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

[Leon86 13]

Indeed, it'll run on the 6300, when tuning settings the ones that matter most are viewdistance and object viewdistance.

[nikiforos 450]

Hello,

Right now I have the following rig.

i5-2500k 3.3GHZ @ 4.3

8 GB RAM

GTX 570

Let's say that I right now have 50 FPS playing on Altis. How much better could it be if I buy the GTX 770? How many frames do you guys think I would gain with the same ingame settings?

Is it worth it? I also plan to buy an SSD but that's another chapter.

[Leon86 13]

Try a lower resolution or disable antialiasing, that's the way it'll perform with a faster gpu.

On altis you're probably cpu limited, so you'll probably not gain any fps by upgrading the gpu, might still play a little bit better because you're still shaving off a few ms of rendertime, unless you play with vsync.

---------- Post added at 10:30 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:27 AM ----------

You should try overclocking that chip if you can towards 4.2... I don't know if your multipliers are open or not.... You should be fine.

multi's are locked, but you can overclock by choosing a different fsb strap on socket 2011, so good overclocks should be possible.

[nikiforos 450]

Thank you Leon :) I play with high settings and with disabled AA and PP. I guess an upgrade might not be needed then.

I will certainly buy a SSD though:)

[Bee8190 10]

Just to throw in another option; you could upgrade to 3570 i5 and 670 for the money of one gtx770. The ~ 20% per core better performance on 3570 could boost the frame rates when most needed while 670 is good ~ 30% faster over 570 with fairly lower power consumption.

If you could fit in there an SSD as well, you'd be onto a winner IMO ;)

[Leon86 13]

3570 would not be a good upgrade, a 2500K will overclock further due to better thermal interface, overclocked with a good cooler they'll perform near identical (with the 3570 at lower clock, but more efficient clock/clock.). Same goes for haswell.

[aqarius 1]

So, I'm sanding out a new config, thought I'd see what you guys think:

V1:

Intel i5-4670K

MSI Z87-G45 Gaming

Crucial Ballistix 2x4 1600 DDR3

MSI N650-Ti 2GD5/OC/BE

Thermaltake SPS-530M

Seagate Barracuda 1Tb

LC-Power PRO 974B

Kingston SSDnow V300 120gb

V2:

Intel i5-4670K

MSI Z87-G45 Gaming

Crucial Ballistix 2x4 1600 DDR3

MSI N760 2GD5 HAWK

Thermaltake SPS-530M

Seagate Barracuda 1Tb

LC-Power PRO 974B

<no SSD>

Both round out to around 710E

Thoughts?

[Walsh.D 0]

Hey guys,

I have an i5-2500 sandy bridge at stock speed

16 gigs ram

Radeon 7990

at all settings ultra I get anywhere between 15-60 frames on altis depending on view and object distance, Is there a sweetspot? Anyone have a similar set up and what are your view distances and object distances at? is the i5 going to be bottlenecking me?

thanks

Edited September 1, 2013 by Munny

[b00tsy 28]

I just got a new rig gifted to me. Will this one be good enough to play arma 3 like smooth on ultra settings? (I have it still in the box, to late to set it up now unfortunately) :)

Acer Aspire MC805

Intel i5 3350p

6Gb DDR3 memory (no idea how many cores it has, box does not say)

1TB drive

NVidia geforce GT620 2GB

and a 24 inch HD monitor

[Leon86 13]

that i5 cpu is a quad and pretty fast, gpu (geforce 620) is very slow though, so dont expect good performance, especially on ultra.

[b00tsy 28]

that i5 cpu is a quad and pretty fast, gpu (geforce 620) is very slow though, so dont expect good performance, especially on ultra.

Awh I hoped when I read ´2Gb graphic card´ on the box that ´hell yeah´ I finally could play ArmA on Ultra, but I was cheering to early thus :/

I intend to use it purely for gaming so the HD will be pretty much empty besides the games I have installed, hope that will make a difference too.

Well I am still happy with the gift of course, it beats my old dual core by a factor of 10 :)

[Bee8190 10]

So, I'm sanding out a new config, thought I'd see what you guys think:

V2:

Intel i5-4670K

MSI Z87-G45 Gaming

Crucial Ballistix 2x4 1600 DDR3

MSI N760 2GD5 HAWK

Thermaltake SPS-530M

Seagate Barracuda 1Tb

LC-Power PRO 974B

<no SSD>

Both round out to around 710E

Thoughts?

V2 because while SSD is awesome, one can always add it easily at later date. Also, I would without hesitation ditched the seagate drive and went for WD blue line

[Sneakson 1]

So, I'm sanding out a new config, thought I'd see what you guys think:

V1:

Intel i5-4670K

MSI Z87-G45 Gaming

Crucial Ballistix 2x4 1600 DDR3

MSI N650-Ti 2GD5/OC/BE

Thermaltake SPS-530M

Seagate Barracuda 1Tb

LC-Power PRO 974B

Kingston SSDnow V300 120gb

V2:

Intel i5-4670K

MSI Z87-G45 Gaming

Crucial Ballistix 2x4 1600 DDR3

MSI N760 2GD5 HAWK

Thermaltake SPS-530M

Seagate Barracuda 1Tb

LC-Power PRO 974B

<no SSD>

Both round out to around 710E

Thoughts?

Yes, yes, yes... then graphics card... not sure. Power supply I'd go with Corsair CX500M without knowing much about the other one but Thermaltake seems to have a bogus certification and that alarms me.

Barracuda yes, case whatever rocks your boat...

I'd go with the bottom alternative and with a CX500M unless you've really read nice things about the Thermaltake one and then save up for an SSD...

Or take the SSD too at a slightly higher price because you'll want your OS on it but you can naturally re-install it to the OS whenever you buy it.

Hey guys,

I have an i5-2500 sandy bridge at stock speed

16 gigs ram

Radeon 7990

at all settings ultra I get anywhere between 15-60 frames on altis depending on view and object distance, Is there a sweetspot? Anyone have a similar set up and what are your view distances and object distances at? is the i5 going to be bottlenecking me?

thanks

The i5-2500... K? Or not K? I don't know if there even is one that isn't K but the K ones are legendary for overclocking which should alleviate any possible bottlenecking but the 7790 isn't a beast.

You're balanced.

Naturally you can check CPU/GPU usage for abnormalities but ARMA usage is always abnormal so you’d have to test it in another game I guess.

I just got a new rig gifted to me. Will this one be good enough to play arma 3 like smooth on ultra settings? (I have it still in the box, to late to set it up now unfortunately) :)

Acer Aspire MC805

Intel i5 3350p

6Gb DDR3 memory (no idea how many cores it has, box does not say)

1TB drive

NVidia geforce GT620 2GB

and a 24 inch HD monitor

Nice gift. A laptop? Seems like a pleasant CPU but the graphics card will be a strong limit unfortunately.

If only there was a way to replace it the rest seems nice but I guess that's rarely possible in laptops.

Try it out in some other games before buying ARMA3.

---------- Post added at 01:01 ---------- Previous post was at 00:57 ----------

V2 because while SSD is awesome, one can always add it easily at later date. Also, I would without hesitation ditched the seagate drive and went for WD blue line

The Barracuda is equally popular to the Blue! :)

I constantly hear both being recommended and haven't seen a direct comparison so I wouldn't say no to either even if WD is my choice.

[aqarius 1]

Yes, yes, yes... then graphics card... not sure. Power supply I'd go with Corsair CX500M without knowing much about the other one but Thermaltake seems to have a bogus certification and that alarms me.

Barracuda yes, case whatever rocks your boat...

I'd go with the bottom alternative and with a CX500M unless you've really read nice things about the Thermaltake one and then save up for an SSD...

Or take the SSD too at a slightly higher price because you'll want your OS on it but you can naturally re-install it to the OS whenever you buy it.

I would love to, but nobody sells corsairs in a 200km radius from here, unfortunately. Apparently, the SPS series has the same OEM as the CX500 (CWT) and should be simmilar, apart from SPS being 230V only. I could get a Seasonic 12II (520W), they're supposed to be awesome, but quite pricier.

I was thinking the same for the SSD, but I keep hearing everyone raving about them, so I thought I'd ask around. Other than load times, what would the impact be on performance?

V2 because while SSD is awesome, one can always add it easily at later date. Also, I would without hesitation ditched the seagate drive and went for WD blue line

The Barracuda is equally popular to the Blue! :)

I constantly hear both being recommended and haven't seen a direct comparison so I wouldn't say no to either even if WD is my choice.

I hear Seagate got really good in the last 2-3 years. Either way, I've dealt with 'cudas for the last five years of so almost exclusively, and I've had no problems.

Oh, yeah, also, FWIW: Rock bottom settings Arma 3 Alpha gets you 20-ish FPS @900p running from an E8500/N8600GTS. I have to remember to check how beta behaves... :D

[Sneakson 1]

I finally tried this out:

I7-4770K @ Stock

MSI GTX 770 Gaming 2GB at various settings

16GB RAM

1920x1200

Windows 8 64-bit

Somewhat surprisingly/unsurprisingly the only settings (didn't try Display settings though) that matter are Object quality, View distance and Object distance...

With Object Ultra I could do 1600/1600 perfectly smooth and with Object High 2000/2000 in average 50 fps flying over Altis in a helicopter moving around quite a lot and at high-ish altitude.

I have to say that is below my expectations and the CPU utilization never breaks 30%...

Graphics card use doesn’t show at all in Afterburner for some reason right now unfortunately.

RAM usage was about 5GB. Not sure how much of that was ARMA but about 1.5GB is idle and I also had some various monitoring and optimization software running.

4770K temps never went above 41 degrees using a H110 which was nice and sounds promising enough for overclocking and the graphics card went up to 76 at worst.

My main issue right now is my HX1050 which cools passively but regularly at some minute’s interval of playing spins up and makes a lot of noise all of a sudden and then fades down again which is really annoying because everything else has a very nice noise level really.

May end up exchanging it to see if this one’s bad or if it is an issue with all of them I guess I’ll switch to another one entirely.

Windows 8 start-up time with this build and a 840 Evo is 22 seconds from pressing the button to the start screen which of something like 13 seconds is bios by the way.

Quick but I’m pretty sure everything will be better once I tweak the computer tomorrow.

Other than the noisy power supply it’s great to have a new machine.

Windows 8 seems nice as long as you download an unofficial start menu and your mouse doesn’t come close to the right edge of the screen (damn charms!)…

Edited September 2, 2013 by Sneakson

[nikiforos 450]

Considering your old GPU and the new one can you tell if it's worth the upgrade? Im planning to buy the same GPU so I'm curious to find out.

It would be great if you run everything at the same settings(old rig) with the new setup and tell us the difference in FPS. Can you do that?

[Leon86 13]

I have to say that is below my expectations and the CPU utilization never breaks 30%...

I get up to 70% with my i5-750 quad, goes down ~45-50% if there's lots of ai in a fight.

Hyperthreading makes cpu use appear half of what it really is.

[tonygrunt 10]

I get up to 70% with my i5-750 quad, goes down ~45-50% if there's lots of ai in a fight.

Hyperthreading makes cpu use appear half of what it really is.

Not only Hyperthreading but more cores too. With my 6 core + 6 Hyperthreads maxing CPU usage in one core will show as 8-10% CPU usage and unfortunately Arma is mostly using 1 core. Due to that comparing by total CPU usage has little benefit, better to mention per core usage.

[Leon86 13]

But more cores can give you slightly better performance, while there is no benefit in hyperthreading at all.

[radi0n 10]

My specs:

I7 860 2600Mhz 4 cores 8 threads (HT)

Nvidia GTX 770 4GB ram

16 GB ram DDR3

1920x1200

my launch options in steam:

-noLogs -nosplash -world=none -cpuCount=8 -high -maxMem=8192 -exThreads=7

In task manager during game only 4 cores are working (-cpuCount=8 dont work?) and my FPS is not so good.

[Leon86 13]

arma avoids hyperthreading, it made arma 2 stutter even when fps was fine.

[bonghu 10]

sysprofile.de/id163236

AMD Phenom II X6 1100T @ 4013.63 MHz Watercooled

4x 2048 MB Corsair (10700) = 8GB Ram

nVidia GeForce GTX 590

Why are the FPS drops from Singleplayer @ all Settings Ultra 35 - 40 FPS to 15-20 @ Multiplayer

My CPU is at 35 percent and my GPU at 14 percent at Multiplayergaming

Anyone a Idea how i can Increase the FPS Rate @ Arma III

I tryed this one at cfg -> But it Brings not the right performande

GPU_MaxFramesAhead=1;

GPU_DetectedFramesAhead=1;

Hi, in my opinion its not hardware problem. I have a weaker CPU (Fx6300 without OC) and i have about 30 fps in multiplayer with ultra options, as you can see in this forum its all about a view distance, check your settings. Ofc a healthy system is required as well, no virus, no trojan etc..

Good luck!

(By the way 30 fps can drop for me when chaos begin in the server...as i red its about the engine, not a version, so the final version ll not help us :( )

[federik21 10]

On single player mission the game runs smoothly, but in multyplayer (expecially wasteland) it goes 15-25 fps on my sugggested medium-hight settings, and decreasing those won't affect performance.

I have:

AMD phenom x4 955 be 3,5Ghz

4GBram 1866Mhz

ATi hd5750

1366x768 monitor

I don't know what i should change first.

[Sneakson 1]

Considering your old GPU and the new one can you tell if it's worth the upgrade? Im planning to buy the same GPU so I'm curious to find out.

It would be great if you run everything at the same settings(old rig) with the new setup and tell us the difference in FPS. Can you do that?

I'm going to test and tweak as much as I can this week.

Moving things between computers is a pain however exchanging graphic cards and memories and comparing load times for SSD vs HDD assuming other components doesn't affect that much should be possible.

So a 560 Ti (= 660) vs 770 and maybe downclock to 760 (= 660 Ti) specs might be possible as well as comparing my 4GB DDR2 RAM to 16GB DDR3 RAM.

Comparing my entire old rig versus my entire new rig is too much difference to compare.

ARMA max with Object Quality High and Visibility 2000/2000 flying aggressively over Altis in an empty editor gave me 50 fps and the Crysis intro on everything max gave me 50 fps on my new computer in 1920x1200 and on my old one it’s 22 fps and 45 fps in 1680x1050 so divide that by 2/3 and it equals 15 fps and 30 fps…

Reading anything out of these values is difficult though since absolutely all components are different.

[Walsh.D 0]

The i5-2500... K? Or not K? I don't know if there even is one that isn't K but the K ones are legendary for overclocking which should alleviate any possible bottlenecking but the 7790 isn't a beast.

You're balanced.

Naturally you can check CPU/GPU usage for abnormalities but ARMA usage is always abnormal so you’d have to test it in another game

That is upsetting, I purchased the XfX R7990 because I thought it was a very powerful card..

---------- Post added at 20:43 ---------- Previous post was at 20:34 ----------

Oh I see that we mis understood each other in that last post, that's what I get for checking posts on my phone. Time to look Into overclocking the i5