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

[nikiforos 450]

Hi all!

I just got my new computer in order to be able to play ARMA3 with decent FPS on higher setting. The spec on my new computer is:

4770K @ 4.5 | EVGA GTX 780 Ti SLi @ 1150/7800 | Asus Maximus VI Formula | 4x8GB Corsair Dominator Platinum 2133Mhz | Win 8.1 64 Bit | Samsung 840 PRO 512GB SSD x 2 | Corsair AX 1200i PSU | Corsair Obsidian 750D | NZXT Kraken X60 | ASUS | Creative Sound Blaster ZxR | Asus VG248QE

On Autodetect setting I get around 10-15 FPS when playing any missions which takes place in Altis which is kinda low for my system (I hope)

I have been reading around on different optimalization tips and I think I have used all tricks in the book by now (enter all the different startup commands, did the edit arma3.cfg files ect) but to be honest, they didnt really get any increase my FPS according to FRAPS so then I tried to lower every setting.

My following settings are now:

Sampling: 100%

Texture: Very High

Objects: Very High

Terrain: Very High

Shadows: Standard

Particle Quality: Very High

Cloud Quality: Standard

PIP: High -

HDR Quality: Standard

Dynamic Lights: Very High

PPAA: SMAA High

Dynamic Lights: Ultra

Overall View Distance: 3000

Object Draw Distance: 200

Shadow View Distance: 100

Post-Processing: Bloom/Radial&RotationBlur/Depth Of Field = 0

SSAO: High

FSAA: 4x

ATOC: All Tree+Grass

PPAA: FXAA - Very High

Anisotropic Filtering: Very High

V-Sync - Disabled.

With these setting I get around 25-30FPS when playing mission that is on Altis. My question is, should I be happy with this? Or what settings do I need to adjust to be able to play this game above 60FPS? Do I need to get the 6-Core 4960 processor? Cant really upgrade any other parts of my system.

My suggestion :

Sampling: 100%

Texture: Very High

Objects: Very High - change this to high

Terrain: Very High

Shadows: Standard

Particle Quality: Very High

Cloud Quality: Standard

PIP: High -

HDR Quality: Standard

Dynamic Lights: Very High

PPAA: SMAA High

Dynamic Lights: Ultra

Overall View Distance: 3000 - change this to 2000

Object Draw Distance: 200

Shadow View Distance: 100

Post-Processing: Bloom/Radial&RotationBlur/Depth Of Field = 0

SSAO: High

FSAA: 4x - Change this to 2x

ATOC: All Tree+Grass - Turn this off

PPAA: FXAA - Very High

Anisotropic Filtering: Very High

V-Sync - Disabled.

Once again having the best GPU in the world would not help if 70-100 AIs fight each other in the game. So the best thing is to hope for optimizations from BIS (don't have any high hopes though :) )or contact NASA for one of their computers.

Now enjoy your game :)

Edited December 12, 2013 by Nikiforos

[arotished 10]

My suggestion :

Sampling: 100%

Texture: Very High

Objects: Very High - change this to high

Terrain: Very High

Shadows: Standard

Particle Quality: Very High

Cloud Quality: Standard

PIP: High -

HDR Quality: Standard

Dynamic Lights: Very High

PPAA: SMAA High

Dynamic Lights: Ultra

Overall View Distance: 3000 - change this to 2000

Object Draw Distance: 200

Shadow View Distance: 100

Post-Processing: Bloom/Radial&RotationBlur/Depth Of Field = 0

SSAO: High

FSAA: 4x - Change this to 2x

ATOC: All Tree+Grass - Turn this off

PPAA: FXAA - Very High

Anisotropic Filtering: Very High

V-Sync - Disabled.

Once again having the best GPU in the world would not help if 70-100 AIs fight each other in the game. So the best thing is to hope for optimizations from BIS (don't have any high hopes though :) )or contact NASA for one of their computers.

Now enjoy your game :)

Thanks for your recommendation. I see that I made a mistake in my settings, Im running 2000 Object Draw Distance:, not 200.

Kinda sad that todays "Top" GPU, CPU (ok, not a 6-core but still), RAM and SSD is not enough to run the game not even close to Ultra settings. How can people with lower spec computer play this game?

[jumpinghubert 48]

Hi arotished, there is something strange with your results. Maybe your cpu is downclocking.

Here is a benchmark so we can compare results: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?151794-ArmA3Mark-Benchmark-your-ArmA-3

[oldbear 390]

@ arotished : With such a config "i7 4770K @ 4.5/GTX 780 Ti SLi / 4x8GB 2133Mhz", nearly the best you can get at the moment, you can play with higher settings than those suggested by Nikiforos.

Have a look at HardOcp : ARMA III Video Card Performance and IQ Review

With a single GTX 780 Ti, I think you can play on "Ultra" for all the Quality section settings, the only setting having a huge impact on performances is "Visibility", you can set Overall visibility between 3800 m and 2000m tweaking Object visibility accordingly.

Sampling must be left @ 100% and Vsync can be disabled (not so many frames over 60).

In the AA&PP section, as I can't stand Blur and Blooms I have disabled them, but you can left it if you like, but I suggest you use HardOcp recipe for FSAA&FXAA : "... best AA combo in this game, FXAA Ultra + 2X/4X or 8X FSAA ..."

I am playing on "i7 3770/GTX 670/ 8 GB 1600Mhz" with 2000 m visibility, with those settings, I am getting 45 FPS in Arma3mark benchmark on Stratis. [ ArmA 3 Benchmark v0.51.Stratis : https://docs.google.com/file/d/0ByhZc2l2kSOaX0czdDhaRnMtbW8/edit]

Afterburner&HWinfo Arma2mark : http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/440/8swy.jpg/

Game screen Arma2mark : http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/826/r5x4.jpg/

If you are getting less than 45 FPS in the Arma3mark benchmark on Stratis, there is something wrong on you rig but you must 1st check if there is no energy saving option switched "on".

Nothing to be upgraded here all is top notch and i7 4960 is not the kind of CPU you can use, game wise.

Source : http://www.hardware.fr/articles/904-5/performances-jeux-3d.html (Beware French language : open at your own risk)

Edited December 12, 2013 by OldBear

[arotished 10]

Thanks for your replys. During the Campaign which sets place on Stratis, I got around 100FPS with these settings I posted but the issue is when I play custom senarios from Altis and cant get the FPS above 30+ without doing some seriouse reduction on the grapich settings.

Next montht the next campain is comming and that takes place on Altis I think, cant say I look forward to that....

[oldbear 390]

@ arotished : Reduction of graphic settings is not a good move while playing. With such a rig you get, you must change nothing apart "Visibility"

By "custom scenarios" are you meaning SP or MP ?

[arotished 10]

@ arotished : Reduction of graphic settings is not a good move while playing. With such a rig you get, you must change nothing apart "Visibility"

By "custom scenarios" are you meaning SP or MP ?

On all the SP missions I have download from SteamWorkshop which takes place on Altis, think I treid around 20 yesterday. I havent tired any MP missions yet.... (dont really wanna as I heard you get even lowr FPS in MP)

[Tyl3r99 41]

im thinking of a GPU upgrade... simply because i want more bloody frames lol

ive currently got a gtx690

anyone know of a better gaming card specifically for this game?

simply because if it can run this sweet as a nut then it can run anything

[arotished 10]

im thinking of a GPU upgrade... simply because i want more bloody frames lol

ive currently got a gtx690

anyone know of a better gaming card specifically for this game?

simply because if it can run this sweet as a nut then it can run anything

Upgrade the 690? To what? If you look at the post I just made, you can see that even I struggle with frams on my 780Ti SLi system. The GTX690 might be the best "single" card for gaming on the market right now so no point in chaning it.

PS: Do you get 100% usage on "both" your cards in the 690 or are they struggling around 40-50% each as I have on my system?

Better to invest in better cooling and overclock your CPU to 5,5Ghz or something as this game is so CPU demanding.

Edited December 16, 2013 by arotished

[Tyl3r99 41]

mines liquid cooling and only heats to 45 with arma 3 running :)

mines overclocked to 4.4ghz 6 core..

actually my spec is in my sig lol

ive disabled multi gpu usage due to the PIP flicker and seems to run OK..average 45fps give or take just want more lol

[RipGroove 10]

As per thread title, how can I expect Arma3 to run on my system (graphics settings and fps etc):

Res: 1080p (60Hz)

OS: Windows 8.1

Mobo: MSI 990FXA-GD80

CPU: AMD FX8350 (8-Core) 4.3GHz

RAM: 16GB Corsair

GPU: EVGA 780 Classified 3GB

PSU: Corsair TX750

SSD: Samsung 840 EVO 250GB

SSD: Samsung 840 120GB

[Jedo 10]

Hi all,

I have been playing Arma 3 for a while now with around 20 fps in any given multiplayer session (so can drop down to 10 fps at times). Previously this had also been my experience with Arma 1 and Arma 2 so I have grown accustomed to it, but recently I had to look up my system specs for something and I was reminded that I have quite a monster machine. It's not "I spend way too much money on my PC and should probably give more money to charity" monster machine, but still quite powerful for an average Joe:

OS: Windows 7 x64

PCU: Intel i7 3770K 3.50GHz

GPU: Radeon HD7950 OC

RAM: Corsair 16Gb 1600MHz

PSU: Seasonic 620Watt

HD: 2x WD 500GB

3 1920x1080 screens but I only play on one of them

This is not an old system. So I look at it and I can't figure out why something like Elder Scrolls Skyrim with a bunch of mods plays at 70 fps but Arma 3 drags at 20. Is 20 fps normal for my machine? Anyone else has similar specs?

PS Changing game's graphic settings usually does little difference for me. Changing view distance from 3000 to 1000 wins me like 1 fps.

Edited December 16, 2013 by Jedo

[oldbear 390]

@ Jedo : my main PC specs are : "i7 3770/GTX 670 OC/ 8 Go RAM/SSD System 240Go+ SSD Arma* 128Go"

Video settings "Ultra", "Visibility" = 2 000m, AA&PP "Bloom&Blurs:disabled"+HardOcp combo = "FXAA Ultra + 2X/4X ou FSAA 8x"

Played on Iiyama Prolite B2206WS @ 1680*1050

ATM, I am using : -cpuCount=4 -exThreads=7 and testing "park control" from http://bitsum.com/files/parkcontroldist64.exe

On Arma3Mark benchmark I am getting 45 FPS.

I am playing in the 35/55 FPS range in SP on Stratis and on MP [on our dedicated Clan server Visibility is set to 2000m].

I am playing in the 30/40 FPS range in SP on Altis and on MP, but in some areas such as Kavala or Atsalis Island I am getting slips down to 20/25 FPS.

As I am also making missions for my game team, in those areas I have to tweak down Visibility to 500/800m and setup "terrain grid" over 25 to get playable Coop mission with over 120 AI fighting there.

It seems there are some issues related to the ways the engine and server soft manage MP, the average FPS loss goes from -5 to -10.

I am getting better FPS in MP on Stratis than on Altis , last night I finished a 2h30min coop mission on Stratis with my Team mates over 50 FPS but in previous Clan training session I had played at a stable 25/30 FPS on Altis with reduced visibility. So Altis in itself is a challenge, Arma3 FPS wise.

Altis missions need a lot of tweaking to be playable for all and as an example, if the server setup for visibility is too high, people having only mid-range configurations are having low FPS issues on Altis.

As I am also playing on various public server, I had get a wide range of experience down to the slide-show level. So the quality of the server you are playing on and the quality of the mission are having a huge impact on game experience.

I am sorry to say it's not possible to make game comparison, I am getting very low FPS on Rome II : Total War ... and extra high FPS on War of Warplanes. Too much differences between them.

If you are getting 20 FPS in SP or in Arm3mark benchmark something is wrong with your rig.

If you are getting 20 FPS in MP it's too low, go play on an other server ...

[arotished 10]

What have BIS said about this subject?

Sorry but I have just entered the forum so havent read every thread about optimalization (bet there is MANY) but have BIS told officially that they are working on it or is it like "This is what you get, we have tried to improve the performance since Alpha but we cant, you just have to live with it" attitude?

[oldbear 390]

@ RipGroove : with your PC you can expect some disappointments playing Arma3. Late AMD products are not doing too well in game -Arma* wise-, from my point of view, the FX8350 is the only one having enough juice to allow playing Arma3 at an acceptable level, I mean well over the 30 FPS limit.

Having a lot of nice hardware features , I mean great GPU , nice SSD set, right RAM amount and so on will help playing, but basically this CPU is not the best to play Arma3.

[RipGroove 10]

Thanks, it is an FX8350 I have.

---------- Post added at 16:17 ---------- Previous post was at 16:16 ----------

Are there any certain benchmarks I can run that might relate back to Arma?

[oldbear 390]

@ arotished : Dwarden has said they were working on it. In fact they are working on many aspects, as far as I know they are working on the engine itself, working on Altis, working on MP management.

I don't clearly understand why you believe they are not working on the issues. BIS is quite a small studio, they are working on a huge project. As they have done in the past, they have been a bit over ambitious, trying to build something able to last as long as Operation Flashpoint. No Arma4 next year, nor Arma V in 2015 !

It will take time to get what they have intend to build in the first place, but they have already done a lot of work ... and after getting some holidays, they will be back to work.

---------- Post added at 17:33 ---------- Previous post was at 17:27 ----------

@ RipGroove : ArmA3Mark - Benchmark your ArmA 3

[RipGroove 10]

Do I need Arma 3 in order to use that benchmark? As I don't have it yet.

[oldbear 390]

Sorry, of course ... yes.

Have you Arma 2 ?

[RipGroove 10]

Sorry, of course ... yes.

Have you Arma 2 ?

No :-(

---------- Post added at 18:00 ---------- Previous post was at 17:52 ----------

For reference I can max out BF4 and maintain 100+ fps

[Leon86 13]

could download arma 2: free, it's an unmoddable arma 2 with crap textures.

[RipGroove 10]

Surely that won't be good representation of the grphical needs of Arma3 though?

[oldbear 390]

@ RipGroove : you are right using Arm2Free is not a good plan, but I will add that the main problem looking at your PC config. is not the graphical need.

Arma3 is known to be CPU dependent. In fact Arma* games are dependent of the ability of the CPU to have the highest performance on one core.

Arma3 (quad core highly recommened) is using one core intensively and extensively. That is one of the reason why FX 8530 is lagging behind i5 4440, Arma* wise.

In this situation, having a high end GPU as a GTX 780 can be viewed as an overkill.

That's why I have previously said ..."you can expect some disappointments playing Arma3".

Edited December 17, 2013 by OldBear

[RipGroove 10]

Ok, thanks, I better give Arma a miss then :-(

[oldbear 390]

@ There is no need to deprive yourself of making an experience on an exceptional game. My only concern was to warn you after you said ... "I can max out BF4 and maintain 100+ fps". This game is different and this difference came at a price.

Some time ago on an other thread as we were discussing on a similar topic, [FRL]Myke has given his point :

Strange enough that i do have a FX-8350 and i really enjoy ArmA 3. Of course not all set to Ultra (probably i'm addicted to the word "normal") but if this is the only way one could "enjoy" ArmA 3, then this might not be a suitable game for this person.

The meaning is, it is down to everyone to decide what is in fact "enjoyable". Some can't play with at least 60FPS while for others it is perfectly fine to have ~30FPS. Both are right.

To the chart: i think it is still valid for A3 and i guess it is still somewhat accurate, at least for the differences between the CPU's. The absolute FPS values may differ though. So while i am a AMD fan, the best CPU's for ArmA 3 are Intel CPU's. But this doesn't mean that AMD CPU's are "unplayable".