FPS with GTS 250 in BC2?

Y

Youwerekilledby

Registered User
Joined
Aug 11, 2009
Messages
20
I was wondering since I didn't get to download the Beta, what sort of frames per second should I expect with my GTS 250? Could I run high at 1920X1280? BF2142 works great at all maxed settings, but I know this game will be more GPU intensive.

Thanks in advance.
 
CPU will also play a factor, but my guess would be 50-60 for that card on high- and that res maybe pushing it. Just a quick guess.
Game has a ton of other issues. Overall it's gonna take some patience while they tweak this for PC play.(hoping that they do)
 
Yeah, I was looking online last night in some forums I found. It seems that people with a quad core processor get about 10 more FPS, disappointing since I only have an E7400. I bought it because there were so few games utilizing quad core at the time. It's a pretty good little processor, but at the rate things are going nowadays, i5 will be "last years" material in a month or two...
 
Youwerekilledby said:
I was wondering since I didn't get to download the Beta, what sort of frames per second should I expect with my GTS 250? Could I run high at 1920X1280? BF2142 works great at all maxed settings, but I know this game will be more GPU intensive.

Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...
i was getting around 35 fps with my gts 250 i think? i ran fraps once so only way i remember seeing.. loved the game i had no lagg issues!
but yea i ran all high settings on same resolution or close no problem!but im really not sure if that was that exact fps i was seeing so ye..

also thought id add im running a intel Q6600...
 
DeathPanx said:
i was getting around 35 fps with my gts 250 i think? i ran fraps once so only way i remember seeing.. loved the game i had no lagg issues!
but yea i ran all high settings on same resolution no problem!but im really not sure if that was that exact fps i was seeing so ye..

also thought id add im running a intel Q6600...
Click to expand...


Nice, I should expect a little less with my E7400, but lowering the resolution down to 1680 should work out nicely I think... Plus, I don't like all of the smoke and shadows- it actually detracts from your ability to see people and shoot IMO.
 
I played BC2 at 1280x1024 with absolutely no issues. I've got an 8800 GTX, 4 GB of RAM, and a Q6600 @ 2.4 GHz (Stock). If you can't play the game at a higher resolution, there is no need to. It looks great both ways :).
 
I played (for 5 minutes due to disconnection issue) at maxed out 1920x1080x4AA (with HBAO on) with a GTX 260 c216 and framerates felt like 25-40 (never did an actual benchmark) which isn't terrible, but not outstanding by any means. HBAO off probably gives +10FPS on average. All of this is guesstimates.

However, I seriously doubt you'll have a playable game with the GTS 250 (rehashed 9800 GTX rehashed 8800 GT) maxed out with HBAO on and 4xAA. If you turn down settings, it will be very playable of course.
 
i dunno i can play most games maxed out on my gts 250 a decent card in my eyes.. never tried the gtx so i wouldnt know for a comparison..
 
nobody is talking about maxing it out - we all learned that minute 1 - especially with the HBAO issue
 
Played the beta with my 9800GTX+ and E8400. HBAO off and medium graphics seemed to play the best for my old machine. I also turned down the brightness which was only something on my end or personal pref. I lagged some but that was more dependant on the servers we were on. Ping didn't seem to matter in beta as much as the server. I could play Dallas, Atlanta and Chi town with little issue but certain VA servers just sucked.
 
See deadred's post above. 9800GTX+ pretty much is the exact same as the GTS 250.

HBAO is not a "problem" - it's just a feature which requires a lot of processing power.
 
This game is actually really CPU intensive, and runs best on a quad. Some members in my forum were literally getting double the framerate when doubling the number of cores (tested by unlocking an AMD PhII X2 into an X4).

But I was running a core 2 duo @3.33ghz and a 8800GT pretty well at 1080p, so you should be fine with your setup.
 
I was running at 60 FPS according to Fraps with 2 x GTX260's in SLI and a quad core. I'm hoping the actual release will be better optimized.
 
I was running a Q9550 @2.83ghz and a GTS250 at 1280x1024x4AA

50 fps
 
I was getting, on average, 100fps with a I7 920 and the Radeon 5870. I hope the retail version is better optimized though. No matter what cpu was used, the beta was very cpu intensive, too much so in my opinion.
 
DeathPanx's in several servers i had 75 - 90 fps =)
 
Thanks everyone, we'll see how the real thing goes in a few hours after download and install. Looking forward to it...Maybe the real deal will be less CPU intensive and nice to my E7400!
 
Currently, I sit around 30-40 frames per second (FRAPS) with the following settings with my E7400, 4 Gb DDR 1066 and GTS 250 512 MB:

1920 X 1280
Low Shadows and Effects
Medium Terrain and Others
AA @ 2X
HBOA Off
Vsync Off

The funny thing is, the resolution seems to have NO effect on my frames per second. The thing that changes it most is the shadows and effects (which thankfully I consider least important). It's kinda weird, but I suppose that's because this is a more CPU intensive game. (??)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top