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

[dc207 11]

I just saw this build and was wondering what everyone thought of its ability to run Arma 3. Any feedback or suggestions? I saw it as a premade on newegg. For $1,000. Thanks for any feedback.

Corsair Carbide Series 500R Arctic White Steel/Plastic ATX Mid case

Intel Core i5-4670K Haswell 3.4GHz LGA 1150 84W Quad-Core Desktop Processor

ASUS Z87-A LGA 1150 Intel Z87 ATX Intel Motherboard

ASUS GTX760-DC2OC-2GD5 GeForce GTX 760 2GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Support Video Card

G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 2133 (PC3 17000) Desktop Memory Model F3-2133C10D-8GXM

ADATA Premier Pro SP900 ASP900S3-128GM-C 2.5" 128GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)

Seagate Barracuda ST1000DM003 1TB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive

CORSAIR CX750M 750W ATX12V v2.3 80 PLUS BRONZE Certified

[pr0ph3tswe 1]

I just saw this build and was wondering what everyone thought of its ability to run Arma 3. Any feedback or suggestions? I saw it as a premade on newegg. For $1,000. Thanks for any feedback.

Corsair Carbide Series 500R Arctic White Steel/Plastic ATX Mid case

Intel Core i5-4670K Haswell 3.4GHz LGA 1150 84W Quad-Core Desktop Processor

ASUS Z87-A LGA 1150 Intel Z87 ATX Intel Motherboard

ASUS GTX760-DC2OC-2GD5 GeForce GTX 760 2GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Support Video Card

G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 2133 (PC3 17000) Desktop Memory Model F3-2133C10D-8GXM

ADATA Premier Pro SP900 ASP900S3-128GM-C 2.5" 128GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)

Seagate Barracuda ST1000DM003 1TB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive

CORSAIR CX750M 750W ATX12V v2.3 80 PLUS BRONZE Certified

that's a good pc in general, will run arma fine, specially if you oc the cpu

[mattldempsey 10]

Pretty much the current gen version of my PC, with faster ram.

Dont expect to be playing multiplayer over 30fps though.

[dc207 11]

Pretty much the current gen version of my PC, with faster ram.

Dont expect to be playing multiplayer over 30fps though.

That is surprising to me. I have not played Arma yet so I'm a long way off. This pre-build would be for a relative who also wants to jump in to Arma. We have kept up with Arma thru the years but have always been console gaming. Both sick of XBox and buying the same games every year.

I believe you, it just surprises me. I would've thought that processor/GPU would run it well.

---------- Post added at 07:19 ---------- Previous post was at 07:14 ----------

Pretty much the current gen version of my PC, with faster ram.

Dont expect to be playing multiplayer over 30fps though.

What RAM do you have if you don't mind? I read on some other thread about a possible increase in FPS when going from 1600 to 2133.

[oldbear 390]

@ dc207 : this rig looks good, but from my own experience, the 128GB SSD is a bit small, a 240/256GB will be better. I have updated from Intel 80GB to Crucial 128GB and now Samsung 250GB.

With such a rig you can expect more than 30 FPS in Multi-player if you are playing on a well hosted, well administered pro server playing a well built mission ... . With my own "I7 3770/GTX670/8Go/250 Go SSD" rig I am getting 20/60 FPS on MP on our Clan server.

Last night against hordes of AI, in town, on Altis, under heavy firefight with explosions, I was getting 20 FPS, but as soon as we had overcome the offensive and ran out of town, the FPS rate jumped over 35. More often, I am playing in MP @ 35/45 FPS.

Of course, the FPS level in game depends on your hardware, mainly your CPU -Visibility "video" parameter being totally CPU related-, but in MP many other factors totally unrelated to your hardware are impacting the FPS.

- issues in the game itself, from dead AI to building destruction models management and in the ways MP works ATM.

- issues related to servers, as there are no official server, everybody can host a server ... some are better than others

- issues related to missions, some missions are well built but too often missions are tweaked by "amateurs" with limited skill.

[mattldempsey 10]

That is surprising to me. I have not played Arma yet so I'm a long way off. This pre-build would be for a relative who also wants to jump in to Arma. We have kept up with Arma thru the years but have always been console gaming. Both sick of XBox and buying the same games every year.

I believe you, it just surprises me. I would've thought that processor/GPU would run it well.

Lately I have been trying everything possible to get the extra performance out of Arma.

On single player it is fine, unless you go with ridiculous draw distances then it will run smooth, doubt you will hit 60's but you will be safely above 30FPS.

Multiplayer on the other hand is ridiculous. When singleplayer I have most things upped to max, staying safely above 30FPS. However, join a high populated server and that struggles to get out of the 20's. Even changing everything to low/disabled made little difference, 4/5 FPS at most.

I would say that it is the hosts, but it is such a common problem it just seems to be how it is.

What RAM do you have if you don't mind? I read on some other thread about a possible increase in FPS when going from 1600 to 2133.

Corsair Vengeance, and until reading the thread you are talking about I was running at 1333. I have upped to 1600 since and would like to try/buy 2133. Going up to 1600 has given a nice little boost in singleplayer, but its just to hard to tell on MP.

----

Currently running..

- i5-3570k OC'ed @4.2ghz

- 8gb Vengeance OC'ed 1600

- EVGA GTX 670 2gb

[Sneakson 1]

I see a lot of users going for the 4770K. Did I miss some benchmark saying it actually does better than the 4670K in ARMA3? Usually it's a few percent slower in most games despite being $150 more expensive actually...

Hi fellas just built this setup and I was wondering if it will run Arma 2 and Arma 3?

NEW CASES - COOLERMASTER K350 Black Case With 12CM Fan

850W PSU - X-VIPER 80+ BRONZE & 14CM Quiet Fan/Modular

INTEL HASWELL CPU - Intel Core i5 4670K - 4 Cores Overclocked @ 4.4Ghz + 6MB CACHE

INTEL HASWELL MOTHERBOARD - ASUS Z87-PRO - USB2.0, USB3.0, SATA6 + XFIRE/SLI + WIFI

CPU COOLING - CORSAIR CWCH60 WATER COOLER - NO NEED TO REFILL

RAM - 8GB DDR3 1866Mhz - PATRIOT VIPER V3 RED Performance/Gaming RAM

MASTER HARD DRIVE - 1TB (1000GB) SATA3 - 6Gb/s, 7200 RPM & 32MB Cache

GRAPHICS CARD (PCI-E) - nVIDIA GeForce GTX770 2GB PCI-E 3.0 Ready

SOFTWARE - WINDOWS 7 Premium - 64 Bit Inc DVD/Licence

General UseCOOLING - Pack Of 2 x Case Fans Silent & Powerful

Yeah, that will run ARMA3 basically as well as anything else.

I'm still running this on my i7920 and it's doing a pretty good job but I do run an Ssd for w7 64 ....plus extra ssd for other games (Specs are in my sig) it definitely helps to sort the garbage out on your pc like unwanted programs etc, background services, processes, antivirus and firewalls bla bla bla. Generally playing on king of the hill servers right now until the novelty wears off... I've spent years on and off in pure trial and error to get my game just how I want it.... Since arma 1 in fact!! It's not perfect but multiplayer is great I'm getting anything from 30 to 70fps with new nvidia beta drivers... There are very occasionaly( hardly ever) major slowdowns which occur for less than a second like somebody pressed the pause button and back again real quick but only when random players die or somebody connects. Will be upgrading soon to the 4770k and 16gb so be nice to see what issues I'm going to run into as I have no doubt it will be a pain in the butt to optimize again :/ ah well... Sleepless nights here we come :)). Anybody getting good results from 4770k with a 680? I'd like to hear if you do... Thanks...

BLUE.

I have a 4770k and 770 which I think is similar to the 680... runs fine in singleplayer. I haven't bothered much with multiplayer though.

Someone way smarter than me helped put these together. I am going to purchase a gaming PC this spring. Will have around $1,500 to spend. Here is one option.

Option 1

CPU Intel Core i7-4770 3.4GHz Quad-Core $300.98

CPU Cooler Cooler Master Hyper TX3 54.8 CFM Sleeve Bearing $20.81

Motherboard Asus B85M-G Micro ATX LGA1150 $69.99

Memory A-Data XPG V2 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 $69.99

Storage Crucial M500 240GB 2.5" SSD $122.99

Seagate Barracuda 3TB 3.5" 7200RPM $100.00

Video Card Zotac GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3GB $682.90

Case Corsair 300R ATX Mid Tower $59.99

Power Supply Corsair 600W ATX12V $44.99

Optical Drive Asus DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS DVD/CD Writer $19.98

Operating System Microsoft Windows 8.1 - OEM (64-bit) $99.98

Keyboard Cooler Master CM Storm Devastator Gaming Bundle w/Optical Mouse

Option 2

i7-4770 + Zotac GTX 780 Ti

MoBo: MSI Z87I AC mITX

Case: CyberPowerPC Zeus MiniITX Case

- Zalman ZM-HPS200 GamingHeadset

- Corsair H60 120mm Liquid Cooling

- Cooler Master Storm Devastator Gaming KB+M Combo

- Corsair CX600 PSU

Option 3

i7-4770 + Zotac GTX 780 Ti

MoBo: Asus Z87-K

Case: Corsair 300R

Zalman ZM-HPS200 GamingHeadset

- Corsair H60 120mm Liquid Cooling

- Cooler Master Storm Devastator Gaming KB+M Combo

- Corsair CX600 PSU

Option 4

i7-4770 + Zotac GTX 780 Ti

MoBo: ASRock B85 Fata1ty Killer

Case: NZXT Source 210 Elite/USB3

- free GG Cruiser PC200-I Gaming Headset

- Intel 120mm Liquid CPU Cooling

- iBuyPower "Gaming" KB+M

- OCZ ModXStream 600W PSU

I figured I would ask the Arma community which one looks better from your experience, since I intend to play Arma 3 on this PC. Thanks.

I would go with a 4670 instead of a 4770... $150 cheaper and usually a few percent quicker. First option there looks good though. Second one too probably though it doesn't say which RAM, HDD or SSD is included... neither do options 3 or 4. They're all basically the same though aren't they? Take the one with the case you like the most in that case (har har har)....

Don't be afraid to buy a 770 or 760 instead of the 780 Ti either lol... the 780 Ti is quite strong and very expensive.

I just saw this build and was wondering what everyone thought of its ability to run Arma 3. Any feedback or suggestions? I saw it as a premade on newegg. For $1,000. Thanks for any feedback.

Corsair Carbide Series 500R Arctic White Steel/Plastic ATX Mid case

Intel Core i5-4670K Haswell 3.4GHz LGA 1150 84W Quad-Core Desktop Processor

ASUS Z87-A LGA 1150 Intel Z87 ATX Intel Motherboard

ASUS GTX760-DC2OC-2GD5 GeForce GTX 760 2GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Support Video Card

G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 2133 (PC3 17000) Desktop Memory Model F3-2133C10D-8GXM

ADATA Premier Pro SP900 ASP900S3-128GM-C 2.5" 128GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)

Seagate Barracuda ST1000DM003 1TB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive

CORSAIR CX750M 750W ATX12V v2.3 80 PLUS BRONZE Certified

Looks good. All top parts except the SSD which is a brand I've never heard of... Samsung 840 Evo (newer) Samsung 840 (older) are the best SSDs on the market currently. 128 GB is more than enough for OS, docs and programs... they most important thing is to have your OS on there really. I'm not sure how much anything else benefits from being on an SSD but I think there's a general consensus that games do not run better.

Edit: Ofcourse if you CAN change anything about that I would change the SSD and also slim down the power supply... 750W? 500W is more than enough... I'm not sure what the TDP of the 760 is but even a 770 works with 500W and I know the 760 needs less. Also Corsair Vengeance memories are considered one step ahead of the Ripjaws but the Ripjaws are the second best as I remember and the difference is so small you would never notice outside of the benchmark test.

Edited February 18, 2014 by Sneakson

[pr0ph3tswe 1]

4770k will only be worth it if you're a hardcore gamer that plays a lot of bf4 or other games with good multi threaded support, or if you do work that actually needs the logical cores, else the i5 is plenty, even for streaming etc

the same could be said about the 780ti i suppose, radeon 290 and gtx770 are good enough unless you actually want ultra settings in 1440p etc

ssd wise i'd stick to crucial m series and samsung, both are great

[arotished 10]

other games with good multi threaded supportt

Yeah, ARMA is allergic to everything that stats with MULTI and ends with SUPPORT, probably the next generation of ARMA will also be the same :)

[nivimar 10]

Hey I was just wondering , I have an old system what do recommend I to get better Frame Rates. Aleinware R2 i5 860, AMD 5770 radeon HD,12 GBs of Ram ,500 gb HDD.

I know it's weak but it plays it at 25-35 FPS

[oldbear 390]

@ Nivimar : if you are only looking for higher frame rate the only way is a CPU/MoBo upgrade up to i7 4770K/ Z87 Socket 1150 Mobo.

You can wait a bit until Intel releases it's "Haswell Refresh" CPUs in order to have more choice among high end processors.

Getting a "K" CPU and a "Z87" Mobo is to let open the OC solution in the future.

Now, as AMD has stopped the competition on the high end gaming market, Intel is having room to do their things at their own pace ... telling us that they have problem with "Broadwell" or that they are slowing due to PC market crisis. So we can expect more "cosmetic" enhancements in the near future and why not ... more delays in next gen release, so "mild" OC can be an option.

[Blu Ray 10]

Windows 8.1 PRO

i5 4200U up to 2.4 Ghz dual core

HD 8850M 2GB GDDR5

6 GB RAM

Currently with 750gb 5400rpm HD, planning on upgrading to a SSD soon, though I would initially run the game with the 5400rpm HD.

Can I run this decently? I have a more powerful desktop but I would prefer to be able to play this on both my laptop and desktop.

[arotished 10]

I just took a Altis benchmark test and on "Default Ultra" setting I got 40FPS. (Stratis gave me 43FPS)

Good/Bad?

[tonschuh 3]

4:

No, I have not heard about XMP profiles.

What do you mean "what is about latencies"?

Ofcourse you should ensure compatibility of all components, maybe I should have mentioned that but the components I mentioned are all compatible together.

6:

What do you mean there is no difference in transfer speeds?

Western Digital over Seagate, yes ;) The Seagate Barracuda is a common alternative to the WD Blue though, I would have mentioned that if I had remembered it! I think they're equal.

Are you talking about RAID? I didn't want to go there in such a meant-to-be-basic guide.

7:

Not heard of "fossy" brands but I'm confident even a layman will be able to locate a perfectly fine DVD on their own though.

Can't understand that sentence... the drive eats brands?

8:

Care to disprove me? ;)

I have actually measured my wattage at the wall using a 4770K, 770, water-cooling and a whole bunch of other stuff that draws some watts including the monitor and everything and it came down to 300W.

9:

What I meant by saying Windows 8 is like Windows 7 99% of the time was when it comes to user experience and I wanted to point out that Windows 8 is not all that bad... some users (including myself before upgrading) seem to think that you spend a lot of time in apps or the start screen in Windows 8 which you don't.

12:

How cute... you have no idea what you are talking about.

World best Counter-Strike players by money won here:

1. f0rest (400 dpi)

2. cArn (400 dpi)

3. dsn (?)

4. NEO (500 dpi)

5. TaZ (400 dpi)

6. RobbaN (400 dpi)

7. Loord (400 dpi)

8. kuben (400 dpi)

9. zonic (?)

10. walle (?)

11. Edward (400 dpi)

12. Zeus (?)

13. GeT_RiGhT (400 dpi)

14. ave (?)

15. HeatoN (?)

16. starix

17. Kapio (?)

18. LUq (?)

20. markeloff (400 dpi)

20. Storm (?)

List order based on December 2013 data and DPI based on July 2012 data:

http://www.ongamers.com/articles/top-100-counter-strike-players-of-all-time-by-prize-money-won/1100-508/

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AkghPvIh7ZVwdGZ3WXE0dDlTdk5rT1ZKZm91VXVzREE&output=html

Quake ESWC 2010:

Cooller 400 dpi

Cyper 450 dpi

DaHang 800 dpi

Av3k 800 dpi

Bodzo 400 dpi

Fazz 400 dpi

L1nkje 400 dpi

Noctis 800 dpi

Rapha 400 dpi

Stermy 400 dpi

Strenx 800 dpi

http://www.esreality.com/index.php?a=post&id=1907380

Couldn't find any quick SC2 data but I believe 400-2400 is the norm.

And on the water-cooling: I'm currently not overclocked.

to 4.)

Latency:

Have a read here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAS_latency

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_timings

Example:

Corsair 8GB (2x4GB) Vengeance CMZ8GX3M2A1600C8 DDR3

Full Timings:

8-8-8-24 @1.5V (Voltage is important as well, if your RAM and / or MoBo doesn't support XMP or doesn't recognize the RAM properly)

Corsair 8GB (2x4GB) Vengeance CMZ8GX3M2A1600C9 DDR3

9-9-9-24 @1.5V

Lower is better / faster.

XMP:

XMP is Intel’s substitute for XMP which is short for eXtreme Memory Profile. XMP is supported by intel chipsets like X48 , X58 , etc… . The use of EPP/XMP is just to get the RAM self configured for max performance rather then manually doing it from BIOS – if the motherboard supports it.

How it looks in your Bios, if supported:

http://images.bjorn3d.com/Material/revimages/memory/Corsair_Dominator_DDR3_1600_6GB_Kit/Bios_1.jpg

Your are still able to tighten the timings manually, to squeeze some extra performance out.

Here is a screen-shot of the spec's of my RAM as an example:

http://imageshack.com/a/img43/8527/o0l1.jpg

You will see that the Basic-RAM-Speed is 1600MHz, but that they are tested to run @2400MHz with the shown timings.

Newer RAM usually supports XMP and sometimes the shops tell you about it:

Example:

Kingston 16GB(2X8G) KIT T2 HyperX 1866MHz DDR3 XMP Predator Series

Single- / Dual- / Quad-Channel-Memory:

Have a read here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-channel_memory_architecture

It's important to know which architecture and in which configuration your MoBo supports things.

And you should really make sure that the RAM is compatible with your MoBo, as you could end up with a non-booting / crashing system.

to 6.):

RAID would be the next step, but that's just a bit more complicated and I would only mention it, if someone is asking for it.

What I tried to show you, was something like this here:

- Seagate Barracuda (ST1000DM003-9YN162) SATA-3 1TB = Transfer-Speed ~130MB/s

- Seagate Barracuda (ST31000524AS) SATA-3 1TB = Transfer-Speed ~80MB/s

They both got sold for the same price. If possible try to do some research before you buy a HDD.

to 7.):

If you buy empty CD's / DVD's / BluRay-Disk's etc., then you are able to choose from a wide range of Brand's.

Your Burner-Firmware has to support all this different Brand's and Burn-Speed's, otherwise you are not able to burn a Disk successfully or not at all, if the Burner simple refuses to recognize your Disk.

I had myself 2x Pioneer-Burner's which were so fussy about the Brand's that I threw them out. You will see this behaviour in Off-the-Shelf-Desktop-PC's with certain No-Name / Cheap-Brand's of Burner's and in Laptop's.

It can be even so bad, that you can burn it with your Burner, but you can't read it in a different Drive or that your Burning-Software tells you that the Burning-Process was successful, but you end up with an empty Disk.

I recommend LG, as they usually take ("eat") any Brand you throw at them.

to 8.):

It's not only the wattage which is important, as you have to have a look at the amps on the certain rails as well.

You can have a cheap No-Name PSU with only 20A on the 12V-Rail, or a PSU with 3x 12V-Rails with 18A each or a PSU with 48A on a Single 12V-Rail.

I recommend not to run a PSU at it's maximum possible Output. You should always have some headroom and have a look in which Output-Range it has the maximum Efficiency.

Electronic-Parts deteriorate over their life-span, which results in a lower maximum output.

Don't try to save money on your PSU. I saw flames coming out of an running PSU or saw lose soldered spots inside a PSU which killed a MoBo + CPU + GPU.

It's good to know which Brand supplied parts behind the Brand you buy:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/power-supply-oem-manufacturer,2913.html

Or if you want to get some more info's / test's etc.:

http://www.jonnyguru.com/index.php

to 12.)

Couldn't find any quick SC2 data but I believe 400-2400 is the norm.

That sounds better.

You usually set your in-game Mouse-Sensitivity to a very low level and put your DPI's up.

I play mainly FPS-Shooters since quite some years and plenty Comp-Player's prefer to be able to do a 360-turn within ~20cm Mouse-Movement, for better Aiming-Accuracy, but if you play a fast-paced Shooter, then you have reduce that amount of Movement-Distance.

I play for an example all my FPS-Games with 5600DPI, which is not common.

to OC:

If you need some Info's, then just send me a PM.

My Rig (only average and too "weak" for ARMA-3 at least):

http://www.gskill.us/forum/showpost.php?p=73167&postcount=1

:)

Edited February 21, 2014 by TONSCHUH

[Leon86 13]

You usually set your in-game Mouse-Sensitivity to a very low level and put your DPI's up.

I play mainly FPS-Shooters since quite some years and plenty Comp-Player's prefer to be able to do a 360-turn within ~20cm Mouse-Movement, for better Aiming-Accuracy, but if you play a fast-paced Shooter, then you have reduce that amount of Movement-Distance.

I play for an example all my FPS-Games with 5600DPI, which is not common.

5600 dpi is ridiculous, well beyond what any mouse sensor will accurately register. I recommend finding out what the dpi of the mouse sensor actually is, then setting it to that or half and ajust game sensitivity until you get your preferred cm/360.

[Z4layeta 10]

hey pls i need a fast answer ,

arma 3 is on sale at steam and i rlly want to play altis life

my pc has

amd athlon II x4 640

4gb ram

nvidia geforce gts450 1gb

have i a chance to play it online with low graphics without much lags? like 30fps will be rlly good

pls need to know it this weekend its on sale

thx for answers

[Sneakson 1]

Playing without stuttering perception is achieved in Arma3 over 20 FPS. This limit is of course variable depending on physiological and/or psychological factor. Some people can play the game seamlessly down to 15 FPS other are still perceiving stutter over 25 FPS. Remember that building up an image from what we get on the the screen is mostly a mental process.

I missed this one.

I remember playing Crysis in about 20 fps average when it was new. In some games that DOES work however 30 is so much better and so is 40, 50 or 60.

Each to his own and if you’re happy with lower framerates that’s nice for you HOWEVER I think I should mention that player performance increases quite linearly along with framerates up to about 60 fps, studies show. (I think the study showed a slower increase in player performance at more than 60 fps ONLY because the users weren’t used to more than 60 fps and more than that may need some time of adjustment.)

I can tell you from experience that aiming, handling weapons and the like is a lot easier on higher framerates because the delay in controls is much smaller and when you’re on low framerates you wouldn’t think it but when you play a game smoothly it’s a night and day difference.

I tried this out specifically while speed-running some levels in the ARMA3 Beta. Anyways the aiming speed and accuracy lost with even 20 fps is only a split second. It most of all situations it doesn’t matter too much.

Hey I was just wondering , I have an old system what do recommend I to get better Frame Rates. Aleinware R2 i5 860, AMD 5770 radeon HD,12 GBs of Ram ,500 gb HDD.

I know it's weak but it plays it at 25-35 FPS

FYI: the "go-to" build that generally all gamers are recommended to buy today is an Intel Core i5-4670K with a Z87 motherboard (Socket 1150), 8GB 1600 MHz RAM and a 760 or 770 graphics card or AMD equivalent and definitely an SSD.

Note: the 4770K is exactly a 4670K with hyper-threading, a feature that has nothing to do with gaming and that usually slows down games (very slightly) though a few games do support it and in certain situations use it beneficially, including Battlefield 3 but last I heard (a while ago) ARMA3 does not support hyper-threading well. The 4770K is $150 cheaper and that money is better saved or spent on the graphics card or an SSD upgrade. A lot of users buy the 4770K thinking it is stronger than the 4670K but this is a complete, unfortunate misunderstanding.

Windows 8.1 PRO

i5 4200U up to 2.4 Ghz dual core

HD 8850M 2GB GDDR5

6 GB RAM

Currently with 750gb 5400rpm HD, planning on upgrading to a SSD soon, though I would initially run the game with the 5400rpm HD.

Can I run this decently? I have a more powerful desktop but I would prefer to be able to play this on both my laptop and desktop.

A bit weak I'm afraid. It might start up and so but I don’t think it would be completely enjoyable.

Text.

On RAM: Oh, okay. I was aware that the C9 in the end is supposed to be lower but never checked why and only heard it’s a smaller difference than anyone would notice which I believe is very true still. Never heard about auto-overclocking memories and not really studied memories in detail at all beyond the bare basics I’ve need to buy my own.

On HDD speeds: okay.

CD/DVDs: okay.

On PSUs: well duh, if you want you can scan every component inside you can. Might take a while though.

If you want it over with all you have to do is search for one with at least the wattage you need and some sort of 80+ certification then google for reviews and check the verdict, especially noting the sound level which is the number one most important thing other than making sure it works and is compatible with your computer and all that. Compare a few and don’t forget to compare the costs obviously.

On DPI: No, that’s "wrong." You set your DPI low and in-game setting high if you want it high end sensitivity, except for StarCraft II where you always do as I said: in-game 51-54% (or whatever I said before) and change the DPI on the mouse. Pro-players always do it that way anyways. StarCraft is different from shooters since it deals with two-dimensional mouse movement same as Windows and doesn’t need quite as much accuracy as well.

Not that there's much difference between high DPI low in-game and low DPI high in-game but that's what the pros prefer for whatever reason they may have.

I also hear 500 MHz polling is more popular than 1000 Hz. Sounds counter-intuitive but I can’t argue with them.

[tonschuh 3]

5600 dpi is ridiculous, well beyond what any mouse sensor will accurately register. I recommend finding out what the dpi of the mouse sensor actually is, then setting it to that or half and ajust game sensitivity until you get your preferred cm/360.

It's always the best option to run your Mouse with the native DPI of the sensor, that's right.

Here are my BF4 in-game Mouse-Settings:

http://imageshack.com/a/img208/3765/w950.jpg

Here are my Settings via the Mouse-Software:

http://imageshack.com/a/img594/5663/eexb.jpg

I don't like large Mouse-Movements and I would not have the space on my desk for them either, but the possible 8200DPI are just too sensitive for me.

My Mouse-Movement for a 360-turn is around 6cm, but I don't play as a Sniper.

Optical-Sensors are better than Laser-Sensors, but I prefer Laser-Sensors.

:)

---------- Post added at 10:14 ---------- Previous post was at 09:56 ----------

On DPI: No, that’s "wrong." You set your DPI low and in-game setting high if you want it high end sensitivity, except for StarCraft II where you always do as I said: in-game 51-54% (or whatever I said before) and change the DPI on the mouse. Pro-players always do it that way anyways. StarCraft is different from shooters since it deals with two-dimensional mouse movement same as Windows and doesn’t need quite as much accuracy as well.

Not that there's much difference between high DPI low in-game and low DPI high in-game but that's what the pros prefer for whatever reason they may have.

I also hear 500 MHz polling is more popular than 1000 Hz. Sounds counter-intuitive but I can’t argue with them.

I think the way the pros do it is to max the DPI polling then mess with DPI then lower in game sensitivity to the point where they are highly accurate for the front 160 degrees. In BF 3 that is somewhere around 2-8% sensitivity, so seriously low.

Comp players like RivalXFactor just set it so they are highly effective in the front 180 degrees, but not very effective at spinning 360 degrees to return fire on someone who shot them in the back. That's because in a comp scenario, if an enemy gets to your flank, they WILL kill you. You can't usually spin around and return fire when flanked, you are already dead.

If you get a mouse like a Logitech G9X you can set your sensitivity on the fly which comes in handy if you suddenly find yourself sniping or in a tank unexpectedly.

Have a look here:

:)

Edited February 22, 2014 by TONSCHUH

[Leon86 13]

hey pls i need a fast answer ,

arma 3 is on sale at steam and i rlly want to play altis life

my pc has

amd athlon II x4 640

4gb ram

nvidia geforce gts450 1gb

have i a chance to play it online with low graphics without much lags? like 30fps will be rlly good

pls need to know it this weekend its on sale

thx for answers

That depends on altis life, not sure how cpu heavy it is, might vary from server to server.

see if you can find some info on performance on altis life specifically, and what cpu's they're using.

[oldbear 390]

@ Z4layeta : in your rig configuration, the AMD Athlon II x4 640 is meeting official "Recommended" specs and the Nvidia Geforce GTS450 1gb is meeting official "Minimum" specs.

The AMD Athlon II x4 640, even if it is meeting -on paper- the specs, is not as good as the recommended Phenom II X4 940.

From my own experience with a GTS450 1gb DDR3, with this GPU autodetect is switching to "Low" settings but IRL, some parameters can be set up to "Standard".

So with "AMD Athlon II x4 640/Geforce GTS450", you can expect to play in the 25/35 FPS range on "Low" with limited view distance and disabled AA&PP section on Solo mission and Campaign as well.

On Multi-players, you will probably get a drop from 5 to 10 FPS due to Arma3MP/hosting servers/missions performances. So you can expect a wide range of situations from a more or less unplayable 15 FPS to an enjoyable 30 FPS level.

Right now, BIS devs are working to enhance Arma3 Multi-players performances.

Some Altis-Life servers are OK, others are not.

So there is no simple answer to your question.

As a side note, from my point of view , both literally and figuratively, playing Arma3 on "Low" is not really playing. On my own "AMD Athlon II x2 250/Geforce GTS450" rig, I have spent 1 hour and a half trying to escape the beach on 1st mission of the Campaign 2nd part on Altis.

On "Low", with limited view distance, I was unable to get landmarks and too often it was more "pixel-guessing" than tactical observation. I had to stop due to headache and finally I had to switch to a better GPU!

[Sneakson 1]

It's always the best option to run your Mouse with the native DPI of the sensor, that's right.

Here are my BF4 in-game Mouse-Settings:

http://imageshack.com/a/img208/3765/w950.jpg

Here are my Settings via the Mouse-Software:

http://imageshack.com/a/img594/5663/eexb.jpg

I don't like large Mouse-Movements and I would not have the space on my desk for them either, but the possible 8200DPI are just too sensitive for me.

My Mouse-Movement for a 360-turn is around 6cm, but I don't play as a Sniper.

Optical-Sensors are better than Laser-Sensors, but I prefer Laser-Sensors.

:)

---------- Post added at 10:14 ---------- Previous post was at 09:56 ----------

Have a look here:

:)

Well, those videos were way below my level actually.

[Leon86 13]

The dpi war with gaming mice is really pointless and crazy. Even the highest sens players will never benefit from anything above 2000 dpi. The highest dpi's are always faked, mouse outputting more counts than the sensor reads, or even worse, created in the driver. This is why high dpi always gets you jitter.

If you're using a normal sensitivity it's best to set the dpi low, 400/800 range so the mouse has a clean output and the counts dont oversaturate the usb, otherwise you'll have jitter agian.

[Blu Ray 10]

A bit weak I'm afraid. It might start up and so but I don’t think it would be completely enjoyable.

That's disappointing, was expecting to get 30+ fps with graphics on standard. My problem is my CPU?

Windows 8.1 PRO

i5 4200U up to 2.4 Ghz dual core

HD 8850M 2GB GDDR5

6 GB RAM

Currently with 750gb 5400rpm HD, planning on upgrading to a SSD soon, though I would initially run the game with the 5400rpm HD.

Can I run this decently? I have a more powerful desktop but I would prefer to be able to play this on both my laptop and desktop.

Anyone else with a second opinion on this?

[Leon86 13]

the i5-4200u runs on 2.3 Ghz with 2 cores under load, it'll run, of course not on par with a recent desktop. Performance will depend heavily on settings and the mission.

It'll run about on par with Z4layeta's system I think.

[Z4layeta 10]

the i5-4200u runs on 2.3 Ghz with 2 cores under load, it'll run, of course not on par with a recent desktop. Performance will depend heavily on settings and the mission.

It'll run about on par with Z4layeta's system I think.

thx first to all for the answers

and what means "par" ? when u say it will run about on par ?