ArmA 3 System Requirements

[duhmedic 1]

Seems like I might be having no choice but to upgrade. I run ArmA II at the highest settings, but from what E3 and Gamescom has shown us, I can't imagine it working enough to run it that high. Maybe Mid? Any thoughts?

Phenom II X4 965 @ 3.5 ghz

HIS IceQx AMD 6870 (slightly OC'ed)

8gb DDR3 RAM @ 1330 (i think)

and my Mobo is an MSI 870a-G54

I see the game working at least at mid-low settings, but if anyone thinks It might be okay for a bit higher, lemme know :D

[papanowel 120]

Just wait until the alpha or the final release come and then chance if you need to.

[chortles 263]

AFAIK the PhysX will be handled by your CPU, not GPU, so the 7870 is fine (Good choice too).

Does this mean that PhysX 3 in Arma 3 being CPU-based means that there would be no advantage to a NVIDIA GTX card over an AMD Radeon card?

[oldbear 390]

Yes, you get the point!

After three rounds of beta testing, NVIDIA has finally released new PhysX SDK 3.2 for Windows, Linux, Mac OSX and Android platforms.

source : physxinfo.com

It mean that this PhysX can run on nearly all available up-to-date cpu.

[Horus 83]

Piledriver architecture in Arma 2: Operation Arrowhead

Link - BEHardware

[Tonci87 163]

My i7 2600k still beats that

I wnder how they achieved 42 frames with EVERYTHING maxed out in OA, I can´t do that.

[SWAT_Glock 10]

I'm running ARMA II CO on a Dell M6600 Precision Mobile Workstation laptop docked to a 24" monitor with no problems. Most setting set to High or Very High. Averages 43 FPS.

Specs:

Win 8 Pro

i7-2760QM

16GB 1600 MHz Ram

AMD FirePro M8900 video card

Samsung 256GB 840 Pro SSD

[chortles 263]

Yes, you get the point!

source : physxinfo.com

It mean that this PhysX can run on nearly all available up-to-date cpu.

Correspondingly does this mean that there is no advantage to NVIDIA cards in Arma 3 only, in PhysX 3 games in general (I assume that PhysX 2 games are GPU-based) or only in games that specify CPU-only-based PhysX? The 7850 seems to be in a pretty good position performance-to-price-wise, but I'm concerned about how many games "CPU-based PhysX" would apply to... I'm intending an "Arma computer", but it can't just be an "Arma computer" either.

[PuFu 4600]

what most don't get is that physics calculation have always been CPU side. In simpler terms, physics are all the rules that govern how the world reacts. All games have those, including the available arma franchise. Most confuse advanced particle effects, as well as cloth and destruction effects and collisions with basic physics and ragdolls.

Will A3 take advantage of advanced GPU based features? Not sure at this moment. There has been no confirmation or denying of this. But one this is certain: ragdolls will be CPU based, using physix SDK 3.2+

[chortles 263]

Oh I get that, but I'm trying to get a proper sense of where things lie both for Arma 3 and for other games so that I can "correctly" pick between the two GPU vendors, even if Arma 3 is going to be CPU-heavy again :p but as a result GPU-vendor-agnostic.

[Covert_Death 11]

most games don't use physX anyway and if they do it's always been optional... batman is the last one i remember that had physX. and with the news 3.0 sdk being CPU capable it doesn't much matter anymore at all. if you like the 7850 then get it, thats really all we can say I guess...

[Smith 1]

Just ordered an Aurora R4 wih 16 gb of ram, and a gtx 680 graphics card. Intel® Core™ i7-3820 processor (Quad Core, 10MB Cache, Overclocked up to 4.1GHz . I do not know much about computers and this game is the reason I wanted a computer and if its not going to be powerful enough I can change the order. Someone let me know what you think.

[St. Jimmy 272]

Just ordered an Aurora R4 wih 16 gb of ram, and a gtx 680 graphics card. Intel® Core™ i7-3820 processor (Quad Core, 10MB Cache, Overclocked up to 4.1GHz . I do not know much about computers and this game is the reason I wanted a computer and if its not going to be powerful enough I can change the order. Someone let me know what you think.

You are good to go.

If you want to squeeze out everything from Arma 3 then add SSD to your packet and install it there. Read more here about Arma and SSD.

[chortles 263]

The real factor would be whether or not you had a solid state drive (SSD) in there to install Arma 3 to, the specs that Smith posted already exceed last year's recommended specs by a lot.

[Smith 1]

The real factor would be whether or not you had a solid state drive (SSD) in there to install Arma 3 to, the specs that Smith posted already exceed last year's recommended specs by a lot.

Do you recommend the alienware options or should I wait till the computer comes and buy one from a store. I want to install my windows and games on the ssd and just use my 1 tb hard drive for music/pics.

[Itsarclight 1]

Since you guys started a little sidechat about SSD. I really want to know what difference it makes if you choose to install it on an SSD compared to a normal HDD?

Thanks guys =)

/Arclight

[St. Jimmy 272]

Since you guys started a little sidechat about SSD. I really want to know what difference it makes if you choose to install it on an SSD compared to a normal HDD?

Thanks guys =)

/Arclight

You can read it from the link that I gave in my last post and here's another discussion in BI forums.

[Itsarclight 1]

You can read it from the link that I gave in my last post and here's another discussion in BI forums.

Thank you Jimmy!

[Covert_Death 11]

@smith if your capable at all of putting things together, buy the parts separately and put your machine together yourself, first builds are always nerve racking, but completely worth it, you know more about your computer and really get what you pay for. you can get a lot more bang for the same buck or save a lot of money and build that same rig yourself. if your really only going to be gaming you don't need 16Gb of ram... tell us your budget and we can suggest a build from newegg or somewhere

[Smith 1]

I really would have liked to build my own but since I am financing this computer interest free over 3 years it really made sense to me financially to go this route. Next time I will have cash in hand or a credit card with a big enough limit.

[Covert_Death 11]

well newegg would let you pay it off in a year no interest and a rig MUCH more powerful than the one you are purchasing only costs ~$1600.... with TWO graphics cards it brings it to the same price, includes a monster SSD and killer RAM... check it out.

the price listed is with TWO graphics cards, change the 2 to a 1 and the price is 1600 and still dominates the Aurora

http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/PublicWishDetail.aspx?WishListNumber=21091125

[finguide 1]

well newegg would let you pay it off in a year no interest and a rig MUCH more powerful than the one you are purchasing only costs ~$1600.... with TWO graphics cards it brings it to the same price, includes a monster SSD and killer RAM... check it out.

the price listed is with TWO graphics cards, change the 2 to a 1 and the price is 1600 and still dominates the Aurora

http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/PublicWishDetail.aspx?WishListNumber=21091125

Computer case: from this to this or this -> save $50 with no difference in case - quality brand case (I have the first one myself), very quiet, looks and keeps your components cool

Processor: from this to this -> save $95 with 0-3% performance hit - only difference between these two is hyperthreading technology that almost any game can't use

RAM: from this to this -> save $34 with 0-2 % performance hit - the optimal RAM performance/price ratio is at this moment 1600 MHz / CL 9 latency, above that the performance boost is very small when compared to price

= Total savings $189 with 0-3 % performance hit (almost none!)

Edited December 7, 2012 by finguide
recommended case -> XL version for 2 HD7970s

[Covert_Death 11]

Computer case: from this to this or this -> save $80-$90 with no difference in case - quality brand case (I have the first one myself), very quiet, looks and keeps your components cool

Processor: from this to this -> save $95 with 0-3% performance hit - only difference between these two is hyperthreading technology that almost any game can't use

RAM: from this to this -> save $34 with 0-2 % performance hit - the optimal RAM performance/price ratio is at this moment 1600 MHz / CL 9 latency, above that the performance boost is very small when compared to price

= Total saving $209 - $219 with 0-3 % performance hit (almost none!)

agreed, but it all comes down to what you do I guess. I will never skimp on a case as if you get the right one it can last forever, fractal is nice but still mid-range.

the CPU and RAM all comes down to user operation, I guess if your only going to be gaming on ArmA3 or other games then yea swap the chip and the RAM to the above suggested (although if your switching to 1600 ram just make sure is CAS 9 or 8, ... I do a lot of CAD work so i'm pretty biased towards hyper threading and high core count but the point remains you can save SOOO much money and still get decent financing if you build it yourself AND get a better rig all around

[finguide 1]

agreed, but it all comes down to what you do I guess. I will never skimp on a case as if you get the right one it can last forever, fractal is nice but still mid-range.

the CPU and RAM all comes down to user operation, I guess if your only going to be gaming on ArmA3 or other games then yea swap the chip and the RAM to the above suggested (although if your switching to 1600 ram just make sure is CAS 9 or 8, ... I do a lot of CAD work so i'm pretty biased towards hyper threading and high core count but the point remains you can save SOOO much money and still get decent financing if you build it yourself AND get a better rig all around

Agreed too. I'd still buy the Fractal though, I consider it as very good solution. I have the R4 myself, and I can easily imagine that I'll have the same case still after 10 years.

Based on Smith's messages, I don't think that he's going to use those any programs that really benefit from hyper-threading or very fast RAM, or if he actually will use them, the build is still very decent to that kind of use.

And because the processor may be the bottleneck of the system with 2 HD7970s, I'd definitely get aftermarket CPU cooler (some examples here) and overclock the processor. If one doesn't want to OC the CPU it would be still a very good solution to buy OC service from local IT experts/professionals with that build. i5-3570k is especially made for overclocking, it's often possible to reach 4,5 GHz and even 5 GHz with it...! That makes a huge difference, if the processor is the bottleneck of system like in this case it may be – especially when we're talking about ArmA series.

I really would have liked to build my own but since I am financing this computer interest free over 3 years it really made sense to me financially to go this route. Next time I will have cash in hand or a credit card with a big enough limit.

You could buy the components and case and buy service from local IT professionals and let them put the stuff together, maybe even install the OS, drivers etc for you. Much more performance for the money. :)

[Smith 1]

Yeah, I also forgot to mention that I received a pretty decent deal on the computer compared to what they said it was going to cost (preferred customer) ... still overpriced I know but I didn't know about the financing possibility through newegg.