THE AMD R9 290X is now the NEW champion for ARMA3 with @_@ performance at all res!!

[clydefrog 3]

Dwarden do you know if Arma 3 seems to favour AMD or Nvidia graphics cards? Apparently AMD cards ran better in Arma 2/Arrowhead. Has this changed with Arma 3?

[bakerman 247]

I find it rather sad that it's near impossible to have a unbiased discussion when it comes to graphics cards. That aside the 290x is truly a great graphics card, at $550 it will force Nvidia to cut back on their relatively high margins. At the end of the day a great card like this is a win no matter on which side of the fence you are. On the heat and noise issue, this will most likely be solved in a few weeks when we get non reference coolers.

@wasserkool

I'm suddenly very tempted to try and get playable fps on a LN2 cooled rig with arma 3 running at the absolute max...

@Dwarden

Here you go. Guru3d 290x Review

[Beagle 684]

Back in the 90s, a gaming PC was rendered obsolete within a couple of years. These days a mid-range PC from 2009 can run most games fine unless you specifically want to play Crysis, Arma & co. I'm not sure what hardware today's casual PCs have, but it has to be pretty low-budget if what you're saying is correct.

You still don't get that much for 500€. just an example. those PCs are mostly lacking a competetive gfx card.

[Binkowski 26]

I still love my GeForce 780GTX.

[Beagle 684]

The main problem for me personally is...and think about that, you're basically throwing away a PC system that could run for another 10 years just for a game....now that's disposable society at its best.

[RSF TheCapulet 59]

My 3870 used to sit around 112-115c, and never had an issue.

When it's using around a lightbulb's difference in power or less, I don't see the big deal. Sure, it's clear that the Nvidia cards are more efficient. But at the price difference that we're seeing, it doesn't matter. Most consumers will buy whatever has the best performance value when they start tossing parts in carts.

And noise really isn't an issue as long as you actually apply some effort in machine design when you order your parts. I built my setup around dual 4870x2's, and hardly any noise got out then. I'm now running a 7950 with a heavily boosted fan speed (for the OC), and I literally can't hear it even while gaming. If noise is a real concern for you, you would build around that concern at the base level. If you leave it up to your video card to make the difference between sound, you care more about brand loyalty than noise. (I feel like I said a lot of the same things when Fermi was released)

---------- Post added at 05:07 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:05 PM ----------

The main problem for me personally is...and think about that, you're basically throwing away a PC system that could run for another 10 years just for a game.

Why not sell it? My old machine always finds a new home when it's time to upgrade. I even buy a cheap case to throw it in when it comes time to order parts so I can keep my current one and still sell off the old parts in one package.

[clydefrog 3]

I still love my GeForce 780GTX.

You say that like it's a 5 year old card or something.

[wasserkool 1]

I find it rather sad that it's near impossible to have a unbiased discussion when it comes to graphics cards. That aside the 290x is truly a great graphics card, at $550 it will force Nvidia to cut back on their relatively high margins. At the end of the day a great card like this is a win no matter on which side of the fence you are. On the heat and noise issue, this will most likely be solved in a few weeks when we get non reference coolers.

@wasserkool

I'm suddenly very tempted to try and get playable fps on a LN2 cooled rig with arma 3 running at the absolute max...

@Dwarden

Here you go. Guru3d 290x Review

The TITAN uses a huge chip at 7.1 billion transistor and according to the rumors, with a low yield so any price cuts will seriously erode their margins and make the product barely profitable. This is why the TITAN chip was initially only used on the quadro professional cards which cost $3000+.

I think the ONLY way to run Arma 3 in ultra with 10KM viewdistance is through some serious LN2 OC on the CPU and the GPU...maybe 6GHZ on an i7 will do it :D

---------- Post added at 22:03 ---------- Previous post was at 22:00 ----------

The main problem for me personally is...and think about that, you're basically throwing away a PC system that could run for another 10 years just for a game....now that's disposable society at its best.

It really depends on how you planned your initial gaming PC build, I know many people who are still gaming fine on their X58 intel platform with the first generation i7! I have a X58 based system with the classic i7-980X as my living room gaming PC and it plays all of the latest game without a problem.

[MavericK96 0]

I'm liking those 690 numbers...maybe I should pick up another 680. :p

[Dwarden 1125]

@Dwarden

Here you go. Guru3d 290x Review

hmmpf that 260X is pretty low scoring, worse than 7850 ... (which is cheaper)

[Miroslaw Kowalski 54]

In my opinion it's a shame that I don't get more than 30 FPS with LOW settings on my GeForce GTX 660 and 8x 4 GHz AMD Processor :(

[oldbear 390]

@ Dwarden : ... here you go again, Radeon HD 7870 GE, GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost & Radeon HD 7790 on ARMA III Video Card Performance and IQ Review by HardOcp.

@ BusterBlader : I am getting 30 FPS on my Athlon II x2 250 (2 cores @ 3Ghz) and HD 7770, Visibility (global) 2000 m, tweaked AA&PP with HardOcp "combo", in Solo,on 1680x1050. However in MP it's quite a different story.

[Miroslaw Kowalski 54]

I didn't try the the multiplayer in dev branch only singleplayer. I'm playing multiplayer on stable branch and the multiplayer runs relatively fine.

[oldbear 390]

@ BusterBlader : I forgot to add something .... "I am getting 30 FPS on my Athlon II x2 250 (2 cores @ 3Ghz) and HD 7770, Visibility (global) 2000 m, tweaked AA&PP with HardOcp "combo", in Solo,on 1680x1050" ... with "Standard/High" settings. Settings some parameters on "Low" is counter-productive for then I believe that then, the render is switched from a GPU job to a CPU job, with a bad effect on the FPS.

Edited October 26, 2013 by Old Bear

[Miroslaw Kowalski 54]

So I'll probably get better performance with higher settings? :D I'm going to check this :D

[dav 22]

I have been playing capped at 30 fps, recently I switched to 50fps using Msi afterburner however I switched the grass off completely and it's fairly steady at 50fps. It's much better at 50fps. I'll wait until I buy a new card next year.

Win 8 on Ssd

Arma 3 on Ssd

Gtx 3 gig 580

I72600k

[iceman77 18]

And why limit to 2K viewdistance. the ultimate goal is to have the FULL 10K viewdistance hehe...which is what everyone is trying to achieve.

Because 2k is a reasonable VD. The people who run 10k VD are alot of the same people who come here and complain about fps. Ofcourse they don't like to say "oh btw I'm running ultra with 10k vd". 10k vd has never been a viable vd. Sure, 10k vd in the editor, previewing a bare map is okay. It's not at all viable in a real MP scenario.

[roshnak 41]

If we are talking about MP scenarios then the view distance is set by the mission, not the player.

[Gera_CCT 12]

Because 2k is a reasonable VD. The people who run 10k VD are alot of the same people who come here and complain about fps. Ofcourse they don't like to say "oh btw I'm running ultra with 10k vd". 10k vd has never been a viable vd. Sure, 10k vd in the editor, previewing a bare map is okay. It's not at all viable in a real MP scenario.

Agree. Hell, i play with 1600 VD and it´s fine for infantry.

[lao fei mao 21]

I've found many guys who complaining the fps are often those who pursue the extreme setting. For ArmA series, a stable fps is much more important than a 20~100fps. I use MSI afterburner to cap the max fps at 30, VD&OVD=2.5KM, other settings at very high, except for the post effect(off). At this setting, 99%time my fps stables at 30. I got very smooth game experience, though my video card is the old HD6970, my CPU is the old 2500K.

[papoose244 10]

hi guys im in the market for a new gpu What would you suggest for arma 3 a amd 290x or a nvidia 780ti?

[roberthammer 582]

hi guys im in the market for a new gpu What would you suggest for arma 3 a amd 290x or a nvidia 780ti?

if you have enough money for gtx780 ti , go for it - also both these cards needs very high resolution to use their power

if you want crossfire or just cheaper gpu then go with 290x but i would wait for better cooler tho

[almanzo 144]

Can someone tell me what the Nvidia tax is?

[MavericK96 0]

Just that nVidia cards tend to be more expensive for what you get. Though I do enjoy things like PhysX and the drivers seem to be much better, so whether or not the "tax" is worth it to you is personal preference.

[pathetic_berserker 4]

Just that nVidia cards tend to be more expensive for what you get. Though I do enjoy things like PhysX and the drivers seem to be much better, so whether or not the "tax" is worth it to you is personal preference.

Hmm when I got my GTX 690 I also considered the extra heat and power required by not just the opposing cards, but also what it would take to counter that extra heat during summer with AC. Over the long term that 'tax' didn't look so bad for a premium product.