Battlefield 3 PC: Graphics Comparison - Ultra vs Low-Settings in Detail

PC Games shows you the differences between low- and ultra-settings in Battlefield 3. Check out their graphics comparison.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
lugia 40002435d ago

Yes, PC is better. But we all knew that.

Septic2435d ago (Edited 2435d ago )

Did you even read the title or click on the link? Its a PC comparison between the two settings.

EDIt- that website is horrible. Its inundated with ads that take up half the screen.

Army_of_Darkness2434d ago

That the pc is able to upgrade its abilities with a little money;)
Otherwise it wouldn’t stand a chance against the ps3 or xbox 360 with its low settings! OMG, it Looks gawd awful.

rabidpancakeburglar2434d ago

I'm actually really surprised by just how bad the low settings are. It looks like the sort of graphics you got when some developers were still complaining that the ps3 was too hard to work on. The high settings look great though.

f7897902434d ago

What ads? AD BLOCK PLUS!

tehgam3r2434d ago (Edited 2434d ago )

I like my PC <3
High settings is all good :P, can run ultra but framerate is like 20 - 30 :/

Comparing these to xbox and ps3 is painful. But on the bright-side it still looks good as!

DICE you have done a very good job <3

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2434d ago
blaziliuz122434d ago

Failing to read the article is a fail

Xalaris2434d ago (Edited 2434d ago )

[anti-PC elitist comment here]

Jafooli2434d ago

Lol, he's right, but got the wrong article.

fcpthebest2434d ago (Edited 2434d ago )

Ok, what you gotta understand is that an article is more than just a title...

Bolts2434d ago

This is Bi-Failing.

1. Failing to read the article before commenting.
2. Failing to read the god damn title before commenting.

It's as if Lugia 4000 stop reading at Battlefield 3 PC: Graphics before spewing some canned knee jerk reaction.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2434d ago
StealthyRay2435d ago

The slider is more useful than side-by-side comparisons. The jaggies are horrible on the low side and there is dust on the ultra.

One more day to go!

f7897902434d ago

The jaggies seem to be in extreme abundance. I'm wondering if this is from image compression, not the game itself.

Most of the textures don't look that bad on Low. I'll probably be running around there with 2aa. I don't mind putting off upgrading until necessary.

dirthurts2434d ago

No game looks that jaggy on my monitor. Must be compression.

ProjectVulcan2435d ago

No AA :( ouch. The battlefield games need AA, they have a lot of square flat edges. 2 X AA would clear up the very worst so it wasn't quite so eye stabbing. I believe in the beta an 8800GT was enough to squeeze on a little AA on low

DwightOwen2435d ago

Hopefully my 6950s in XFire can handle this on Ultra. I may have to flash them to 6970s.

hazeblaze2435d ago

I think you should be fine. I have dual 6990m's in CF. And they handled Ultra in the beta around 50 fps... Granted, all of the polishing of the 'true' Ultra was likely not in the beta, but I'm still expecting 40+ fps.

arjman2434d ago

You realise those dual 6990m's you paid for (oh the thousands of dollars) are equivalent to downclocked desktop 6870's

kevnb2434d ago (Edited 2434d ago )

u mad arjman? Im pretty sure he knows what he has.

DarkKinght2434d ago

i played beta on ultra with my 5990

gamesmaster2434d ago (Edited 2434d ago )

wtf? dual 6990's only got you 50 fps? my single 6950 unlocked got me 50 fps on ultra. i dont understand?

InNomeDiDio2434d ago


Germans PC Mag said you need a GTX 580 to max it out in 1080p an get around 30 FPS. But if you do so BF3 looks like a damn Trailer! Simply amazing. They called it Avatar of VideoGames.

peowpeow2434d ago (Edited 2434d ago )

@ gamesmaster

He said 6990m. I'm not too sure but doesn't m mean mobility? I.e. weaker than desktop versions

f7897902434d ago

InNomeDiDio they're just comparing their obviously well off builds going "lol i don't know, will it run it on ultra???"

DwightOwen2434d ago

I was able to get around 60 FPS running BC2 on max settings. DICE seems to have an affinity for AMD cards. I'm banking that Battlefield 3 will be just as optimized.

Sexual_Hrrsmnt_Panda2434d ago

6990m's are pretty crappy dude.

A regular 6990 will push well over 60fps with everything maxed.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 2434d ago
dirthurts2434d ago

I have a 5850...and it's a little concerned right now.

tmoss7262434d ago

I have that too. Run it on high no problems. Never lower than 30 FPS.

NeoTribe2434d ago

Nope better go drop another 500 bones.

AsianOnRoute692434d ago

In all honesty, I'm playing battlefield 3 right now on ultra everything, with only crossfire 5830s, and I am getting a solid 50 - 60fps, albeit, my cards are overclocked on both core to 1000mhz and mem at 1250mhz each, but yah, I think the recommended requirement of needing a gtx580 to really max out the game is complete bs.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2434d ago
Detoxx2435d ago

i really hope my ps3 phat and my tv can run battlefield 3, otherwise i would have to buy a ps3 slim *sarcasm

Jamaicangmr2434d ago

Best comment ever lol! +Bubble. I have a pretty High spec rig but timing on this post was sublime.

I had to call my friend and tell him about it.

lolololololololololololool!!! !!!!!!!

ATi_Elite2434d ago

Now that was funny! +bubbles

But i would be cool to run two PS3 in SLi configuration!

Show all comments (56)
The story is too old to be commented.