Your Rig + Bad Company 2

For those that have Bad Company 2, what kind of Notebooks are you using?

Also, please mention if your satisfied with the performance of your Notebook while playing BC2.

And...the settings you use. Generally either High, Medium or Low.

I'm interested in what the consescus is.

 

Single player i can play with an average of 35 fps with all high, medium shadows, 1xaa/af @ 1440x900. it will dip into the 20's when a lot of stuff is going on. for multiplayer i use all medium and low shadows, average fps for me is around 45 fps and stays above 30 in intense action.
This game makes me want a quad core.

 

So, you're saying the game REALLY does in fact need a quad.

Although, I'd wonder how an i5 would do, since it has 4 threads and not just 2 like previous duo cores.

 

My system is in my sig and I run low and medium settings at 1200x800 resolution. This game runs smooth!!!! better than what battlefield 2 ran back then. I get an average of 30fps on my system. But I do turn off AA and it still looks good.

 

my machine is in my sig, i run High detail and everything else on medium, AA2x,AF4x and at native res of 1680x1050 and get an average of 40fps, really happy with the performance, it plays very well.

 

I'm using a Microsoft XBox 360 notebook and BC2 runs flawlessly!

Unfortunately there's certain games meant and designed for consoles over PC and this is one of them.

 

I only play singleplayer and I have all settings on high, native 1600 x 900 resolution, HBAO is enabled in DX10 mode, AA 1x, Vsync disabled.

I get an average of 30-35 fps, sometimes higher frame rates, for example 45 fps but it depends on the level and how much is going on. In DX9 I get about 50-65 fps though.

To give you an idea of Core usage, I am in a building in the game, not doing much and Core usage is as follows:

Core 0: 20%
Core:1: 32%
Core:2: 56%
Core:3: 0.8%
Core:4: 58%
Core:5: 1.6%
Core:6: 65.5%
Core:7: 0.0%

I am not sure if it ever makes use of all threads and I think the game is just as GPU intensive as it is CPU. At least the OS can use the other threads for tasks leaving the game with enough resources. For example Core 5 could be an OS task.

 

System in Sig.

Running at 1920 x 1080 at max settings, turning off AA, AF, HBAO

pretty much getting full frames no matter what.

 

sounds nice. im planning on purchasing a g73 also.

 

Same, but I leave AF on since its not a big hit and important to me.

 

on my msi 1651 on everything low and 1024x768 resolution with the 9600m gt
i mildly lag! lol but still runs okay.

 

Where can you purchase a Clevo? More importantly, where in Canada. Or do you just order it through their site?

 

I got mine from the UK so can't really help you much. However check out the list of resellers here

 

A friend of mine bought his Sager/Clevo notebook from XoticPC.com which is a US company, but they ship to Canada as well. The only problem would be the high brokerage fees and to avoid it you'd have to use UPS express shipping. If you're interested in a powerful gaming rig just do what everyone else doing and go with the ASUS G73JH.

 

Thanks for the info.

 

Im using/WAS using the computer below... dual 2.66ghz, and 7950 GTX. but its SO UNPLAYABLE, i got a friend send me his old gaming desktop with an E8400 and 8800GTS... so i HAVE to use that. Its sad, cause the 8800mGTX plays the game good, but my videocard sucks for it, i just missed the cutoff

 

The W860CU is just as powerful, can use the same ATI 5870 GPU and has a more flexible future GPU upgrade potential because it uses the standard MXM 3.0B. To me that is much more important than being limited by the G73's proprietary format even if it is cheaper in the short term.

 

For a good price ($1500), I came accross the MSI GX740, however it has yet to be released.

For the specs it contains, it would cost be over $2000 for a sager or anything else for that matter.

Specs:
i7-720
5870
500Gb
4Gb
17"
Bluray

 

Try living in Canada and importing a Sager/Clevo notebook vs buying a ASUS gaming rig within Canada. The price difference is more than enough to make it a deal changer for anyone.

 

I play mine on 1920x1080, 4x aa and 8 x AF evverything whacked up with HBAO

get mid 40's in combat upper 60's non combat

 

I have settings on low 1360*768 with gt130m 1024ddr²

 

This is a console port? I wasn't aware of this...

 

NO BC2 was ground up made for the PC BUT has the simplicity for console players that is why it feels like a console game.

I play All high with HSAO on and Med on Shadows and effects. It usually stays at 40 BUT when viewing WIDE SCALE scenery with Dust it dips below 30

 

I've found that BFBC2 is... tolerably optimised. Personally, I've been playing at 1920x1080, with settings at high, no AA or HBAO. It runs so-so. Better than Crysis, but not quite the smooth-as-French-butter Modern Warfare 2.

 

system in sig..

According to fraps i get 30min 81max 59.800avg

My settings are
Width=1280
Height=768
Fullscreen=true
RefreshRate=60
VSync=false
[Sound]
Quality=high
VoipEnable=true
SpeakerCount=0
[Graphics]
Effects=high
Soldiers=high
Vehicles=high
Overgrowth=high
Undergrowth=high
StaticObjects=high
Terrain=high
Shadows=high
Bloom=true
HSAO=false
MSAA=2
Water=high
MainQuality=custom
Texture=high
DxVersion=9
Aniso=1
Detail=high
RenderAheadLimit=2
Fov=90 <<<<<< this makes the game much better looking xD i changed it from i think normal is 40 or something (Field Of View)

Im a little sad at the fact that I get disconnected a lot..sometimes 5 min after i join sometimes longer..its nothing with my connection though cuz it works 100%. I even forwarded ports and nothing. a lot of people are getting this problem and it sucks..hopefully they'll fix it in the next update..only happens to me when i play battlefield BC2..

 

Its not just how well optimized it is its the engine and environments too.

Also I think in general sandbox games are harder to run, BFBC2 is a sandbox game, not as open as Crysis but definitely more open than MW2.

 

native res., everything else on medium, 1xAA,AF and V-Sync ON

 

My Envy 5830 clocked at 550/1050, all max 1080p- AA AF HBAO OFF 39 FPS

 

1366*768 Native Res. All HIGH 1x AA and AF, no HBAO. Runs really smooth, no problem. OC'ed C2D Extremem to 3.0GHZ, will be getting T9900 OC'ed to 3.5 GHZ When i order it, so will test that out since this game is very CPU dependant.

 

Oh I see, didn't realise this was the case.

 

It isn't a console port. BC2 was just designed with console players in mind.


[edit] I see Shadowfate replied in regards to this as well. Thanks!

 

I play everything at 1920x1200 on High with AA at 1, HBAO on, and filter set at 16 and so far no complaints on the performance end.

BUT.... for some reason once in a while i'll be playing then completely out of the blue it will totally exit and kick me back to my windows main screen without even the courtesy of telling me something went wrong, it looks like I wasnt even playing a game to start with. It's truely weird.
Any ideas why it keeps abruptly exiting?
Thanks!

 

Its runs very smooth on Single Player mostly 26 to 35FPS its drops down to 18FPS when there is a whole lot of action on the screen thanks for lowering shadows and other settings. But on multiplayer it kinda of lags a bit maybe because of my weak CPU and internet connection

[WindowSettings]
Width=1024
Height=768
Fullscreen=true
RefreshRate=60
VSync=false
[Sound]
Quality=low
VoipEnable=true
SpeakerCount=0
[Graphics]
Effects=high
Soldiers=high
Vehicles=high
Overgrowth=high
Undergrowth=high
StaticObjects=high
Terrain=high
Shadows=low
Bloom=false
HSAO=false
MSAA=0
Water=high
MainQuality=custom
Texture=high
DxVersion=auto
Aniso=0
Detail=high
RenderAheadLimit=0
Fov=55

Game is still awesome and the graphics are still good even with lower settings

 

On my G72GX I use a mix of medium and high settings (low shadows), 2xAA, 8xAF, 1600x900. Gameplay online and off is smooth, very rarely dropping below 30FPS (to the point where I don't notice it at all).

 

Satisfied with my nearly 2yr old desktop rig at 1920 x 1200.

 

desktop (see sig) : 1920x1080 All high, hbao on, 16xaf and 4xAA between 60-90 fps avg 73 fps

Laptop: 1440x900 all high, hbao off, no aa 8xAf between 23-45fps avg 32

 

Asus G51vx-RX05 -- upgraded with T9900 OC to 3.3 in game.

Native 1366*768
High Texture
Medium Detail and Effects
Low Shadows
4x AF
1xAA
HBAO,Vsync, and Bloom Off

Full Server and Depending on Map

Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
23872, 463561, 26, 117, 51.497

Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
21953, 420146, 0, 125, 52.251

Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
22449, 343540, 30, 141, 65.346

Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
14156, 326720, 0, 110, 43.328

 

The latest ATi profile update increases performance for BC2, especially for XF. Read some even saying 60-75% increase. Shrug I don't have XF so can't confirm.

ATi is allowing Rage3D to be the first to host these which is why you may not have seen them on AMD's official site.

http://www.rage3d.com/xmp/

 

sorry bout this, mind enlightening me on these ati profiles ? how they work , and how to use them?
are they part of the catalyst driver package or are they supposed to be downloaded separately?

 

Starting with Catalyst 10.2 you download them separately.

The idea is you don't have to wait a month to have your profile updated for new games, patches etc. You just download the profile update, you install over your old ones. No need to uninstall.

The directions are in the link btw.

 

I'm quite sure it can easily run it at higher details and 1280X800.. What CPU do u have?

Asus G73 is great... especially if u want a 17incher... Can't wait for mine.. 149 days till i get one!

Well looks like ATI's driver are becomming better day by and day and NVDIA is screwing up more and more... i'm so disappointed in NVDIA... using a 5 month old driver sigh...

 

Why the wait? And why so long?

 

not much feedback from people with weaker computers =\

 

Hell no..............The BF series started on pc and though BC1 was console only these type of games playes much better on pc. And yes I do own a xbox360 as well and have played BC2 on it, but I think the experience is much better on a pc.
On my rig I can play 1080 res, DX11, everything on max, everything I say....and the game runs smooth like Captain Morgan Spiced with coke

swank

 

Oh I see. Thank you.

 

On my XPS M1730 the games runs smooth at 1920x1200 all High settings, sure some drops sometimes but 98% of the time smooth with framerates 35-40+.

My desktop in sig that has the max res of 1440x900 due to my TFT screen size runs the game at 60-70 fps smooth as butter all maxed out.

 

totally unplayable, as expected of a game with such high requirements lol

T5800 2GHz, GMA 4500 MHD


and hope you get your dream G73 soon, sean!

 

I don't like how it runs on my system, as I get very inconsistent performance (I like little variations from max and min fps).

I get as low as 20ish and as high as 60 all mixed up durin multiplayer and usually 35fps during single player, with also those spikes of 60 fps and then laggy 20.

I play at 1920x1080, all medium, high textures and vsync on.

 

got no money... parents will pay after exam results in 148 days lol... need to wait so long

 

Playing on my M17 with 4850 cards. Runs great native res' but after the new update the game keeps crashing