nikiforos 450 Posted June 4, 2015 If you want to play Arma 3 with acceptable FPS go for Intel processor i5 or i7 K version. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
aaron1977 10 Posted June 5, 2015 If you want to play Arma 3 with acceptable FPS go for Intel processor i5 or i7 K version. Yeah, Intel seems to be the popular choice. According to what I've read, I should probably worry more about that CPU, than I do the GPU. In regards to Arma anyway. Does it matter if too much if you mix an intel CPU with an AMD GPU? Sorry if it's a silly question, just wondering if there are benefits either way. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ratszo 17 Posted June 5, 2015 If you want to play Arma 3 with acceptable FPS go for Intel processor i5 or i7 K version. Do what Niki says and you can be forgiven for buying a card other than nvidia. Tho if you do buy said other card, be warned, few will understand any problems you may find. Tho some of my best friends have amd cards, my eyes glaze over anytime they speak of them. Good Luck with your K series intel cpu. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shx 11 Posted June 5, 2015 Does it matter if too much if you mix an intel CPU with an AMD GPU? Beyond nVidia exclusive features like Shadowplay, no. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hunter6003 10 Posted June 6, 2015 (edited) Y70 TOUCH Processor:4th Generation Intel Core i7-4720HQ Processor (2.60GHz 1600MHz 6MB) Operating system:Windows 8.1 64 Bit Graphics:NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M GDDR5 4GB Memory:16.0GB PC3-12800 DDR3L 1600 MHz Display:17.3" FHD LED AntiGlare Multitouch with integrated camera (1920x1080) Pointing device:ClickPad Hard Drive:512GB SATA SSD Battery:4 Cell 54 Watt Hour Li-Polymer Network Card:Lenovo AC Wireless (2x2) Bluetooth:Bluetooth Version 4.0 Operating System Language:EN:English RAM:SODIMM Optical Drive:None So will this laptop "Y70 Touch" be able to run Arma 3 well I am really green to PC gaming so i need help, form comparing stats it looks ok but I could use a Pro's option. My main concern figuring i am doing this once is this will be able to run it a Medium+ graphics and not have much lag ruining game play. Anyone have an Idea how arma will run when the system and game is updated/supported by Win 10? Edited June 6, 2015 by Hunter6003 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
aaron1977 10 Posted June 6, 2015 Do what Niki says and you can be forgiven for buying a card other than nvidia.Tho if you do buy said other card, be warned, few will understand any problems you may find. Tho some of my best friends have amd cards, my eyes glaze over anytime they speak of them. Good Luck with your K series intel cpu. Ok, you guys have me convinced on intel. Now have read that there is no noticeable difference between an i5/i7 for gaming. Is this true? I don't plan on streaming or video editing. Also, will I need a Z97 mobo? I believe they can be overclocked, if I ever feel the need to that. One more thing. Is it true that there are issues running two cards in SLI? That might make my decision a little easier. Was thinking of eventually running two gtx960's. Or maybe just get one gtx970. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shx 11 Posted June 6, 2015 [...] updated/supported by Win 10? It's running fine on the TP, without significant performance changes. ((Generally, unless the application in question is a driver, or really old, it's going to work.)) Y70 TOUCH Notebook+Arma3 is not exactly what I'd recommend, but if 'notebook' is a must have for you, the Y70 is a top competitor and will run the game fine (just a lot worse than a similarily priced tower). Battery:4 Cell 54 Watt Hour Li-Polymer 54Wh? That's like 20 minutes under load. RAM:SODIMM Geesh, that shop deserves punishment. Is this true? For gaming in general: yes. However, like in many other places, Arma is a exception here, the game will benefit from every last Hertz you pull out of your (Intel-) CPU. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ratszo 17 Posted June 7, 2015 Ok, you guys have me convinced on intel. Now have read that there is no noticeable difference between an i5/i7 for gaming. Is this true? I don't plan on streaming or video editing. Also, will I need a Z97 mobo? I believe they can be overclocked, if I ever feel the need to that. One more thing. Is it true that there are issues running two cards in SLI? That might make my decision a little easier. Was thinking of eventually running two gtx960's. Or maybe just get one gtx970. The i5 chip is fine for gaming. The "K" series chips are unlocked for overclocking. A good motherboard & an after-market heat-sink helps with overclocking. Look for high speed RAM too. SLI? Don't know, but one card is fine for arma. Good luck. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
aaron1977 10 Posted June 9, 2015 The i5 chip is fine for gaming.The "K" series chips are unlocked for overclocking. A good motherboard & an after-market heat-sink helps with overclocking. Look for high speed RAM too. SLI? Don't know, but one card is fine for arma. Good luck. Would I need to OC the i5 to achieve similar results to a stock i7? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobkins 10 Posted June 10, 2015 Hi everbody :), First of all, I'd like to apologize if I put this message in a wrong section. I'd scoured the forums and I thought this thread to be the best to ask my question. The question is that I'm planning to buy a new rig to chiefly play ArmA 3. I've done some research that, sad to say, left me in two minds about which CPU I should go for. A friend of mine recommended me to buy AMD FX-8370, which strikes me as a way to go, but from what I've read, many AMD-users struggle with low fps both in MP and SP. Is there somebody using this particular CPU who would share his experience in ArmA 3 ? I would be very much grateful for any of your takes on this. :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ratszo 17 Posted June 10, 2015 (edited) Would I need to OC the i5 to achieve similar results to a stock i7? Depends on the chips being compared. Quite afew sites get into close comparisons using benchmarks. All the new 'K' series i5s will run this game stock ..., a good price point to consider. Overclocking is a good thing going forward, tho a good chip won't need an oc out of the box. Was looking at the i5-4670K --3.4ghz..., turbo to 3.8ghz, not a bad price point, if that matters. Edited June 10, 2015 by Ratszo Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
aaron1977 10 Posted June 10, 2015 Depends on the chips being compared. Quite afew sites get into close comparisons using benchmarks.All the new 'K' series i5s will run this game stock ..., a good price point to consider. Overclocking is a good thing going forward, tho a good chip won't need an oc out of the box. Was looking at the i5-4670K --3.4ghz..., turbo to 3.8ghz, not a bad price point, if that matters. Yeah, i5-4670k is what I was looking to buy. Thought I could use money saved on that to buy a gtx970, rather than a 960. Thanks for your help! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
linuxmaster9 101 Posted June 11, 2015 Honestly, an AMD FX series CPU 6300 and up can run this game just fine too. Obviously, the faster the clocks, the better but, the AMD chips are still decent gaming chips for the money. I wish I still had my 8120 when I run a TADST server and the game on my rig at the same time. My 4770k just cant handle some of the mods on the server mission. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobkins 10 Posted June 11, 2015 Honestly, an AMD FX series CPU 6300 and up can run this game just fine too. Obviously, the faster the clocks, the better but, the AMD chips are still decent gaming chips for the money. I wish I still had my 8120 when I run a TADST server and the game on my rig at the same time. My 4770k just cant handle some of the mods on the server mission. Thank you for your opinion :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lendova 10 Posted June 12, 2015 Honestly, an AMD FX series CPU 6300 and up can run this game just fine too. Obviously, the faster the clocks, the better but, the AMD chips are still decent gaming chips for the money. I wish I still had my 8120 when I run a TADST server and the game on my rig at the same time. My 4770k just cant handle some of the mods on the server mission. Define "fine". My FX6300@4.4GHz not even close to provide a "fine" perofrmance in this game. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
oldbear 390 Posted June 23, 2015 I order to play Arma3, I will lay the FX 8370 aside and in this cost range I will go to an i5 4590. I have build a "i5 4590/GTX 760 mini" miniITX rig for my oldest son and the thing is flying really high. In order to play Arma3, you don't need a high end graphic card, a GTX 960 is quite enough to play at the Ultra/Very High level needed to enjoy the game [i am also testing Arma3 on an "Athlon II x2 250/GS450" rig ... so I can tell!] But you need the most effective CPU you can afford, from my point of view the best one atm is the i7-4790K [i know ... young son is playing Arma3 on it]. Let have a look here to get a crude view of CPU hierarchy related to Arma3 : http://www.noelshack.com/2014-40-1412423541-arma3-haswell-e.png (source:http://www.comptoir-hardware.com/articles/cpu-mobo-ram/26089-test-intel-x99-et-core-i7-5960x.html?start=13) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
linuxmaster9 101 Posted June 23, 2015 Define "fine".My FX6300@4.4GHz not even close to provide a "fine" perofrmance in this game. Paired with What GPU and at what graphical settings? My 8120 ran just fine with a modest OC to 4GHz High settings paired with a 7970 and SSD. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sawe 10 Posted June 25, 2015 Only place I could find that uses Arma 3 in GPU benchmarks. And now it has article about AMD Fury X, the scores include R9 390X aswell. http://muropaketti.com/artikkelit/naytonohjaimet/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-fiji,4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
domokun 515 Posted June 25, 2015 sawe: nice find. In fact there are a few other articles describing the impact of GPU on performance in A3: http://www.techspot.com/review/712-arma-3-benchmarks/ http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-970-maxwell,3941-9.html Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lendova 10 Posted June 26, 2015 Paired with What GPU and at what graphical settings? My 8120 ran just fine with a modest OC to 4GHz High settings paired with a 7970 and SSD. Do you like hot beer? Thats how "fine" a shooter with ~30 frames. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
linuxmaster9 101 Posted June 26, 2015 Do you like hot beer? Thats how "fine" a shooter with ~30 frames. I was in the high 40s low 50s. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lendova 10 Posted June 26, 2015 I was in the high 40s low 50s. I would be glad, if an FX could provide that performance all the time. Its cant hold even 30 fps just in the campaign. Its doesnt matter if its a 6xxx or a 8xxx chip neither how high the clock speed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
linuxmaster9 101 Posted June 26, 2015 I would be glad, if an FX could provide that performance all the time.Its cant hold even 30 fps just in the campaign. Its doesnt matter if its a 6xxx or a 8xxx chip neither how high the clock speed. paired with what GPU? on Air or Water? With what speed RAM? My RAM was 2133mhz. With or without SSD? Is the SSD SATAII or SATAIII? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lendova 10 Posted June 27, 2015 paired with what GPU? on Air or Water? With what speed RAM? My RAM was 2133mhz. With or without SSD? Is the SSD SATAII or SATAIII? None of them matters. http://i.imgur.com/F3IQGBP.jpg CPU 4.5GHz, 2GHz ram, GTX 760 OC, Sata 3 SSD Yes, its can go that low (campaign- preventive diplomacy). Marksman showcase: avarage 60+, Combined arms showcase: 30-40 once on the ground. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jason_Malik 10 Posted June 30, 2015 FX-8350 2x 7770HD xF 16GB Vegenace 1600Mhz The game works fine at high. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
