spacemarine 10 Posted January 12, 2012 im buying a new computer soon , but i wanna be able 2 play arma 3 flawless with maxed out settings and loads of ai .. .. should i build a system with dual 16 core cpu's .. or this game wont take advantage of more than 6 or 8? or is the cpu clock frequency more important than the core count Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nkenny 1057 Posted January 12, 2012 Don't expect magic performance by having more CPUs. A fast QUAD core will see you through the next few years of gaming. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maddogx 13 Posted January 12, 2012 If money isn't an issue and you're looking for maximum performance, I'd say wait until April and grab a new Intel Ivy Bridge processor. An i7 3770K with an appropriate motherboard that supports PCI-E 3.0 should do the trick - then you can get two of NVidias new GeForce 600 series cards (GTX 680 or whatever) and connect them via SLI. Throw in 16GB of some top of the range DDR3 RAM and ideally a good SSD and you're set. :) *drools a little* Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
spacemarine 10 Posted January 12, 2012 If money isn't an issue and you're looking for maximum performance, I'd say wait until April and grab a new Intel Ivy Bridge processor. An i7 3770K with an appropriate motherboard that supports PCI-E 3.0 should do the trick - then you can get two of NVidias new GeForce 600 series cards (GTX 680 or whatever) and connect them via SLI. Throw in 16GB of some top of the range DDR3 RAM and ideally a good SSD and you're set. :)*drools a little* ok .. I'm getting that.. but probably have 2 live of vitamin pills and instant noodles for a while. ;) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cdogwoof 11 Posted January 12, 2012 ok .. I'm getting that.. but probably have 2 live of vitamin pills and instant noodles for a while. ;) Rofl Im hoping my 2500k i5 and 8 gigs of ram will see it through to ArmA 3 i have to get a new card though Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bee8190 10 Posted January 12, 2012 I might be dead wrong but I doubt A3 will require tremendous hardware requirements. In fact, i believe arma3 will run better than arma2 on current gen HW. Obviously, Im gonna play it safe and start saving pennies for latest HW :p Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
james2464 177 Posted January 12, 2012 if want to run arma 3 at 60fps you will need to invest in 680GTX and sandy X79 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bee8190 10 Posted January 12, 2012 if want to run arma 3 at 60fps you will need to invest in 680GTX and sandy X79 Well i suppose as with any latest games this is true but on the other hand, if you find enough 40fps you all you will / might need is 560ti tho :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maddogx 13 Posted January 12, 2012 if want to run arma 3 at 60fps you will need to invest in 680GTX and sandy X79 A completely baseless statement I'm afraid, unless you have access to an inside source. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
james2464 177 Posted January 12, 2012 a completely baseless statement i'm afraid, unless you have access to an inside source. ;) ____ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bee8190 10 Posted January 12, 2012 ;)____ I really loled :D Anyways, as said, if one wants to push some game to max- 2560pix, 16AA, 8AF, 5000VD etc...i completely agree, you will need the set up you suggested but I doubt BIS will push it too far with their A3 requirements, as Im pretty sure they have no interest ''eliminating'' half of their player base :p Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
james2464 177 Posted January 12, 2012 I really loled :DAnyways, as said, if one wants to push some game to max- 2560pix, 16AA, 8AF, 5000VD etc...i completely agree, you will need the set up you suggested but I doubt BIS will push it too far with their A3 requirements, as Im pretty sure they have no interest ''eliminating'' half of their player base :p I use to be sympathetic to low settings and people with computers that couldn't handle Arma... but then i got a job. ;) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bee8190 10 Posted January 12, 2012 I use to be sympathetic to low settings and people with computers that couldn't handle Arma... but then i got a job. ;) Strongly disagree here mate, looking trough the forums, some ppl here have very capable HW yet they struggle with performance, whereas someone with lower end HW running the game with no issues. Nothing to do with if you're student or high chair PR... I think EVERY developing studio is acknowledging the need to make their game HW wise accesible as much as they can Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
james2464 177 Posted January 12, 2012 Strongly disagree here mate, looking trough the forums, some ppl here have very capable HW yet they struggle with performance, whereas someone with lower end HW running the game with no issues. Nothing to do with if you're student or high chair PR... I think EVERY developing studio is acknowledging the need to make their game HW wise accesible as much as they can I was really being a smartass, but on a serious note i agree with you on that. Also i've read officially the A3 DEVs have reworked the streaming engine, you can see this for yourself in the F35 flying video it looks very efficient. It will help greatly I think. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites