ArmA 3 System Requirements

[Covert_Death 11]

if that's your budget don't get a 680 friend. a 670 is way to close to 680 performance to justify the cost and they overclock equally well. take a 670 over a 680 and put that extra cash towards a better model CPU or an SSD (ArmA series NEED SSD's) I can build you a couple rig options too if you want some variety, just lemme know

[JwHs 1]

670 - 680 Comparison

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/2012-vga-gpgpu/compare,2950.html?prod%5B5553%5D=on∏%5B5629%5D=on

I myself got a 670 over 680.

[Allen7 1]

Oh God i'm confused!!

anyone please advise!

my system specs

i7 2600k

evga gtx 560

8gig main memory(1600 bus)

wd hdd 7200 rpm sata3

or ill have to wait till release?!?

thanks

[ProfTournesol 956]

or ill have to wait till release?!?

thanks

This.

[GreigPil 1]

I understand completely. :)

---------- Post added at 14:39 ---------- Previous post was at 14:15 ----------

Okay I have 2 build specs for you, I will send you a message with them not to be clogging up this thread.

If you wouldn't mind - I have the same budget (£650 - though I don't need a PSU, SSD or case) and would be interested in what you might have come up with. Maybe you could even edit your post with a spoiler tag?

Cheers,

GreigPil

[zearro1 1]

I am in the process of rebuilding my main rig. I am really curious what hardware will give a great experience. I am starting with

Nvidia gtx 660TI

Nvidia gtx 285 (dedicated phys X)

corsair 240gb ssd

2x 1tb caviar black Raid 0

Depending on what failed I might have a

980x 3.2ghz I7

6gb ddr3

foxconn flaming blade

qx6700 2.66 ghz

790I evga ftw

4gb ddr3

I read that arma 3 devs are switching to Physx 3. Does anyone think that a dedicated PhysX card will be of any value in terms of performace?

BTW first post and I am really excited for ARMA 3!!

[Nowyoudie 0]

I am in the process of rebuilding my main rig. I am really curious what hardware will give a great experience. I am starting with

Nvidia gtx 660TI

Nvidia gtx 285 (dedicated phys X)

corsair 240gb ssd

2x 1tb caviar black Raid 0

Depending on what failed I might have a

980x 3.2ghz I7

6gb ddr3

foxconn flaming blade

qx6700 2.66 ghz

790I evga ftw

4gb ddr3

I read that arma 3 devs are switching to Physx 3. Does anyone think that a dedicated PhysX card will be of any value in terms of performace?

BTW first post and I am really excited for ARMA 3!!

The systems you have even with the outdated Q6700 would provide adequate gaming power for ArmA 3. It is not that much different from ArmA 2's engine, it just has more enhancements and they are adding physics which would definitely stress systems more. Still, it's not something to be worried about, and I, too, have a GTX 260 for PhysX only which would allow your main video cards (even including ATI) focus on the graphics.

[Covert_Death 11]

everything we know so far says physx is going to be CPU only even if you have an nvidia card it will be forced to the CPU

[frozbit 1]

Looks like you all got nice performance PC-s.

But what about me? I got:

Gigabyte 970A-D3 AM3+

2TB Seagate ST2000DM001-9YN1(pretty fast I think)

4 GB 1600 MHz RAM

Radeon 6670 1GB

AMD FX 6100

22" 1080p Philips monitor

Yes, it is a budget PC. It was the best I could buy about a year ago(I'm a poor third-year uni student). I did a lot of price-to-performance checking before buying the parts. ARMA 3 is playable on that, but I wish I could have higher detail and more FPS. Now I'm considering upgrading my PC by spending about 350 euros:

2 x Kingston HyperX PC12800 KHX1600C9D3/4GB about 2 x 18,7 €

Sapphire Radeon HD 7850 2GB about 181,9 €

FX 8320 152 €

What do you think? Is it actually worth upgrading my CPU? I think that my current 6100 is actually fast enough to run ARMA 3 nicely.

[RogueRebel 1]

I sent back my 670 , I will be getting a msi 680 lightning (I didn't buy it yet) , but then again I will be doing sli and probably over clocking them.

Edited November 20, 2012 by RogueRebel

[finguide 1]

In my opinion, if you're going to get SLI, I'd rather get overclockable GTX 670 with aftermarket cooler and OC it to at least to clocks of 680. 670 has much better price/quality ratio than 680, especially when you can easily OC the 670 to clocks of 680. If you're going to get single card only and not add second one later, I'd definitely get HD7970 Ghz Edition, much better raw performance (clocks) already with stock clocks, and better ability to OC it a lot more!

I've just spent 2 months and about 100 hours trying to find optimal hardware for my new PC, so I think that I've some kind of apprehension of the topic ;)

PS. Stable 30-35 FPS at last AO in Domination with mods and 40 players online, 9000 m viewdistance and almost everything on high/very high... i5-3570k at stock clock & GTX 670 at stock clocks & Samsung 830 256GB SSD

[RogueRebel 1]

In my opinion, if you're going to get SLI, I'd rather get overclockable GTX 670 with aftermarket cooler and OC it to at least to clocks of 680. 670 has much better price/quality ratio than 680, especially when you can easily OC the 670 to clocks of 680. If you're going to get single card only and not add second one later, I'd definitely get HD7970 Ghz Edition, much better raw performance (clocks) already with stock clocks, and better ability to OC it a lot more!

I've just spent 2 months and about 100 hours trying to find optimal hardware for my new PC, so I think that I've some kind of apprehension of the topic ;)

PS. Stable 30-35 FPS at last AO in Domination with mods and 40 players online, 9000 m viewdistance and almost everything on high/very high... i5-3570k at stock clock & GTX 670 at stock clocks & Samsung 830 256GB SSD

2 overclocked 680s would be what a 15% performance increase ?

(overclocker edition 680's that is)

I might go with 2 Msi 680 twin frozrs and save the money for an SDD , The money I would of spent on 2 lightnings.

I need to ask around the net if 2 sli lightnings are worth it.

Doesn't arma 2 in general, run better on Nvidia cards though ?

Edited November 20, 2012 by RogueRebel

[finguide 1]

2 overclocked 680s would be what a 15% performance increase ?

(overclocker edition 680's that is)

I might go with 2 Msi 680 twin frozrs and save the money for an SDD , The money I would of spent on 2 lightnings.

I need to ask around the net if 2 sli lightnings are worth it.

Doesn't arma 2 in general, run better on Nvidia cards though ?

It's your decision of course. My point was that at least here in Europe 2x 680s cost at least 220 euros more than 2x 670s. That's, in my opinion, a lot of money when compared to the performance boost. I'd rather get bigger SSD or maybe better, IPS or 120 Hz screen with that money. I'd myself choose bigger screen and more vivid colors and better contrast (IPS) or higher Hz instead of one step better video settings in game (for example this) – in my opinion those affect the quality of experience much more than slightly better graphics settings. I'm myself going to replace my Asus VG278HE 144 Hz screen (which is broken, 3D doesn't work with it correctly) to IPS screen that has better colours and contrast. A3 will have nice colours according to the preview videos, I think it'll be a "WOW" experience to play A3 with IPS screen...

I'm not sure about this, but I think that the performance may be little bit better on Nvidia cards in A2. At least some older AMD cards caused some annoying graphical glitches in A2 some time ago. On the other hand, the performance (especially when OCed) of HD7970 Ghz Edition is significantly better than even GTX 680 (that may cost 100 euros more than 7970!), I'd have definitely got it if I wasn't going to add another video card later (SLI has much better performance ratio than CF on most cards still). In general, my opinion is that single card -> get AMD, multi-card -> get Nvidia.

[RogueRebel 1]

It's your decision of course. My point was that at least here in Europe 2x 680s cost at least 220 euros more than 2x 670s. That's, in my opinion, a lot of money when compared to the performance boost. I'd rather get bigger SSD or maybe better, IPS or 120 Hz screen with that money. I'd myself choose bigger screen and more vivid colors and better contrast (IPS) or higher Hz instead of one step better video settings in game (for example this) – in my opinion those affect the quality of experience much more than slightly better graphics settings. I'm myself going to replace my Asus VG278HE 144 Hz screen (which is broken, 3D doesn't work with it correctly) to IPS screen that has better colours and contrast. A3 will have nice colours according to the preview videos, I think it'll be a "WOW" experience to play A3 with IPS screen...

I'm not sure about this, but I think that the performance may be little bit better on Nvidia cards in A2. At least some older AMD cards caused some annoying graphical glitches in A2 some time ago. On the other hand, the performance (especially when OCed) of HD7970 Ghz Edition is significantly better than even GTX 680 (that may cost 100 euros more than 7970!), I'd have definitely got it if I wasn't going to add another video card later (SLI has much better performance ratio than CF on most cards still). In general, my opinion is that single card -> get AMD, multi-card -> get Nvidia.

This is the monitor I want. Here it is

Edited November 20, 2012 by RogueRebel

[TwitchGripz 1]

I just recently switched from console gaming and finally built what I think to be a decent PC. And I plan on picking up Arma2 and definitely Arma3 when it is released. I just wanted to know with these specs would I be able to run arma2 at decent settings. I'm also assuming I should change the gpu for Arma3, right?

-Specs

Cpu: i5 2500k

Gpu: gtx 650 ti

ssd: intel 64gb

hdd: wd blue 500gb 7200rpm

Psu: Rosewill 650w

Mobo: Asus p8z77

Much thanks in advance.

Edited November 21, 2012 by TwitchGripz

[segaprophet 1]

I hope the gaming rig I just ordered off newegg will be able to keep up with ARMA 3 and all the awesome mods we're going to get.

[RogueRebel 1]

Will I get away with an i5 processor without any problems for Arma 2 and 3 ?

I can get an i7 if I really need it , but if not I would rather get the i5 and put the savings into something else.

I mean could I run a server , fraps and arma 2 or 3 all at the same time with an i5 ?

[finguide 1]

Will I get away with an i5 processor without any problems for Arma 2 and 3 ?

I can get an i7 if I really need it , but if not I would rather get the i5 and put the savings into something else.

I mean could I run a server , fraps and arma 2 or 3 all at the same time with an i5 ?

Get i5-3570k. It has excellent price/performance ratio and pretty huge ability to OC it. You can OC it from 3,4 GHz to at least 4,4 GHz in most cases, the best can reach even 5,0 GHz. You'll need aftermarket CPU cooler and usually also better thermal paste if you're going to OC it though. i5-2500k wouldn't be a bad choice either, it can be OCed too to very high clocks and the thermal paste on the core of CPU is better than in i5-3570k, resulting in lower temperatures if thermal pastes aren't changed. The only difference between i5 and i7 CPUs is hyper-threading technology (HT) that i7 has, but only few programs (like image and video editing programs) can use it. If you're not professional/serious image/video editer, there's absolutely no reason to buy a lot more expensive i7, because games can't use hyper-threading (well, a few games can, but the performance boost is often almost unnoticeable) and therefore get benefit from it. :)

[Ekko 1]

Besides the game takes place in corridors - can't even compare.

Hahahahaha! I must surely have been insane and mentally ill, because last time I played Battlefield 3 I actually was outside in a big open world! though now I think I might have imagined it, let me take a look. ( currently playing bf3 with my premium account which I never use since its quite boring after a hundread or more hours )

So I played a little bf3 and I was never in a corridor! though I did see a lot of houses which were enterable. Conclusion: I am not insane! and the game doesn't take place in corridors.

Ehm, just realized I was on page 1 of the thread and replied to this very old post... :rolleyes:

Edited November 23, 2012 by Ekko

[Psilocybe 3]

Phenom II 965 x 4 @ 3.82 ghz

4gb Ram

6990 4gb GPU

I'm looking to upgrade for Arma 3, and nows about the time to do so, but apparently the things I am looking at aren't THAT(less so on GPU) big of an improvment, namely:

AMD x8 FX-8350

and

4G GTX 690.

Ive heard that those Solid State Hard Drives can be good for gaming too, hoping for some advice here.

[rMav 1]

Quick question: I was about to pull the trigger on an XFX HD 7870 for $189 before seeing all this talk about PhysX. Would I be better off spending a bit more and purchasing a similar Nvidia card instead?

edit: Also note I have an i5-3750k.

Edited November 28, 2012 by rMav

[khaki 10]

Quick question: I was about to pull the trigger on an XFX HD 7870 for $189 before seeing all this talk about PhysX. Would I be better off spending a bit more and purchasing a similar Nvidia card instead?

edit: Also note I have an i5-3750k.

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

[Psilocybe 3]

Okay guys, I want to lay out my plans and get an opinion to see if you think I am making the right one.

I am going to purchase a Swiftech H20-220 Edge Liquid Cooling Kit for my Phenom II 965 and try to OC it to about 4ghz, I am also looking at purchasing a Epsilon Full Cover VGA Waterblock For my 6990 and OC that too.

I am likely going to get a SSD and put my games on there.

This is what I would consider a 'soft' upgrade, as in the past I have always just upgraded Mobo, CPU and GPU.

Hoping I can get some good advice.

[Covert_Death 11]

don't waste your time on that kit.... order one of these and start off on the right foot if your interested in water cooling.

http://www.amazon.com/Raystorm-RS240-Extreme-Universal-Cooling/dp/B008PA1SA8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1354082124&sr=8-1&keywords=raystorm+rs240

get the SSD and put the OS and ArmA on that...

with the 965, depending on what stepping it is, you should get 4.2Ghz if your running a custom loop like what i linked above.

i had a 955 @ 4.0Ghz with only an H60 cooling it and all was well.

[Psilocybe 3]

Ah, thankyou sir!