What does it take to run this game on max settings?

[shadowlid 11]

Im tired of not getting the right answers. I just want one simple answer.

What is the bottom line computer that will run this game on max settings with out lagging.

The reason i ask for the bottom line is then i will know what components to base my new build off of.

I will be running 1920x1080@60hz

The 3d at max setting and view distance at max. Everything at max!!!!!!

What

CPU- Bottom line AMD and Intel chip

Video card- Bottom line ATI and Nvidia chip

Ram- Amount and speed

Hard drive- Rpm and cache.

I do not plan on building a bottom line computer. I just want to know what will run it on max setting then i will go a little higher then that if my budget will allow it.

Thanks in advance,

Shadowlid

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

Performance heavily depends on the mission you are playing.

[shadowlid 11]

Let say your playing the most demanding mission. Hardware wise.

What would you have to have.

Also i will be overclocking everything in my new build. CPU, VGA, and ram. But seeing how you never know what overclock you gonna get.

What is the base line stock hardware to run all maxed out.

Edited August 11, 2010 by Shadowlid

[Beagle 684]

Hard to say as a lot of people report bad frames with super duper new quad or more cores and Crossfire or SLI GPU computers on Win7 while other with old dual cores and old GPUson XP systems have no problems (like me)

[r3volution 0]

Honestly even if you did a build using the top of the line core i7 quad core or six core overclocked to shit, two 5970's in crossfire, 12GB of DDR3 1800mhz, and the best SSD hard drive you could get your hands on, I think it would still probably lag a little at some points...

The main reason for this is the sheer scope of the game which really could require about as much CPU power as you can throw at it, but this is only relevant with complex missions with hundreds of units present. That same rig would almost certainly be able to run smooth as butter at max settings in a blank map in editor.

Basically this game seems to serve as a good reminder of the chokepoints experienced in transfer speeds between cpu/ram/hd/gpu.

Despite that somewhat dismal sounding prognosis, its not necessarily a bad reflection on Arma2 or its engine, its basically that no other game approaches the scope and complexity and thus no other game comes close to needing the sheer amount of computer power that Arma2/Arrowhead does...

[shadowlid 11]

I see. This makes sense. So pretty much your saying that Arma 2 is a beast of a game. I already knew that. Arma 2 rocks!!!!

Ok this is what i was thinking of building.

How do you think this will run the game.

AMD quad core overclocked to 4.0ghz or more.

4gb DDR3 1600(OCed to what ever is stable)

HD 5770- Might crossfire or upgrade to better card(s) later.

And a SSD to run arma 2 and Windows 7 64bit.

PS. Im not rich and i didnt want it to seem like i was gonna build a freaking super computer. I just wanted to base my system off the info i got from this thread.

---------- Post added at 05:53 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:51 AM ----------

Hard to say as a lot of people report bad frames with super duper new quad or more cores and Crossfire or SLI GPU computers on Win7 while other with old dual cores and old GPUson XP systems have no problems (like me)

What kind of FPS are you getting? And what settings are you running?

[rexehuk 16]

Hmm... my rig is in my sig and I still get stuttering, it's mostly down to the BIS coding and can't really be stopped (im not exactly running a cheap rig).

Really just buy a decent machine and wait for patches. You might as well go for an AMD hexcore if you're going that route, for the sake of futureproofing.

[ziiip 1]

Maybe a quad-SLI of the Nvidia flagship cards and and Intel Extreme (the one around $1000) 4 gigs of RAM and the best HDD.,

@Rexehuk Wow you have stuters with that CPU? I thought it would easily hadnle the AI. : \

Edited August 11, 2010 by ziiip

[Vixente 10]

There are a lot of complex games out there. Don't assume Arma2 is "the great and only one". Don't get me wrong, i love this game since day 1, but there are a lot of great games out there ( though OFP2 is not one of them :P ) Also you don't need the latest hardware to run A2 ok, with what you have wrote game will run fine. Maybe the graphic card is a bit too low, i don't know that card, but i think it's below GTX260. You may want to buy a 5850/GTX460/470 and swap the SSD for a Western Digital caviar black/raptor hard drive to "compensate". Drive speed is important, but the SSD prices are still a bit high in my opinion. And you'll need certain amount of GB for W7+APPS+Arma2+pagefile, the more GB the more price. Especially with SSD.

I've got this:

Phenom II x4 955BE @ 3,6 Ghz.

Sapphire Toxic 5850 @ 860/1300 (1080p resolution)

6 GB RAM DDR2

HD: WD VRaptor 2 10k RPM 150GB for W7 64 + applications + important games (Arma2 and a few others)

Game normally runs fine with high/vhigh settings. But this game has flaws and sometimes you are gonna cry and think that is your hardware... and it will not be. But if you like the game you'll keep playing, and if you know and play a lot more games (like i do) you will learn that there are worst games out there with crappy support (without great forums like this one) and crappy performance...

Edited August 11, 2010 by Vixente

[shadowlid 11]

Thanks all for the help. The MOBO i want is pretty future proof i think:confused:. Im gonna wait til the bobcat and bulldozer lines come out before i drop any major cash.

[Murmur2k 0]

AMD quad core overclocked to 4.0ghz or more.

4gb DDR3 1600(OCed to what ever is stable)

HD 5770- Might crossfire or upgrade to better card(s) later.

And a SSD to run arma 2 and Windows 7 64bit.

From what I can tell on this forum I think Intel i7 is best for Arma2

[Beagle 684]

[/color]

What kind of FPS are you getting? And what settings are you running?

My system can produce 34fps in the OA benchmark and 28 in the ArmAII Benchmark 01. On a TFT and used to bad frames since FSX this is good enough for me.

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

Oh and resolution also plays a huge and critical part in how well your PC will perform.

1920x1200 will murder most machines. Even I don't run it at that res on my 24".

[Beagle 684]

1650x1080 here with no AA

[andromedagalaxe 10]

how many roads must a man walk down?

Some questions are just unknowable by man. I count this topic as one of them

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Not even good old OFP runs smooth on max settings yet! This will take another ten years of hardware progress:D

[walker 0]

Hi all

Resolution

View distance

Complexity

Entity Count

Bells and whistes (Anti Aliasing etc)

Oh! and dont forget sound cards still one of the largest causes of crashes glitches and stutters.

Multi core processor but processor speed is more important than number of cores after you have more than one core; at least so far.

Fast hard drive and or lots of memory

A good Graphics card.

A good bog standard soundcard, no cutting edge or bleeding edge bug trap soundcards.

Kind Regards walker

[beastybass 10]

I play all on highest settings. The resolution is 1080p.

AMD Phenom 940 3,3 GHz

4GB DDR2 1066MHz

ATI 5870 1GB GPU Clock 900MHz Memory Clock 1300Mhz

FPS between 35 and 40

[polecat.uk 11]

My setup max's the game, i play domi, most servers dont let you go higher than a 5000 view. so online thats what i play with, that and full grass.

Intel quad q9400 2.6mhz

4gig 800mhz ram

bfg gtx285 oc2

windows xp pro 32bit

I play with everything very high and a 6000 view when on the ground, 10000 max when flying i do have post processing off but i can have it maxed without any problems,(i just dont like the blur) i get 32 fps in the oa bench mark, i did have aa off but after i installed the beta patch i can now max that aswell :) it also let me up my view a tad

Playing the game, i dont see the need for any more fps, plays smooth.

I have not over clocked anything, the gfx card is overclocked but it came like that.

I use a g15 keyboard and going by the read out, my cpu would sit around 60% and my ram would sit around 50%

---------- Post added at 06:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:26 PM ----------

forgot my res is 1650x1050

[Zipper5 74]

Arma 2 or OA at full settings, full view distance and full fillrate is impossible. No hardware in existance right now can run it. Even running OFP at full view distance with terrain detail on very high (really looks like shit, though...) isn't playable.

[polecat.uk 11]

I could never max ofp, i always got the out of memory crap when i up'd my view, as for the hardware not being in existance, i think your wrong Zipper its more down to the game not using the hardware to its best, ie cpu 60% ram 50%

[Zipper5 74]

I'm not wrong in the sense that it's impossible to run either Arma 2 or OA on max everything. It is simply impossible with current hardware unless you go batshit crazy with it.

[polar bear 10]

Depends what you mean by "run".

I have a Core-i7 930 which I OC to 3.2Ghz, tri-channel memory, and an ATI HD 5850 card. I can run the game on max settings at 1920x1200 however I get a pretty low framerate if I do that. It's fine for SP really but for MP even in ArmA you want a framerate above 30fps so as to be able to react faster than the other guy if you meet face to face in close quarters.

So in reality I turn my settings down pretty low, turn off post processing, etc., so that I can get my frame rate up over 30 while maintaining maximum resolution.

Obviously part of the "problem" here is that I have a huge resolution, I imagine I could play on normal settings if I played on 1680x1050 or the like, but I enjoy my big screen :)

The Core i7 930 and the 5850 is in my mind a bit of a sweet spot in that they're not that much more expensive than slower processers/GPU's for a reasonable boost in performance but if you want faster the prices start doubling for only 20% more punch.

Edited August 11, 2010 by Polar Bear

[Noraf 0]

the simple answer to the tread topic question is, a top notch pc, very high end gaming rig, that hits the marked in about 5 years ;)

BIS is usualy a "few" years ahead of the hardware

[Gunter Severloh 4051]

Would knowing the system requirements give you a base idea of what to work around?

Arma 2: System Requirements

Minimal PC Requirements

* CPU: Dual Core Intel Pentium 4 3.0 GHz / Intel Core 2.0 GHz / AMD Athlon 3200+ or faster

* RAM: 1 GB

* Video Card: NVIDIA GeForce 7800 / ATI Radeon 1800 with Shader Model 3 and 256 MB VRAM or faster

* OS: Windows XP

Optimal PC Requirements

* CPU: Intel Core 2.8 GHz / AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+ or faster

* RAM: 2 GB

* Video Card: NVIDIA GeForce 8800GT / ATI Radeon 4850 with Shader Model 3 and 512 MB VRAM or faster

* OS: Windows XP or Vista

these are both for Arma 2 and OA.