end AMD. The game was clearly GPU bound because the framerates just didn't change significantly.

Intel's CPUs will still be boss for gaming in games where CPU performance actually matters: http://www.techspot.com/rev... or this http://www.techspot.com/rev... but BF4 isn't likely to be one of them so meh.
#1.1.4 (Edited 451d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(3) | Report
badass998  +   447d ago
true...
I buy both amd and intel cpus, but only amd gpus.
and my fx6300 is much better than my i5 3570k, and according to benchmarks on the i7 3770k, when I compared my fx 6300's rendering speeds to the i7 3770k, my fx6300 was faster....
Plus I don't use a ssd.
so yeah what could I say, intel is fuking useless.
plus amd won this gpu gen, the hd7970ghz was better than the gtx680.
haseena   451d ago | Spam
mmj  +   451d ago
CPU usage is largely irrelevant, I'd still expect overclocked Intel's to pump out more frames when GPU bottlenecks aren't an issue.
pandehz  +   451d ago
Still sticking with Intel/Nvidia.

I know my share.
fossilfern  +   451d ago
I've been AMD / Ati (AMD ) for years! Went nvidia once , had dual 7600GTs, and had nothing but driver issues. Wouldn't put me off going nvidia again but AMDs price and performance keep me with them.
Haules  +   451d ago
Got a AMD 8350FX and a AMD HD7970...
Will never go buy to Nvidia and Intel both are overpriced!
LAWSON72  +   451d ago
To be fair most Nvidia cards are fairly well priced like gtx 760 and gtx 770, and Intel CPUs like the i5 K CPUs are well worth the money.
#5.1 (Edited 451d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember
New stories
40°

H1Z1 Battle Royale Mod Confirmed

29m ago - H1Z1 will feature a version of the Battle Royale game mod on release. | PC
30°

Despair: Americana Dawn's Kickstarter failed to reach its goal

1h ago - Japanator: "Oh my. I never expected that it would come to this, but I'm afraid that Americana Daw... | PC
40°

PES 2015: 10 Improvements Konami Must Make

1h ago - WC: Pro Evolution Soccer has had an illustrious time in the gaming industry. There are scarcel... | PC
30°

Call Of Duty: Advanced Warfare – 6 Essential Tips To Rank Up Fast

1h ago - So you’ve given in to the hype and bought a copy, as everyone’s been telling you how amazing it i... | PC
Ad

Looking for a great Pokemon Community?

Now - Look no further. Join us at the BulbaGarden Forums, the best community for everything Pokemon | Promoted post
40°

20 Best Video Games Of 2014

1h ago - WC: Shining a light on the best of the best is exactly what’s needed when so many consumers of ne... | PC