will this graphics card and gpu run battlefield 4

[bigboi972]

will this gpu EVGA GeForce GTX 650 1024MB GDDR5(1) along with with this processor(2) Intel Core i5-3470 Quad-Core Processor 3.2 GHz 4 Core LGA 1155 - BX80637I53470 work for battlefield 4 I'll be playing at 1920x1080 resolution. I was also considering 2 other gpu's their links are at the very bottom. Thanks


(1) http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00966IREK/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=A2L77EE7U53NWQ
(2)Amazon.com: Intel Core i5-3470 Quad-Core Processor 3.2 GHz 4 Core LGA 1155 - BX80637I53470: Computers & Accessories

Amazon.com: EVGA GeForce GTX 660 SUPERCLOCKED 2048MB GDDR5 DVI HDMI DP Graphics Card 02G-P4-2662-KR: Computers & Accessories

Amazon.com: MSI NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 2GB GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 Graphics Card N660 TF 2GD5/OC: Computers & Accessories

 

[Solarstarshines]

I would go with the 660TI version or get a Super clocked GTX760 OR 770

Now if you don't care about Brands ,I would look into the 7950 /7970 they have dropped in price and will be more guts then the 660 Amazon.com: MSI AMD Radeon HD 7950 OC Boost 3GB GDDR5 DVI/HDMI 2-Mini DisplayPort PCI-Express Video Card R7950-3GD5/OC BE: Electronics


Amazon.com: Sapphire Radeon HD 7950 3GB DDR5 HDMI / DVI-I / Dual Mini DP with Boost PCI-Express Graphics Card 11196-16-20G: Electronics


Amazon.com: Gigabyte AMD Radeon HD 7970 OC 3GB GDDR5 DVI-I/HDMI/2x Mini-Displayport PCI-E 3.0 Graphics Card GV-R797OC-3GD: Electronics


Amazon.com: Sapphire Radeon HD 7970 OC with Boost 3GB DDR5 DL-DVI-I/SL-DVI-D/HDMI/DP PCI-Express Graphics Card 11197-03-40G: Electronics

All these cards range from $250-300 I would drop the extra cash the performance is worth it especially with a 7950 and 7970 they can still hang with the new stuff that is out

 

[bigboi972]

thank you I am fairly new to this I am building my first computer can you recommend a mother board that will work with the nvidia cards and the intel i5 processor i linked to in my first post
Amazon.com: Intel Core i5-3470 Quad-Core Processor 3.2 GHz 4 Core LGA 1155 - BX80637I53470: Computers & Accessories. Also does the brand of the card effect its performance. If I buy an radeon card thats not made by amd can I still get the drivers from amd?

 

[AstaLaVista]

My personal opinion and being a bit bias because I don't like ATI cards... the combo i5 (non K) + a 2GB 660 SC or 660 Ti is the way to go.

Not knowing how well made BF4 is, whether is a badly coded port or made for PC (I doubt it)... going with a 650 might be cutting it to close. Again, pure speculation on my part.


I have the ASRock Z87 Extreme 6 with an i5 + 2GB 660 and I am loving it. I only do 1680 because my monitor is old but I am sure I could do more and after playing C3, I doubt I wouldn't be able to play BF4

 

[Solarstarshines]

My personal opinion and being a bit bias because I don't like ATI cards... the combo i5 (non K) + a 2GB 660 SC or 660 Ti is the way to go.

Not knowing how well made BF4 is, whether is a badly coded port or made for PC (I doubt it)... going with a 650 might be cutting it to close. Again, pure speculation on my part

That is why I told him if brands don't matter because Bias about brands don't help simply put he can get a better card for the same money if he doesn't care about the brand

They both work the same but the AMD cards I suggested happen to put that 660 in the dog house and if it is around the same price or 60 dollars more I would opt for better performance per dollar

Because playing games without enough GPU power sucks and we have all been there not saying the 660 wouldn't run it but he would be better off dropping a couple more dollars for something superior

 

[bigboi972]

My personal opinion and being a bit bias because I don't like ATI cards... the combo i5 (non K) + a 2GB 660 SC or 660 Ti is the way to go.

Not knowing how well made BF4 is, whether is a badly coded port or made for PC (I doubt it)... going with a 650 might be cutting it to close. Again, pure speculation on my part

That is why I told him if brands don't matter because Bias about brands don't help simply put he can get a better card for the same money if he doesn't care about the brand

They both work the same but the AMD cards I suggested happen to put that 660 in the dog house and if it is around the same price or 60 dollars more I would opt for better performance per dollar

Because playing games without enough GPU power sucks and we have all been there not saying the 660 wouldn't run it but he would be better off dropping a couple more dollars for something superior

as of now I cant afford the card you suggested I am building my first pc so I am buying all the componets. I can get a card you suggested in the coming weeks but I just wanted something to hold me over until then. I know AMD makes the radeon cards. But this radeon is made by another company(link below) will I still get updates from AMD if I buy it such as drivers. would this card run the game


Amazon.com: Gigabyte AMD Radeon HD 7950 3GB GDDR5 DVI-I/HDMI/2x Mini-Displayport PCI-Express Graphic Card GV-R795WF3-3GD: Computers & Accessories

 

[Contrabardus]

Actually, for Battlefield 4 AMD would be the better choice. It's optimized for AMD cards.

That said, having an NVidia card won't hurt anything. The difference in performance between two similar cards is minor.

Though, AMD is cheaper. So you can get a more powerful card for less money.

Honestly, the only time NVidia has an advantage is top end cards. They cost more, but outstrip the AMD top end cards by a small amount. If you're just buying a mid to high range card you'll get more with AMD for the same money.

Both have advantages over the other. PhysX is just a marketing ploy really. Any decent CPU will do what it does just as well without any performance loss. PhysX doesn't do anything but lighten the load on the CPU a little. That's not a bad thing, but it's not as great as they'd have you believe.

AMD has more open 3D that's easier to set up and use. That doesn't matter to most users, but if you have a 3D screen it's just easier and cheaper to use AMD's 3D as opposed to the NVidia kit.

At the end of the day, you should go with whichever is the better deal at the time. Neither has a significant advantage over the other. If you can get a great NVidia card on sale that's cheaper than a comparable AMD card, go for it. Though, most of the time AMD will cost less for a similar or better card.

The biggest difference between the two companies is the GUI they use for adjusting the card's settings. That's pretty minor as you're not likely to mess with those settings once you get them set up initially.

Also, yes, any of the GTX 600 series will run BF 4 just fine. Though, I'd go with the 660 out of the ones you've listed. Either one of the two you listed is fine. Having the extra gig of vram will help and you'll be able to turn the graphics settings up a bit higher with a 660.

The 650 will work, but it's not optimal for a game like BF 4. It will run at probably decent settings, but it's only got a gig of vram and I'd only go with it if it's the best you can afford.

Though, I'd go with the 7950 myself. It's got 3gb of Vram and that makes a difference. It's also well above the recommended specs for BF 4. It's probably the best option you've suggested for the money. It's a pretty high end card and will run BF 4 at high settings at least no problem.

The i5 CPU is just fine. Plenty to run the game and 4 cores. You're set with that as far as your CPU goes with that option.

If you get a card, I suggest not buying a 'better card' in the coming weeks assuming that you've got more than one PCIe slot on your motherboard.

Instead, get another of the exact same card and put it into Xfire or SLi. You'll get more power that way and it won't cost as much as upgrading to a more expensive card. Upgrading that way would be a waste of money.

Even if you've got more than one PCIe slot, make sure that two of whatever card you get will fit on the mobo before you buy another. You should be able to tell when you install the first so there's no need to get out a ruler or anything.

Also, make sure your PSU can handle a second card. If you're building it's worth upgrading the PSU to one that can handle another card and getting a second of the same GPU rather than upgrading a card the way you're suggesting. It will serve you better in the long run to do that.

Though, honestly, for BF 4, a 660 or 7950 will be plenty. I don't know if you'll be able to run at Ultra settings, but one of those cards should get you pretty close to that. Two in SLi or Xfire will be more than enough to run the game at Ultra settings for sure.

Also, yes. Your drivers would still come from AMD no matter what company makes the card. It's still an AMD card, it was just built and sold by a 3rd party. It's still got the same basic architecture no matter what company makes it and runs on the same software.

 

[AstaLaVista]

Either one will do... wait a while to buy the better card because it will last longer in the end.

 

[Solarstarshines]

My personal opinion and being a bit bias because I don't like ATI cards... the combo i5 (non K) + a 2GB 660 SC or 660 Ti is the way to go.

Not knowing how well made BF4 is, whether is a badly coded port or made for PC (I doubt it)... going with a 650 might be cutting it to close. Again, pure speculation on my part

That is why I told him if brands don't matter because Bias about brands don't help simply put he can get a better card for the same money if he doesn't care about the brand

They both work the same but the AMD cards I suggested happen to put that 660 in the dog house and if it is around the same price or 60 dollars more I would opt for better performance per dollar

Because playing games without enough GPU power sucks and we have all been there not saying the 660 wouldn't run it but he would be better off dropping a couple more dollars for something superior

as of now I cant afford the card you suggested I am building my first pc so I am buying all the componets. I can get a card you suggested in the coming weeks but I just wanted something to hold me over until then. I know AMD makes the radeon cards. But this radeon is made by another company(link below) will I still get updates from AMD if I buy it such as drivers. would this card run the game


Amazon.com: Gigabyte AMD Radeon HD 7950 3GB GDDR5 DVI-I/HDMI/2x Mini-Displayport PCI-Express Graphic Card GV-R795WF3-3GD: Computers & Accessories

They do have 4 used one's of that model for 198.00 that is a super buy a $100 cheaper then new

 

[bigboi972]

My personal opinion and being a bit bias because I don't like ATI cards... the combo i5 (non K) + a 2GB 660 SC or 660 Ti is the way to go.

Not knowing how well made BF4 is, whether is a badly coded port or made for PC (I doubt it)... going with a 650 might be cutting it to close. Again, pure speculation on my part

That is why I told him if brands don't matter because Bias about brands don't help simply put he can get a better card for the same money if he doesn't care about the brand

They both work the same but the AMD cards I suggested happen to put that 660 in the dog house and if it is around the same price or 60 dollars more I would opt for better performance per dollar

Because playing games without enough GPU power sucks and we have all been there not saying the 660 wouldn't run it but he would be better off dropping a couple more dollars for something superior

as of now I cant afford the card you suggested I am building my first pc so I am buying all the componets. I can get a card you suggested in the coming weeks but I just wanted something to hold me over until then. I know AMD makes the radeon cards. But this radeon is made by another company(link below) will I still get updates from AMD if I buy it such as drivers. would this card run the game


Amazon.com: Gigabyte AMD Radeon HD 7950 3GB GDDR5 DVI-I/HDMI/2x Mini-Displayport PCI-Express Graphic Card GV-R795WF3-3GD: Computers & Accessories

ya you're correct im going to buy that one ill just be patient and buy my parts every few paychecks or so. lol the benefits of being in college hardly any money I do appreciate all the help. I am still curious if the radeon card is made by another company other than AMD will i still be able to get driver updates

 

[Contrabardus]

ya you're correct im going to buy that one ill just be patient and buy my parts every few paychecks or so. lol the benefits of being in college hardly any money I do appreciate all the help. I am still curious if the radeon card is made by another company other than AMD will i still be able to get driver updates

Yes. Your drivers would still come from AMD no matter what company makes the card. It's still an AMD card, it was just built and sold by a 3rd party. It's still got the same basic architecture no matter what company makes it and runs on the same software.

 

[AstaLaVista]

ill just be patient and buy my parts every few paychecks or so

Hmmmm, my advise... plan ahead, make a budget and start buying your components once you have the money ready. Remember, computer parts go down everyday, Hot Deals only come once in a while but, for the most, part, two weeks from now, you will find the same price or even slightly better... last thing you want is to buy something today only to find it much cheaper when you are ready to buy your next component.


Once you are ready and purchase all of your components, don't second guess yourself and get upset if you find it cheaper somewhere later, it is bound to happen, stick with the budget and search that component for the best price... if buying online, check the reviews of the place first, sometimes cheaper does not mean cheaper if you will have a hellacious time returning a dead component.

 

[Worker]

Evening, chummers!

Battlefield 4 is not currently on this pup's horizon, but I am going to be getting a pro bono Splinter Cell: Blacklist with my new rig (currently built as of last post from the company, and UPS has it and suspecting it'll be on its way tomorrow (Monday) with an estimated arrival date of Friday the 8th); the specs are in 'My System Specs', as opposed to the specs for my soon-to-be retired Dawntreader Eleven (the new one is Dawntreader Twelve).

Man, I'm looking forward to my new piece o' configuration loving. ^_^

Did have a question, tho': anyone here have any idea if Quake 4 (2005) will run well in Windows 7? The one gaming forums that had an active Q4 subforum/thread suggested no problems with running it, although compared to what specs Q4 would need to run well, my lil' homeward-bound pup is a colossus. (It probably would've run on my current rig before half the RAM failed, if Activision hadn't intentionally had Q4 coded to malfunction in Windows XP 64-Bit, my current rig's OS.) Looking forward to playing playable Borderlands (2008), and got myself a copy of Borderlands 2 (2012) a couple of weeks ago. And Skyrim! Can't forget that Elder Scrolls awesomeness.

-Worker.

 

[3Colors]

Currently I'm playing battlefield bad company 2 on medium quality, and is acceptable(90%) with a resolution of 1200x800. I would have no problem playing with the same settings in BF4, addition to the visual, draws more me attention the playability... which is more fun BF3 or BF4 ?

 

[Contrabardus]

Currently I'm playing battlefield bad company 2 on medium quality, and is acceptable(90%) with a resolution of 1200x800. I would have no problem playing with the same settings in BF4, addition to the visual, draws more me attention the playability... which is more fun BF3 or BF4 ?

You'd have to lower the settings for BF 4. It uses more system resources than BF Bad Company 2 does. If you're struggling to run BC 2 that much on your system then BF 4 will be an even heavier load and won't run as good on the same settings. The graphics engine has been overhauled for BF 3 and 4. There's no way you'll be able to run it at the same settings with similar results on hardware that's having trouble with BC 2.

Something doesn't seem right though. You've really got to lower the settings that much for BC 2? A 1.5gb 7770 with a 3.1gb i5 and 8gb of Ram should be able to run that game smoothly on at least high settings no problem. I honestly can't see why you aren't running it on maxed out settings with no problems looking at your system specs. Your PC should be more than powerful enough to run BC 2 on maxed out settings at 1920x1080.

Is your i5 a dual core or a quad core? That might be what makes the difference as it's a very physics heavy game. If it's a quad core you should be at maxed out settings for BC 2 with no difficulty at more than 30fps.

 

[3Colors]

I tried some options in High and no problem. About the resolution, I love it like this. Be because I had many years playing almost in that resolutions... in my previous pc could not afford to playing with a high configuration :
Pentium 4HT with x1650PRO(256MB) and 1.5 of RAM(DRR - 400Mhz)

This weekend, if I can, i will try to play in high.

 

[Contrabardus]

With your system you should have no trouble running either BF 3 or 4 at pretty high settings. You easily meet the recommended specs for BF 4. Usually that means you can run the game at somewhere between medium and high settings with a good framerate. Given you've got a higher end 7000 series GPU, you'll probably be able to run it on high.

A quad core CPU at 3ghz. The i5-3450 is a quad core CPU so you're set there.
8Gb of Ram since you've got 64 bit Windows. You're set there with your system.
A Radeon HD 7000 series GPU. BF 3 and 4 are optimized for AMD cards, so you've got a slight advantage over an NVidia system owner since you've got a Radeon HD 7770.
It takes up 30 GB of HDD space.

Battlefield 3 has even lower system requirements which you easily exceed. Either one will run well at decent settings given your hardware.

Between BF 3 and 4, I recommend 4 more. It's the better of the two and has the advantage of being newer. BF 3 is fun as well, but if you've got to pick one, I suggest going with 4. The maps are more diverse, the graphics are slightly better, there have been tweaks to improve controls and interface, and there's a bit more destructible stuff to blow up.

You'll have to run BF 4 at slightly lower settings than BF 3, but it's still the better game between the two.

 

[3Colors]

In terms of visual settings no problem I think. I've seen some screenshots in low to high. So set between low and medium, looks good.

In my opinion, I think the pc he want to build will be fine to play Battlefield 4. Midrange could say.


And wait for all the patches and expansions are released.

 

[3Colors]

As I said above... I did the test and I can play the Battlefield Bad Company 2(MP) in high in 1200x800, no problem.

With a mid-range graphics card I think you would not have problems. With the GTX650(depending on your budget) I think it's fine, of course must have DirectCU for better heat dissipation.

Reading some reviews, playing at a lower resolution to 1600x900 and in the middle I think you need not worry

But if you play with higher resolutions and at ultra, you should pick a more powerful graphics card.

 

[ShamrockRig]

for anyone who is interested, the new r9 280x runs bf4 with all settings maxed(1920x1080) watched my brother play it, no drops at all, sapphire edition