Will-my-pc-run-Arma3? What cpu/gpu to get? What settings? What system specifications?

[daftmedic 1]

And what does autodetect says ? For me, the autodetect worked pretty good as they improved it compared to Arma 2. However my cpu is the one to blame.

So try with the autodetect and reduce the view distance. The view distance has a huge impact on performance.. I goes from 17 to 60 fps between 12km and 500 meters..

Also, make sure the VSync is off, it has a big impact too.

---------- Post added at 11:11 ---------- Previous post was at 11:06 ----------

As Gliptal says, PhysX (not Physix) works on the GPU only if you have a NVidia.

For the single thread performances, just check the link I wrote ... Thing is kinda the same for multi-threading. Of course I'm talking about gaming performances. It's been said that AMD cpus are not really optimized for video gaming, just some benchmarks around. I won't search for the links again so I let you Google it.

Oh dear you forgot to add the tm after "PhysX" if we are picking up symantics.

I did forget to add my view distance is at 3k. I think it maybe the fps killer for the guys running AMD GPU's. but don't be to disheartened its an alpha. I'm sure if people get hold of bis and explain the issues they are having they will try and optimise it as well as they can.

[gliptal 25]

My specs:

CORE 2 DUO 3.00GHZ, 4 GB RAM, 250 GB SATA HARD DRIVE, NVIDIA GT 520 1GB GRAPHICS

It's still running on XP. I'm thinking about upgrading it to Win7 to test the Alpha Lite but maybe it's not even worth it to bother...

I'd say low, IMHO wait for Alpha Lite and see how it runs...

Yay!

[MaD_DoG 0]

My specs:

CORE 2 DUO 3.00GHZ, 4 GB RAM, 250 GB SATA HARD DRIVE, NVIDIA GT 520 1GB GRAPHICS

It's still running on XP. I'm thinking about upgrading it to Win7 to test the Alpha Lite but maybe it's not even worth it to bother...

I don't think it will run smoothly.. You'd need a i5 or i7 at l east, and a better graphic card.

I think it may run ok if there isn't many people on the island. As soon as you will add some troops, it will get choppy due to your cpu.

[Pfhaota 11]

My specs:

CORE 2 DUO 3.00GHZ, 4 GB RAM, 250 GB SATA HARD DRIVE, NVIDIA GT 520 1GB GRAPHICS

It's still running on XP. I'm thinking about upgrading it to Win7 to test the Alpha Lite but maybe it's not even worth it to bother...

Playing on similar specs but with a Radeon HD 4850 card 500 MB. Having everything on Standard except textures and objects on high. AA off, resolution at 1366*768. View distance quite low, at around 2000m.

Acceptable performance with around 15-20 characters (AI), worse in towns and villages. Works surprisingly well. However, I'm quite resistant to low framerates.

[gliptal 25]

That's because you're playing at a relatively low resolution, I'm trying to use my native 1920x1080 and struggling to do so... XD

Yay!

[LeYuno 1]

found out a significant increase in performance when disabling PIP, even when there's no picture in picture rendering going on. for some reason i got an extra 15 fps on my system.

[Pfhaota 11]

That's because you're playing at a relatively low resolution, I'm trying to use my native 1920x1080 and struggling to do so... XD

Yay!

I know, however, it's good enough for me though, given the low end computer. Did a small test with 59 AI (and me) on open ground. Got framerates at around 20-25. Acceptable given the specs.

[daftmedic 1]

I don't think it will run smoothly.. You'd need a i5 or i7 at l east, and a better graphic card.

I think it may run ok if there isn't many people on the island. As soon as you will add some troops, it will get choppy due to your cpu.

Or an AMD phenomII 1100t BE oc'd at 4GHZ. ;)

[luizsilveira 5]

Playing on similar specs but with a Radeon HD 4850 card 500 MB. Having everything on Standard except textures and objects on high. AA off, resolution at 1366*768. View distance quite low, at around 2000m.

Acceptable performance with around 15-20 characters (AI), worse in towns and villages. Works surprisingly well. However, I'm quite resistant to low framerates.

Ah, many thanks. Honestly I don't run Arma 2 much better than that. But your GPU is much, much better than mine.

I don't actually look forward for it running anything on high (I run Arma 2 on medium/low already), I'd be happy if it'd run *at all* even with all on lowest and that resolution (no way I'll every play with my 1980 native).

[MaD_DoG 0]

found out a significant increase in performance when disabling PIP, even when there's no picture in picture rendering going on. for some reason i got an extra 15 fps on my system.

That's intersting, I will try this out this evening.

[gliptal 25]

found out a significant increase in performance when disabling PIP, even when there's no picture in picture rendering going on. for some reason i got an extra 15 fps on my system.

Great finding, where do you disable it from?

Yay!

[MaD_DoG 0]

Great finding, where do you disable it from?

Yay!

Somewhere in the video settings you will find the PIP settings

[Leon86 13]

As Gliptal says, PhysX (not Physix) works on the GPU only if you have a NVidia.

For the single thread performances, just check the link I wrote ... Thing is kinda the same for multi-threading. Of course I'm talking about gaming performances. It's been said that AMD cpus are not really optimized for video gaming, just some benchmarks around. I won't search for the links again so I let you Google it.

There is no gpu physX at all in arma3, it always runs on the cpu, even if you have an nvidia card. Poor performance is not because of physx but because of the insane number of objects you can have onscreen.

[c0wboy 1]

AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Processor

4GB DDR3 RAM

Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate

GeForce GTX 560 (Palit; 2048MB)

I already bought this Game.

I Just can play it on "Standert"

What i need to upgrade.

.....

[MaD_DoG 0]

There is no gpu physX at all in arma3, it always runs on the cpu, even if you have an nvidia card. Poor performance is not because of physx but because of the insane number of objects you can have onscreen.

Ok then. Are they planning to make it run on the gpu ? Anyway, I don't mind because I have an AMD card. But that's good to know.

I'd even be more accurate about your sayings, I would say "because of the insane number of objects in the world". I did the test, no matter where objects are on the map, since they are somewhere, it will costs cpu. That's specific to "Simulations", unlike other classical games.

[Leon86 13]

Ok then. Are they planning to make it run on the gpu ? Anyway, I don't mind because I have an AMD card. But that's good to know.

I'd even be more accurate about your sayings, I would say "because of the insane number of objects in the world". I did the test, no matter where objects are on the map, since they are somewhere, it will costs cpu. That's specific to "Simulations", unlike other classical games.

But if you're going to render them they all have to go through directX, which eats up quite a bit of cpu. Easiest way to have higher fps is lowering viewdistance.

[MaD_DoG 0]

But if you're going to render them they all have to go through directX, which eats up quite a bit of cpu. Easiest way to have higher fps is lowering viewdistance.

directX ... cpu ? You mean gpu right ?

View distance has a lot to do with cpu aswell because Arma is using some pre caching stuff when having a long view distance.

It's easy to notice it: Beyond some distance, no matter what video settings you change, you won't have any fps differences.

[RadicalAtHeart 11]

What laptop should I get?

i72630QM or will a i5 just cut it ?

GPU GT650M or GTX660M ?

[Leon86 13]

directX ... cpu ? You mean gpu right ?

View distance has a lot to do with cpu aswell because Arma is using some pre caching stuff when having a long view distance.

It's easy to notice it: Beyond some distance, no matter what video settings you change, you won't have any fps differences.

no I mean cpu. Game->directX->driver-> gpu, quite a bit of overhead. lowering viewdistance has a massive effect on fps, unless you make something else the bottleneck, like having a 500 vs 500 infantry fight on the other side of the island.

[MaD_DoG 0]

no I mean cpu. Game->directX->driver-> gpu, quite a bit of overhead. lowering viewdistance has a massive effect on fps, unless you make something else the bottleneck, like having a 500 vs 500 infantry fight on the other side of the island.

I see, so cpu and gpu are really bound to each other. But in any case, cpu is prior to gpu since even with the lowest settings, the cpu still has to handle every events and threads (like AI) all around the map because it is a simulation. That's why I'm pretty sure upgrading my cpu is a good idea to have better fps anyway.

[Leon86 13]

I see, so cpu and gpu are really bound to each other. But in any case, cpu is prior to gpu since even with the lowest settings, the cpu still has to handle every events and threads (like AI) all around the map because it is a simulation. That's why I'm pretty sure upgrading my cpu is a good idea to have better fps anyway.

Yes, for arma games you can never have enough cpu power.

however, the multithreading isn't that good, so there's no point in getting anything above core i5 3570K.

[mestido 1]

Will I have more fps with i7 3770? At this moment I have i5 2500k. Is there a reason to upgrade?

[Leon86 13]

There's really no point in upgrading a 2500K to 3770, you'll get 10% more performance at most.

is the 2500K overclocked already? if not you might want to look into that.

[MaD_DoG 0]

Yes, for arma games you can never have enough cpu power.

however, the multithreading isn't that good, so there's no point in getting anything above core i5 3570K.

Sure ! I have a 2.8ghz so getting a 3.5ghz I guess I'll have some better performances :)

---------- Post added at 18:42 ---------- Previous post was at 18:41 ----------

There's really no point in upgrading a 2500K to 3770, you'll get 10% more performance at most.

is the 2500K overclocked already? if not you might want to look into that.

No, the K just means it is open to overclocking.

[cheesepuff 1]

Hello, id like to ask if my comp can atleast run arma3 at 60 FPS

AMD Phenom II x4 945

Nvidia GeForce GT 630

8Gb ddr3 666MHz

I have seen someone with the same cpu, I still want to be sure about it though