Are you going to upgrade because of ARMA 3?

[samyg 3]

Im going to be doing a new build in the next few weeks that is not specifically for arma 3 but i do want it to be able to play arma 3, i know what im getting but the gfx card is the only thing im stuck on. Someones suggested the 560ti as in their opinion its half the price of some of the newer cards and not far off in performance and others tell me to go for the 300 pound cards.

What card would you guys recommend to me to be able to comfortably play arma 3 (yes i know its not out and exact minimum specifications arent either etc) to go along with a new ivy bridge set up? Bearing in mind im not one of these 4 way sli have to have everything completely maxed kind of guys. High settings would do me just fine.

What is your budget? And no, you don't need multiple cards unless you are running a high resolution monitor or multiple monitors for your games.

[Steakslim 1]

That's not entirely true, but not entirely false either.

[samyg 3]

That's not entirely true, but not entirely false either.

Well, yes, lol.

[Steakslim 1]

I won't lie, once I start working in a few weeks, i'll probably start getting retarded with pc parts.

[avfc 10]

What is your budget? And no, you don't need multiple cards unless you are running a high resolution monitor or multiple monitors for your games.

No real budget set to be honest but i guess 300 pound would be my absolute limit if it was a decent card, dont think i could bring myself to spend more on a graphics card but like i said running the game comfortably would be my priority so as cheap as possible with those parameters i guess.

[JustinStuart 10]

I'm going all out on my first Gaming Rig. I have wanted arma 2 for years then seen arma 3 and wanted it more. Then my buddies brother got DayZ. I know some people think it ruins the community but is awesome. Arma 3 will be great with the new lighting and physics. Cant wait.

Case and Cooling

Haf X

Extra Spectre Pro 200mm

Power Supply

PRO 1000W

Motherboard

Rampage IV

Processor

i7 3930K OC to 4.5ghz

Hydro Series H100

Graphics Card

Dual GTX 680

DDR3 Desktop Memory

16GTX Trident X 2X8GB

Hard Drive and SSD

120GB Vertex 3

2TB Caviar Green SATA3

Blueray Drive

12X Blu-Ray Reader

[PuFu 4591]

if 300 is the upper limit, i would go for gtx 670...should be able to find some for around 280-310 pounds

[pathetic_berserker 4]

If at all possible make the graphics card your last purchase, CPU's and mobos shouldn't move much till Haswell comes out and even then I suspect high end i7s will drop only slightly in price as Haswell is focusing on the mobile side of CPUs. Don't know what AMD has coming up but nvidia should be releasing the 660's soon so if your absolutely certain you WONT be going multiple monitor you could pick up a 570 or 580, quite cheap as they try and clear the stock. I'm going to try hold on to my 285 till nvidia release a card based on thier GK110 chip. If it turns out they simply drop a 2grand card on market to see who buys I'll be a bit put out, but if it shakes prices up a bit it could be worth the wait.

[avfc 10]

The problem is you do the research into cards and sure for 300 pound you get a better card but how much better than say a 560ti oc edition? Its half the price and how much in all honesty is the difference in fps? From the reviews etc ive looked at there isnt a massive difference, definitely not enough to warrant the double price or maybe thats just my unexpert view after reading a bit about a few cards.

If the 560ti oc along with 8gb ddr3 2133 and a nice ivybridge can run arma 3 then thats what im going for.

[samyg 3]

The problem is you do the research into cards and sure for 300 pound you get a better card but how much better than say a 560ti oc edition? Its half the price and how much in all honesty is the difference in fps? From the reviews etc ive looked at there isnt a massive difference, definitely not enough to warrant the double price or maybe thats just my unexpert view after reading a bit about a few cards.

If the 560ti oc along with 8gb ddr3 2133 and a nice ivybridge can run arma 3 then thats what im going for.

Hey, go for it but, I would go for 16gb ddr3 ram at 1600. 2133 doesn't really add all that much.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820233299

[avfc 10]

Anything over 8gb imo is overkill.

[Vixente 10]

Anything over 8gb imo is overkill.

For actual games probably. But if you use other kind of software that is immensely RAM-hungry, all you can put in your computer is always welcomed. ;)

Another reason: RAM disks.

[avfc 10]

I should have said for games yea i agree, i plan to game on my new build and browse the web listen to music etc i dont video edit or run any software really so 8gb is plenty for me.

[CTCCoco 1]

RAM is cheap at the moment. Buy 8 gb ddr3 1600 now and buy 8 gb again in a few months.

[avfc 10]

Everyone suggests the 1600 and as you can see im no expert but the asrock extreme 4 for example supports 2133 memory right? So why not for the sake of about a tenner not go for that as its a lot better is it not?

[PuFu 4591]

The problem is you do the research into cards and sure for 300 pound you get a better card but how much better than say a 560ti oc edition? Its half the price and how much in all honesty is the difference in fps? From the reviews etc ive looked at there isnt a massive difference, definitely not enough to warrant the double price or maybe thats just my unexpert view after reading a bit about a few cards.

While this might be true, and the 560 TI is indeed a great card (i run one on one of my rigs - see spoiler), it depends on what you want/need to spend money on. If you aim for the best bang for the buck, wait 1 month or so for the gtx660.

If the 560ti oc along with 8gb ddr3 2133 and a nice ivybridge can run arma 3 then thats what im going for.

there is very little difference between 1600 mhz ram and 2133. If you think above 8 GB is overkill (and you would be right when it comes down to normal PC usage, including games), then go for 8gb 1600mhz.

What is overkill is buying 2133 mhz ram, when the difference is close to nil, or in fact, unnoticeable for the purpose of your PC.

Edited July 9, 2012 by PuFu

[avfc 10]

See this is why i ask here i can put a pc together but im not up to scratch on all the overwhelming choices of hardware, i may well take you up on that advice of the 660, when exactly is it coming out?

[PuFu 4591]

See this is why i ask here i can put a pc together but im not up to scratch on all the overwhelming choices of hardware, i may well take you up on that advice of the 660, when exactly is it coming out?

There is no release date, rumoured for end of July or mid August.

That said, there is no date set for A3 either ;)

[-Coulum- 35]

On the topic of the gtx660, how exactly does it differ from gtx580 or 670 - I know its impossible to "know" right now, but does anyone have any guesses as to whether it will be better/ worse/on par? All I can seem to find is that it is cheaper... does that mean that it will be less powerful?

Edited July 10, 2012 by -Coulum-

[pathetic_berserker 4]

... does that mean that it will be less powerful?

At least the reference card released by nvidia will be, but its still a question of how much. An example would be the difference between the 680 and 670, the 670 is basicaly a 680 with disabled shader cluster and lower clock speeds. But then the varoius manufacturers get hold of it, redesign PCBs and cooling solutions, overclock it and come up with a 670 that performs very close to a 680 reference card. Many 680 cards out there are still a bit better than 670's however, due to the fact that they aren't reference cards either. (having fun yet) From what I've read there will be at least 3 nvidia 660's, a Ti, SE and standard, what happens from then will probably make the choice even more difficult

Still from what I'ver researched recently the cost v FPS difference doesn't warrant any of the 680 cards. And your right, for casual gaming there are many 500 series cards falling into that sweet bang for buck spot as they perform quite well, yet the stock needs to be cleared for the full 600 series range so prices are dropping

Now why am I knowing all this and still hanging out to see what the 660 do to the market (and maybe the GK110 chip (Guessing a 780?) befre the end of the year) .

Primarily because my computor isn't just casual gaming machine and 500 series cards basicaly run hotter and draw more power than 600 series cards for less performance (though my 285 is even worse). Not enough to worry about when your gaming a couple of nights a week and maybe weekends but it adds up over the years when doing more. And I'm also entertaining the idea of going surround vision and don't wont to be forced into getting a second card to do so wich means a 600 series minimum.

PS, I've found guru3d a good source, heaps of reviews that use the same measuring criteria.

Edited July 10, 2012 by Pathetic_Berserker

[Vixente 10]

Everyone suggests the 1600 and as you can see im no expert but the asrock extreme 4 for example supports 2133 memory right? So why not for the sake of about a tenner not go for that as its a lot better is it not?

More speed more GB/s, so yeah, i would put the fastest/better-priced RAM available on that motherboard. But it also depends on the CPU you pick. (Some are 'limited' to 1600)

[CTCCoco 1]

More speed more GB/s, so yeah, i would put the fastest/better-priced RAM available on that motherboard. But it also depends on the CPU you pick. (Some are 'limited' to 1600)

Sandy Bridge to 1333, Ivy Bridge to 1600.

[Derbysieger 11]

Just got my new GTX 680, not because of Arma 3 though. My old HD 4870 was causing problems and I needed a new GPU. I just hope Arma 3 runs reasonably on my rig. Arma 2 and TOH run fantastic (most times around 60fps, never below 40).

[mr. bravo 17]

But it also depends on the CPU you pick. (Some are 'limited' to 1600)

That's a bit misleading to say. It's completely up to your BIOS. In some cases you'll get an even lower default-ratio for your RAM speed, which has to be changed manually. It's really funny to see how many people there are spending extra money on fast RAM, but doesnt know that they most often have to set it up manually in BIOS to actually get that performance. It can also create problems and instability on your system if they require a certain level of voltage to run properly, which will also have to be set manually. I know OCZ are known for this on their hardcore series. Same goes for timings. So if you're buying fast RAM you better get into how to set them up properly.

But as mentioned, fast RAM doesnt do any difference in games at all. It's only good for RAMdisk, certain applications and overclocking (To avoid bottlenecking). And what the motherboard manufacturer suggests is just what's "officially supported", often outdated info. Most motherboards can achieve 2133Mhz and more.

[rok 0]

Here's a link to user test where min fps went from 34 to 40 in A2:OA with different memory clocks. Can't really comment how valid that test was. I just use to buy cheapest memory and plug it in. :)

http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fi&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=fi&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fmurobbs.plaza.fi%2Fkayttajien-tuotetestit%2F695412-muistien-vaikutus-suorituskykyyn-revikka.html&act=url