• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Battlefield 1 PC Performance Thread

S

SapientWolf

Trucker Sexologist
DTKT said:
670 and an i5-750 at 1080p. I can only maintain some kind of playable framerate at low. Probably fluctuate between 50-70.

Should I expect anything more out of the system? Time for an upgrade?
Click to expand...

This is from a full match:

xspuOJH.png


NlVWN33.png


Windows 10
i5-750
16GB DDR3
1070 GTX

You need a new GPU.
 
S

Spook_485

Neo Member
daxy said:
I feel like there's something wrong then because I'm getting a solid 60 on a 970 + 4690K at ultra and 120% resolution scaling with base 1080p.
Click to expand...

Ye well I think so too. But I don't know what else I could do to improve performance anymore at this point. There is like only 1-2 FPS difference between all Ultra and all Low.

My GPU is around 70% all the time. CPU is just bottlenecking way too hard. And I can't go higher than 4.5 with my i5.
 
W

wrongway

Member
I'm inclined to say that capping your framerate might just be the single most important thing to getting consistent and smooth performance with this. I'm on an i7-860/GTX 970/8GB system, playing at 1920x1080 and just lazily using the High preset. Initially, my CPU was pretty much always at 95-100% usage. Framerate was often ok, in the 60-80 range, but it often swung wildly, making the game feel rough, and could take absolutely huge drops at times, especially on St. Quentin where I observed drops to 35.

After capping my framerate to 60 though my CPU usage dropped to 50-70%, and GPU usage tends to sit at 60-80%. I'm almost always pegged at 60, and my observed drops are only down into the 55-58 range. I tried turning shadowplay on last night and it continued to run smoothly.

So if you have framerate weirdness and haven't tried a cap, give it a go. You can do it easily with the game's own options:
- Go to your base BF1 install directory
- Create a new text document
- Name it: user.cfg
- In the file, enter: gametime.maxvariablefps 60 (or whatever you want your cap to be)
- If you want the little in-game counter, you can also add: perfoverlay.drawfps 1

Worked like a charm for my goofy system.
 
S

Spook_485

Neo Member
I already am running with 50 capped FPS and I tried 1 or 2 prerendered frames. I still hover around 45-50 FPS most of the time and drop down below 40 sometimes. Definitely no solid 50 FPS.
 
S

SapientWolf

Trucker Sexologist
Tovarisc said:
Impressive numbers from that old workhorse. For me straw that broke camels back with i5 750 was Witcher 3, granted my GPU also was getting tad old at that point.
Click to expand...
I have a massive overclock on my FSB/memory. Most people don't do that anymore. My intuition is that Frostbite is more of a bandwidth limited engine than a CPU limited one.
 
G

-griffy-

Banned
jorimt said:
As a continuation to my original post about TAA sharpening (http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=221004601&postcount=507), I found the parameters that control the TAA setting in the "initfs_Win32" file (install/Patch folder):

Code: 
#WorldRender.TemporalAAEnable 1
ShaderSystem.MipmapBias -0.5
WorldRender.PostProcessAntialiasingMode PostProcessAAMode_TemporalAA
WorldRender.TemporalAAJitterUseCmj True
WorldRender.TemporalAADisocclusionRejectionFactor 0
// TUNGUSKA - iwainwright - [DIVERGENCE] - TUN-29679 - Setting TemporalAAHistorySharpeningEnable to false and TemporalAAQuality to 0 to increase performance
WorldRender.TemporalAAHistorySharpeningEnable False 
WorldRender.TemporalAAQuality 0 
// TUNGUSKA
[U][B]WorldRender.TemporalAAMotionSharpeningFactor 4[/B][/U]
WorldRender.TemporalAAResponsiveness 1
WorldRender.TemporalAAAntiflickerStrength 1

I believe the underlined code is responsible for the sharpening (I think Mirror's Edge Catalyst, which uses the same TAA, is set to a much lower "1" value).

Unfortunately, the in-game command console and user.cfg file do not recognize these lines as valid parameters, and my attempts to change the file directly results in detection, which prevents me from launching the game.

EDIT: I found Star Wars Battlefront's settings for comparison...

Code: 
#TAA
PostProcess.TemporalAAUseImprovedVersion True
WorldRender.TemporalAAQuality 0
WorldRender.TemporalAAHistorySharpeningEnable True
[B][U]WorldRender.TemporalAAMotionSharpeningFactor 0.1[/U][/B]
WorldRender.TemporalAAJitterCount 26

Almost non-existent sharpening level.
Click to expand...
Just saw this post, I really hope they either put in a sharpening setting or let us manually change it. Or just lower it in a patch.
 
J

jorimt

Member
AndrewDean84xX said:
Is this something wrong with us, or is it the game? At first I thought my tank (in the campaign) is super shiny, and so is the barbwire. Then I noticed the plants were shinning too.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure it's the game. Otherwise, it would probably happen no matter the setting. Again, whatever is causing it must need a temporal element for coverage.

-griffy- said:
Just saw this post, I really hope they either put in a sharpening setting or let us manually change it. Or just lower it in a patch.
Click to expand...

As do I.
 
T

tesqui

Member
The smoke and gas grenades seem to really be an FPS killer for me. When there's like 10 thrown in one area my fps drops to the 40-50 range. Kind of jarring when i'm usually in the 80's.
 
N

Nekrono

Member
jorimt said:
As a continuation to my original post about TAA sharpening (http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=221004601&postcount=507), I found the parameters that control the TAA setting in the "initfs_Win32" file (install/Patch folder):

Code: 
#WorldRender.TemporalAAEnable 1
ShaderSystem.MipmapBias -0.5
WorldRender.PostProcessAntialiasingMode PostProcessAAMode_TemporalAA
WorldRender.TemporalAAJitterUseCmj True
WorldRender.TemporalAADisocclusionRejectionFactor 0
// TUNGUSKA - iwainwright - [DIVERGENCE] - TUN-29679 - Setting TemporalAAHistorySharpeningEnable to false and TemporalAAQuality to 0 to increase performance
WorldRender.TemporalAAHistorySharpeningEnable False 
WorldRender.TemporalAAQuality 0 
// TUNGUSKA
[U][B]WorldRender.TemporalAAMotionSharpeningFactor 4[/B][/U]
WorldRender.TemporalAAResponsiveness 1
WorldRender.TemporalAAAntiflickerStrength 1

I believe the underlined code is responsible for the sharpening (I think Mirror's Edge Catalyst, which uses the same TAA, is set to a much lower "1" value).

Unfortunately, the in-game command console and user.cfg file do not recognize these lines as valid parameters, and my attempts to change the file directly results in detection, which prevents me from launching the game.

EDIT: I found Star Wars Battlefront's settings for comparison...

Code: 
#TAA
PostProcess.TemporalAAUseImprovedVersion True
WorldRender.TemporalAAQuality 0
WorldRender.TemporalAAHistorySharpeningEnable True
[B][U]WorldRender.TemporalAAMotionSharpeningFactor 0.1[/U][/B]
WorldRender.TemporalAAJitterCount 26

Almost non-existent sharpening level.
Click to expand...

Great find man, I wish we were able to change it even on a config level, I think Battlefront or whatever the BF1 beta was using was the perfect amount, I have seeing this sharpening filter on my screen.

Hopefully someone finds a way to mod that command line and get the game to start since who knows if DICE will fix this and if they do who knows when.
 
L

leng jai

Member
tesqui said:
The smoke and gas grenades seem to really be an FPS killer for me. When there's like 10 thrown in one area my fps drops to the 40-50 range. Kind of jarring when i'm usually in the 80's.
Click to expand...

I think that's the case for every game though. Performance always tanks when you spam particle effects in the same spot.
 
J

jorimt

Member
Nekrono said:
Great find man, I wish we were able to change it even on a config level, I think Battlefront or whatever the BF1 beta was using was the perfect amount, I have seeing this sharpening filter on my screen.

Hopefully someone finds a way to mod that command line and get the game to start since who knows if DICE will fix this and if they do who knows when.
Click to expand...

I'd take anything they offer. A command unlock on those parameters, separate "TAA" and "TAA (Sharpened)" presets in the game's settings, a sharpening slider, anything.

Unfortunately, I doubt someone could legit mod those commands in, as this game is very sensitive to file changes, most of which would probably result in a permanent ban to the user upon detection.

I hope they address it eventually. Until then, at least it isn't gamebreaking; the CPU usage however...

AndrewDean84xX said:
Sorry about that. I edited my post. Here's a link as well.

https://youtu.be/kIkbArhsxlU
Click to expand...

Yup, identical to what I'm getting with any AA setting other than TAA. The specular element in that lighting effect probably has a temporal component that is reduced/eliminated by TAA. It's obvious they optimized the visuals for TAA, seeing as it is the default preset AA starting at "Medium" level. I bet the "Low" preset isn't even high quality enough to include the offending lightning effect.
 
Ä

Älg

Member
Interesting to see these big variations in performance for people.

I'm running:

3570K @ 4.3 Ghz
GTX 1080 stock
8 GB DDR3 1600MHz

Everything at max settings, 1080p, resolution scale at 175%, and I can't say I've dropped below 60 even once.
 
D

daxy

Member
Is it strange that I'm getting more a more consistent framerate by capping it at 61 instead of 60? Maybe I'm imagining things.
 
T

Tovarisc

Member
daxy said:
Is it strange that I'm getting more a more consistent framerate by capping it at 61 instead of 60? Maybe I'm imagining things.
Click to expand...

I get obvious stuttering and slowdowns with 60FPS cap, but capping it to e.g. 70 removes them. This version of Frostbite engine is odd one.
 
V

VulpX

Member
I have a GTX 770, unfortunately I get constant random crashes related to DirectX, like a lot of 770 users.
Game is unplayable in this state, sometimes it happens after 5 minutes and other times after 20.
 
I

iRAWRasaurus

Banned
Älg;221674311 said:
Interesting to see these big variations in performance for people.

I'm running:

3570K @ 4.3 Ghz
GTX 1080 stock
8 GB DDR3 1600MHz

Everything at max settings, 1080p, resolution scale at 175%, and I can't say I've dropped below 60 even once.
Click to expand...

I should over clock my i5 3470k @ 3.4 Ghz this weekend. I have the same setup, except for 16 GB of ram. I play on max settings. 1080p but I randomly get drops to ~45 fps for a few seconds. The Geforce experiences recommend a 150 resolution scale for optimal but I get less fps with that.
 
X

Xyber

Member
VulpX said:
I have a GTX 770, unfortunately I get constant random crashes related to DirectX, like a lot of 770 users.
Game is unplayable in this state, sometimes it happens after 5 minutes and other times after 20.
Click to expand...

Both of my friends with 680's get the same thing and both are now going to upgrade because of it.

It was the plan all along!
 
S

SuperBanana

Banned
The freezing seems to be back. I guess it was luck for those couple of matches. This game is fucking unplayable and nothing I do will fix it. The FPS is so erratic as well and NOTHING helps. I'll be going crazy between 20-60 all game on Ultra. I turn everything to low and get the exact same performance. This game is fucked. I'm done with this game until it's fixed.
 
S

Spook_485

Neo Member
zma1013 said:
What sort of performance should one expect on a 6950 and i5 2500k?
Click to expand...

Performance on the 2500k is generally bad. For some its okayish for some its terrible, but all in all its shit. For me its not playable since i fluctuate around 40-50 fps with dips down to 30 on all low settings with a gtx 1070.
 
X

Xyber

Member
Spook_485 said:
Performance on the 2500k is generally bad. For some its okayish for some its terrible, but all in all its shit. For me its not playable since i fluctuate around 40-50 fps with dips down to 30 on all low settings with a gtx 1070.
Click to expand...

It's weird seeing how the guy with the i5 750 is getting pretty good performance, far better than my buddies 2500K@4,2GHz. =/
 
J

JBwB

Member
Älg;221674311 said:
Interesting to see these big variations in performance for people.

I'm running:

3570K @ 4.3 Ghz
GTX 1080 stock
8 GB DDR3 1600MHz

Everything at max settings, 1080p, resolution scale at 175%, and I can't say I've dropped below 60 even once.
Click to expand...

This is similar to my setup. I'm happy to hear that I shouldn't be getting any drops below 60 once I get my hands on the game.

I'll be sure to try out your settings, though I may have to reduce the resolution scale a tad since I'll be playing on a 1920x1200 monitor.
 
C

Coffinhal

Member
And now my Xbox One controller (wireless with adapter) doesn't work anymore in game, no matter what I try.

Works flawlessly in FIFA 17 and probably all my other games.

Anyone had the same issue ?

edit : repairing the game fixed it
 
F

FairFriend

Member
Will the Thrill said:
NP! and If you played battlefront it's basically the same performance as that at similar settings! Frostbite is really well optimized.
Click to expand...

can somebody else confirm this? I'm running a very old PC, a phenom x4 @ 4 GHz and a 7870 but I can play battlefront just fine (1080p @ 60 fps with a mixture of medium and high setting), so I was wondering whether I would be able to play battlefield 1 as well.
 
I

IcyRhythms

Member
A friend gifted this game last night. It's an absolutely stunning game for FPS, no doubt about that. Unfortunately, this game is poorly optimized. Seeing this thread and watching people with i7's and i5's(like me)struggle with some of these settings is ridiculous. Some of you have much nicer setups as well. I have a 4690K and a 980 Ti with 16GB RAM. Should be able to eat this game alive at 1080p. NOPE lol

One trick that seemed to work was disabling Shadowplay completely and turning post process to low. Now I'm staying at 85-110FPS average in multiplayer. Before I was at 75 with drops to high 40's. Gross
 
W

wowzors

Member
IcyRhythms said:
A friend gifted this game last night. It's an absolutely stunning game for FPS, no doubt about that. Unfortunately, this game is poorly optimized. Seeing this thread and watching people with i7's and i5's(like me)struggle with some of these settings is ridiculous. Some of you have much nicer setups as well. I have a 4690K and a 980 Ti with 16GB RAM. Should be able to eat this game alive at 1080p. NOPE lol

One trick that seemed to work was disabling Shadowplay completely and turning post process to low. Now I'm staying at 85-110FPS average in multiplayer. Before I was at 75 with drops to high 40's. Gross
Click to expand...

Calling this game poorly optimized is the most asinine thing I have ever heard.
 
J

jorimt

Member
wowzors said:
Calling this game poorly optimized is the most asinine thing I have ever heard.
Click to expand...

"Optimize" has sadly become a shortcut word to describe any issue.

You're correct, it isn't unoptimized, but the high and sporadic CPU usage is suspect, which is probably what @IcyRhythms is running into; sounds like a CPU bottleneck.
 
W

wowzors

Member
jorimt said:
"Optimize" has sadly become a shortcut word to describe any issue.

You're correct, it isn't unoptimized, but the high and sporadic CPU usage is suspect.
Click to expand...

You are maxing something out at the highest possible settings it should be taxing, the game also had a very large draw which eats away at CPU. The game runs really well on old hardware so I fully disagree with both of you on this.
 
T

Tovarisc

Member
wowzors said:
You are maxing something out at the highest possible settings it should be taxing, the game also had a very large draw which eats away at CPU. The game runs really well on old hardware so I fully disagree with both of you on this.
Click to expand...

90% CPU usage on empty server with absolutely nothing going on is little bit suspect.
 
J

jorimt

Member
wowzors said:
You are maxing something out at the highest possible settings it should be taxing, the game also had a very large draw which eats away at CPU. The game runs really well on old hardware so I fully disagree with both of you on this.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.

But this seems excessive to me:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=220438557&postcount=330

It comes and goes too, sometimes the CPU usage is 60-70% in one match, and 90-100% in another, even on the identical map, in the identical area, with the same amount of things going on. My CPU usage has gone so high as to bottlenecked my GPU at points.
 
H

Horseticuffs

Full werewolf off the buckle
So on my i5 6600, with 16gb RAM and a gtx 970, I'm running at 1080p (Supersampling into my 720p TV) and I'm getting 50-60 fps constant with everything on Ultra. I haven't tried MP yet. Does that generally run better or worse than sp?
 
T

Tovarisc

Member
Horseticuffs said:
So on my i5 6600, with 16gb RAM and a gtx 970, I'm running at 1080p (Supersampling into my 720p TV) and I'm getting 50-60 fps constant with everything on Ultra. I haven't tried MP yet. Does that generally run better or worse than sp?
Click to expand...

Worse, a lot more going on usually plus all the players.
 
J

jorimt

Member
Digital Foundry BF1 Face-Off released:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-battlefield-1-face-off

As I thought, console TAA has half as much sharpening as the PC version has, evident in the comparison link below (my digging through the TAA settings in the "initfs_Win32" file shows "2" [consoles] vs "4" [PC] sharpening apparently):
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/189259

Why did they increase it on PC? The sharpening artifacts are needless at best, intolerable at worst. Bah.
 
F

Felix Lighter

Member
Any BF related fixes in the latest Nvidia driver? Couldn't find the full release notes. I tested SLI performance again after hearing some people having better luck suddenly and I'm still seeing no real performance advantage on my 980 tis. Higher max framerates but lower min framerates. Single card is more stable for me.
 
J

jorimt

Member
Felix Lighter said:
Any BF related fixes in the latest Nvidia driver? Couldn't find the full release notes. I tested SLI performance again after hearing some people having better luck suddenly and I'm still seeing no real performance advantage on my 980 tis. Higher max framerates but lower min framerates. Single card is more stable for me.
Click to expand...

375.70 Release Notes:
http://us.download.nvidia.com/Windows/375.70/375.70-win10-win8-win7-desktop-release-notes.pdf

Game Ready:
Provides the optimal experience for Titanfall 2, Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare Remastered, The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim Special Edition, Obduction, and Dishonored 2.
Click to expand...

Added or updated the following SLI profiles:
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Wildlands - added temporal SLI profile
Click to expand...

Windows 10 Fixed Issues:

  • DxgkDdiEscapeObject is calculated using a user-provided index that is not bounds checked. [1810901]
  • NVSPCAPS crashes in nvd3d9wrapx. [200246307]
  • NVIDIA Image Converter component crashes. [1822628]
  • [GeForce GTX 770, Forza Horizon 3] Driver crashes during PSO (Pipeline State Object) creation. [1826111]
  • [Forza Horizon 3] Possible driver memory leak. [1826143]
Click to expand...

Doesn't look like it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

[GVMERS] The Tragic Downfall of Battlefield 2042
Opinion Analysis
22
1K
LiquidMetal14 replied
EA is ending Battlefield V, Battefield 1 and Battlefront II suport on old Windows OS
News Platform
1
531
EverydayBeast replied
The Outlast Trials | Review Thread
Community Analysis Review
3
738
Bartski replied
Starting December 8 2023, Battlefield 1943 and Battlefield: Bad Company 1 & 2 will be removed from digital storefronts
News 2
62
4K
DeepEnigma replied
Forever Skies to launch as PS5 ‘console debut exclusive’ | Due out alongside PC version in 2024
News Trailer
3
799
March Climber replied
Top Bottom