64 player Battlefield 3 - i3 2120 intel chip. (MULTIPLAYER)

[robcardiv]

Does anyone here play alot of of heavy multiplayer 64 player maps on battlefield 3

with a i3 2120 inter cpu?
I am curious (With real testimony) how the CPU does under max load for situations like 64 player maps. I know the card rates greatly in single player games and light multiplayer.
but I think 64 player maps may cripple the
DUAL CORE bad-ness.

I am getting the fx 6100 cpu because it excess in the large multiplayer 64 player map area.

But I was thinking about going with intel instead, so that I can upgrade to a intel quad core later.

TBH i want to stick with AMD, but they are failing to keep up atm.

 

[DeaconFrost]

Many people go with that Intel chip with the intent of upgrading later on. I don't think the quad-core vs dual-core is going to matter as much. I have an i3-2100 I was using as my work tower and now is my home server...and it's got a lot of power for the price.

 

[robcardiv]

yea. no doubt that its the best chip for its low price.
I just wonder if its going to cripple once it hits 50 player count maps.
Ive heard it does.

Its a dual core, I would bet it does.
Ive heard the 6100 can handle it. Id rather go with the fx 6100.
but the Intel is said to have a better upgrade path.

( although in a year or two, those i5 i7 chips may be phased out just as quickly as the amd x4s are disappearing. )
negating the whole downgrade X_x

 

[robcardiv]

i3 2100 CPU cant play battlefield 3?

Battlefield 3: AMD A-Series APU vs Intel Core i3 Sandy Bridge - PC Perspective - YouTube

This video benchmark between the i3 2105 and a8 3850 amd cpu shows that
the i3 2105 cant even keep a full 20 fps minimal with fraps.

I was thinking about getting the 2120
(Because all the generic advice says the intels are best for their price
LIKE TOMSHARDWARES latest recommendations from this month even......)

I do not see how they can recommend a Dual core processor over Amds quads near the same price.
You can say "The intels have better single core performance...
but again.. thats useless for gaming rigs.

=============

Does anyone here use the i3 2120 CPU for battlefield 3?

how does it do on 64 player maps is the question.
Thats specifically what im building this new rig for.

==============

Or is this benchmark just fail?
Granted its running fraps, which lowers framerate.. but come on.. if it cant even do single player crap with fraps over 20 fps...... its not going to be doing 64 player maps any better lmfao.

Should I just go with the fx 6100 ?

 

[DeaconFrost]

One thing you may not be considering is that many software apps and games likely do not utilize a quad core processor. I can't say for sure about BF3, but you can't just assume one proc is faster than the others because it has more cores.

 

[ignatzatsonic]

Should I just go with the fx 6100 ?

Yes.

Why fight it? You prefer AMD and will clearly be unhappy and second-guess yourself if you buy anything else.

 

[M1GU31]

well what you got to understand is that technology is always advancing so it doesn't matter if you buy the newest because it to will be replaced by something better. Just how the life cycle of technology goes, just get what fits your needs.

 

[Masterfryzz]

I am not quite sure about your question.
Are you looking for the best chip according to their CPU performance (and use a discrete graphics card). Or are you going to use their integrated GPUs?

If you are using the onboard graphics solutions (and thats what the posted youtube vidoe tested!), then you are better off with an AMD chip.

But if you are going to use a real graphics card, then there is no better choice than the I3.
I juyt built a rig for myself with an I3 2120 and a HD 6780. On Battelfield 3 the experience was real smooth even on 64 player maps. And the upgradepath you get with the I3 is pretty good. That`s why I went with a cheap Z68 motherboard (Asus P8U68-V LX). This way you can upgrade to a brand new Ivy Bridge CPU as soon as this is necessary.

 

[MrData359]

Battlefield 3: AMD A-Series APU vs Intel Core i3 Sandy Bridge - PC Perspective - YouTube

This video benchmark between the i3 2105 and a8 3850 amd cpu shows that
the i3 2105 cant even keep a full 20 fps minimal with fraps.

I was thinking about getting the 2120
(Because all the generic advice says the intels are best for their price
LIKE TOMSHARDWARES latest recommendations from this month even......)

I do not see how they can recommend a Dual core processor over Amds quads near the same price.
You can say "The intels have better single core performance...
but again.. thats useless for gaming rigs.

=============

Does anyone here use the i3 2120 CPU for battlefield 3?

how does it do on 64 player maps is the question.
Thats specifically what im building this new rig for.

==============

Or is this benchmark just fail?
Granted its running fraps, which lowers framerate.. but come on.. if it cant even do single player crap with fraps over 20 fps...... its not going to be doing 64 player maps any better lmfao.

Should I just go with the fx 6100 ?

In this benchmark they are using INTEGRATED GRAPHICS. This means they aren't using a dedicated graphics card like a GTX 560, just the graphics on the processor. The benchmark you are referring to is almost useless because anyone playing BF3 will use a dedicated graphics card, and the benchmark isn't reflecting the actual power of the processor, just the integrated graphics. This benchmark has no place in this discussion.

 

[Solarstarshines]

You can also match Top end APU- A8 and Graphics card to match for better Graphic perfomance I belive the HD 6670

That way you can use the cpu intergrated graphics along with a dedicated gpu

it would be a form of confungaled Crossfire

Mind you getting a FX6100 would be more CPU power with out the intergrated graphics then you can pair it up with a 6870 that would be a good buy if you can afford it

 

[DirtRider]

Playing it on my setup I am finding that lag is the biggest issue more than my hardware. Having a few players with a high ping just destroys it for me.

 

[Solarstarshines]

Playing it on my setup I am finding that lag is the biggest issue more than my hardware. Having a few players with a high ping just destroys it for me.

That's almost all Multiplayer games Sadly

I'm always playing VS on Left4dead2 and you got a guy with a 1 another with 5 some with 22 and all of the sudden you see 200's 800's it's like wtf is going on then Micro lag or it skips back to where you just came from i fully got you on that one

 

[DirtRider]

So this is what makes me wonder are we blaming these types of issues on what we think is bad hardware. I normally stay away from these large maps because I find when all 64 players are playing you will have a few with a high ping rate and then the game becomes unplayable. I was wondering when they announced the ultra large maps coming out if they would in fact really be playable in the real world