ASiberianHusky 1 Posted April 11, 2016 Arma 3 is very CPU intensive, I recommend investing in a good CPU (ie. Intel Core i7 4790k) before anything. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gimpymoo 10 Posted May 16, 2016 I am currently running a 4770k at stock (3.5Ghz, upping to 3.9Ghz on single core with turbo). Rest of specs are: 16GB Corsair RAM DDR3 at 1600mhz R9 390 8GB Arma 3 installed so SSD I mainly play multiplayer. With stock missions, I get maybe 30fps average with peaks in the 40's. If I were to invest in a cooler for say £60-£100, would the investment be good "bang for buck" in terms of relative perfornance gain in Arma 3? It is my assumption the game is heavily single core bound so with the "Turbo", the chip is running at 3.9Ghz, a good overclock would be 4.5Ghz, how much extra FPS would the 600mhz give for the £60-£100 investment? Alternatively, upgrade to a 4790k with a maximum turbo frequency of 4.4Ghz but that seems wasteful? Unless the performance gain is there? Thanks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jackal326 1181 Posted May 16, 2016 https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/187603-will-my-pc-run-arma3-what-cpugpu-to-get-what-settings-what-system-specifications/ 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ineptaphid 6413 Posted May 16, 2016 I would not recommend u[grading to the 4790k-the performance gains wont be worth it. But getting a decent cooler so you have the option to overclock is a good idea in my opinion. You will see some performance gains in most situations-not a massive amount but it will make a difference. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
domokun 515 Posted May 16, 2016 Good advice from the others. I suggest (in order of importance): 1. Overclocking your 4770k as she normally runs at 3.5 GHz and raising CPU clock speed offers significant increase (+10% per +0.5 GHz) http://www.techspot.com/review/712-arma-3-benchmarks/page5.html With an after-market HSF, you should be able to reach 4.2 easy, 4.3 prolly, 4.4 maybe & 4.5 unlikey. Currently, here's the best value HSF for 4770k: http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/part/cooler-master-cpu-cooler-rr212e20pkr2 2. Overclock your RAM. They'll prolly do 1866 easy: https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/156993-arma-3-cpu-vs-ram-performance-comparison-1600-2133-up-to-15-fps-gain/http://forums.atomicmpc.com.au/index.php/topic/54087-arma-3-alpha-cpu-vs-ram-performance/ 3. Tweak your game's video configuration http://wiki.day0.com.au/ArmA_3_Performance_Tweaks_and_Settings_Guide 4. Overclock your GPU Hope that helps, C. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Valken 622 Posted May 16, 2016 I have a similar system and push 60 FPS until heavy AI now: 4790K @ 4.4 GHZ OC 16 GB RAM AMD 6950 unlocked. Had CFX but I think one video card died so took it out to test my system. ARMA 3 on SSD I set everything to ULTRA except view distance and object distance. Those are the same as "high". I also turn off AA and use FXAA Ultra. Solid 60 FPS in almost ALL maps now until heavy AI fights which drops down to 20s momentarily. Kill them off and it goes back up. Your GPU is better than mine so its all CPU limited due to the single threading of the AI. Even MP servers are limited mainly due to AI, not network bandwidth or the size of the map so long as it is installed on a SSD or RAMDISK. I think my performance actually INCREASED since I removed the 2nd GPU as now the primary GPU is running at 16x PCIE 2.0 instead of dual 8x PCIE 2.0 across 2 GPU. It is very noticeable in benchmarks when streaming the map. ARMA is mainly bandwidth and IPC related. If I were buying a new system, I would buy either a Skylake and OC it to 4.8 GHZ + with the fastest DDR4 I could find or upgrade my system to a Broadwell 5775C and the fastest DDR3 I can find. Ensure your GPU is running full PCIE 16x bandwidth, ARMA installed on SSD and you should be fine for most ARMA games. It is really a limitation of the AI being single threaded and all the assets that are constantly streamed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
St. Jimmy 272 Posted May 16, 2016 What is your motherboard? That also can limit the overclocking. What performance you get in YAAB benchmark with these settings? Here's what I get. The Fred runs are with fred's malloc so you likely compare your results to the non fred ones That's what you should be able to reach so if you see enough difference between my and your runs then you can answer yourself if it's worth to get the cooler. I've only Coolermaster Hyper 212 Evo (20-30€) and I'm running my chip @ 4.7GHz. With older motherboard I only reached 4.4GHz. But to be honest I'd suggest you to get a aftermarket cooler anyway. or upgrade my system to a Broadwell 5775C and the fastest DDR3 I can find. Too bad that the Broadwell is DDR3L so you can forget dreaming to get any real fast DDR3 RAM for it. Though I found some CL11 2133MHz which isn't too bad. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gimpymoo 10 Posted May 16, 2016 What is your motherboard? That also can limit the overclocking. What performance you get in YAAB benchmark with these settings? Thanks for the reply. Motherboard is Gigabyte Z87X UD4H. Will post benchmarks as advised later. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
domokun 515 Posted May 17, 2016 Thanks for the reply. Motherboard is Gigabyte Z87X UD4H. Will post benchmarks as advised later. Also post you video settings, notably View Distance. We might be able find a few settings that could scrape your a few frames. But no miracle I'm afraid. Valken, is right, with RV4 (Arma 3's engine) it's still all about IPC. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ascendence3 15 Posted May 22, 2016 Theres no reason if Arma wont utilize your CPU and your cores to the fullest its a war you will only lose Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumpinghubert 49 Posted May 22, 2016 I would not recommend u[grading to the 4790k-the performance gains wont be worth it. But getting a decent cooler so you have the option to overclock is a good idea in my opinion. You will see some performance gains in most situations-not a massive amount but it will make a difference. Why not (as a moderator) ontopic like Jackal326 (above your posting)? We have already a thread with 200x answered this and similar questions. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ineptaphid 6413 Posted May 22, 2016 Why not (as a moderator) ontopic like Jackal326 (above your posting)? We have already a thread with 200x answered this and similar questions. You are very right :) There really is no need for a new topic about this. i'll merge this into the hardware thread. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
greenfrogs 0 Posted May 22, 2016 Hi, I was wondering if someone could help me decide what to upgrade in my machine, however having completed some benchmarks nothing appears to be limiting the fps. For the test I used the Stratis Benchmark scenario. CPU: I5-4460 4x3.4Ghz GPU: gtx 760 SSD: Sandisk Ultra I was considering upgrading to the gtx 1070 when it is released, but I am not really sure if there is any point except to increase the VRam. Just for comparison, below is Thief where you can clearly see that upgrading the gpu would be worth it: Thank you Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gimpymoo 10 Posted May 22, 2016 Well... BLOW ME DOWN WITH A FEATHER AND CALL ME ETHEL. Got myself a Noctua NH-D15S and got my 4770K to 4.5Ghz. This is paired with an R9 390 8GB. The results in Arma 3 were interesting. On a same map for testing purposes, like for like, on average there are between 40-50 MORE FPS. That is a LOT. Also, the GPU is now stressing a lot more, reporting more activity. Now, am I being mad, or does that mean the 4770K at stock was bottlenecking the R9 390? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
St. Jimmy 272 Posted May 23, 2016 Well... BLOW ME DOWN WITH A FEATHER AND CALL ME ETHEL. Got myself a Noctua NH-D15S and got my 4770K to 4.5Ghz. This is paired with an R9 390 8GB. The results in Arma 3 were interesting. On a same map for testing purposes, like for like, on average there are between 40-50 MORE FPS. That is a LOT. Also, the GPU is now stressing a lot more, reporting more activity. Now, am I being mad, or does that mean the 4770K at stock was bottlenecking the R9 390? Basically if you don't get full GPU usage, it's something else limiting the performance. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
domokun 515 Posted May 23, 2016 Well... BLOW ME DOWN WITH A FEATHER AND CALL ME ETHEL. Got myself a Noctua NH-D15S and got my 4770K to 4.5Ghz. This is paired with an R9 390 8GB. The results in Arma 3 were interesting. On a same map for testing purposes, like for like, on average there are between 40-50 MORE FPS. That is a LOT. Also, the GPU is now stressing a lot more, reporting more activity. Now, am I being mad, or does that mean the 4770K at stock was bottlenecking the R9 390? It would be awesome if you could share your results with us here, e.g. Benchmark A3 using recognised mission (e.g. Altis & Stratis Benchmarks) Then record the results and compare for: a) before upgrade = ?? fps b) with 4770K but old GPU = ?? fps c) with old CPU but R9 380 = ?? fps d) with 4770K and R9 380 = ?? fps Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
oldbear 390 Posted May 23, 2016 Arma3 being a CPU dependent game, the best upgrade will be to switch to a a better CPU or move to Skylake platform. You can play on "Ultra" settings with a GTX 750Ti and the GTX 760 is a nice GPU. FPS gains moving from GTX 750 to GTX 670, GTX 770 and GTX 970 were real but limited but I had get real nice FPS gains moving from i7-3770 to i7-4790. Of course getting a GTX 1070 will help getting overall better rig performances, and it will be quite OK if you are playing one of those GPU hungry fancy games. Arma3 wise the best move without a platform change will be to use your money for a new CPU on socket 1150, moving to i7-4790K or i7-5775C is to be considered. Source : http://www.hardware.fr/articles/940-15/cpu-jeux-3d-crysis-3-arma-iii.html [warning : French language used in source ] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gimpymoo 10 Posted May 28, 2016 Old bear, an upgrade from 4770K to 4790K is a sidegrade and financial suicide in my opinion. My next platform change will not be till next year. 4.5Gz is good for me now, I am happy with that overclock which cost £60 for the new heatsink. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
domokun 515 Posted May 31, 2016 Old bear, an upgrade from 4770K to 4790K is a sidegrade and financial suicide in my opinion. My next platform change will not be till next year. 4.5Gz is good for me now, I am happy with that overclock which cost £60 for the new heatsink. 4.5 GHz is awesome. If you really want to upgrade beyond 4.5 GHz, then consider getting a GTX 1070 when they finally hit the stores. Because a GTX 1070 offers 59% increase in performance in A3 (compared to GTX 970) for only +15% (+$50) increase in MSRP. https://youtu.be/-FWtJXmtITs?t=12m4s Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumpinghubert 49 Posted May 31, 2016 @Gimpymoo You will have similar (=additional) effect by overclocking your system ram. https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/156993-arma-3-cpu-vs-ram-performance-comparison-1600-2133-up-to-15-fps-gain/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fingolfin 1972 Posted June 6, 2016 I'm thinking about getting a new PC and although I already did some research, I'd like to hear your opinion on this system (regarding ArmA 3): CPU: I7-6700K, 4×4000 MHz (4200 MHz Turbo) Cooler: Scythe Katana 4 PWM Hard drive: SSD 250 GB Samsung 750 EVO Second hard drive: 1000 GB SATA Seagate/Toshiba/WD RAM: 16384 MB DDR4-RAM, 2400 MHz, Kingston HyperX FURY Black Series Graphics: ASUS STRIX-GTX970-DC2OC-4GD5, GeForce GTX 970, 4096 MB GDDR5 Main board: ASUS Z170-K, Sockel 1151 So do you see any problems or bottlenecks? Regarding the budget, unfortunately I can't go much higher. :mellow: Thank you! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
domokun 515 Posted June 6, 2016 I'm thinking about getting a new PC and although I already did some research, I'd like to hear your opinion on this system (regarding ArmA 3): CPU: I7-6700K, 4×4000 MHz (4200 MHz Turbo) Cooler: Scythe Katana 4 PWM Hard drive: SSD 250 GB Samsung 750 EVO Second hard drive: 1000 GB SATA Seagate/Toshiba/WD RAM: 16384 MB DDR4-RAM, 2400 MHz, Kingston HyperX FURY Black Series Graphics: ASUS STRIX-GTX970-DC2OC-4GD5, GeForce GTX 970, 4096 MB GDDR5 Main board: ASUS Z170-K, Sockel 1151 So do you see any problems or bottlenecks? Regarding the budget, unfortunately I can't go much higher. :mellow: Thank you! That's a good config. I'd make just 2 suggestions: 1. See if you can't get some faster RAM for the same price or just tiny (+€5) increase, e.g. 16 MB DDR4-2400 @€60 & 16MB of DDR4-2800 @ €61. http://de.pcpartpicker.com/products/memory/#Z=16384002&sort=a10&page=1&qq=1 2. If your PC is really dedicated to Arma and you can wait another month, remove the 1 TB HDD and use the money you save to upgrade your GTX 970 for a GTX 1070. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
oldbear 390 Posted June 7, 2016 @ fingolfin, From my point of view, this config is among the best combo available ATM in order to play Arma3. The only item I will suggest to change is the SSD 250 GB. So suggested change : M.2 SSD 500 GB. The ASUS Z170-K MoBo is hosting a M.2 slot and I believe it's a good plan to use it for a SSD with extended capacity. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fingolfin 1972 Posted June 7, 2016 Thank you both for your feedback! I will consider your suggestions. :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cadete 0 Posted June 9, 2016 anyone have any idea about home servers? i have an i7 2600 with 8gb ram wondering is that a good setup for a server? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
