Ryzen 7 2700X performance?

[necronaught 12]

Has anyone experienced Arma 3 on a 2700X. I currently have an i5 2500K @ 4.5 Ghz and am thinking it is time to upgrade after 7 years of this fantastic CPU. I have read about how close in terms of gaming the 8700k is to the 2700X and Ryzen obliterating Intel in productivity software. 

 

Is it worth upgrading to a Ryzen 2700X from the i5 2500K for Arma 3?

[Gunter Severloh 4056]

Hello, best to ask here:

 

[jfone 4]

recently went from i7 3770 to Ryzen 7 2700x. on my PC it can handle 70+ active ai in SP and fps never drop below 60. this 2700x is a beast! I would say the 2700x can handle scripts and AI very well. IF you mostly play pvp instead, it couldn’t give you the same performance of an i7 8th gen would.

 

anyway whatever you choose, i am sure performance will increase a lot. Arma 3 finally can run smoothly with 2018 CPUs.

 

my pc runs 2700x + 1070ti

 

[ZN Anhor 40]

Actually, the answer is relatively simple .....

 

Since Arma never uses more than 2 cores, do I need 8 cores? No

 

All that matters is a high clock frequency.

 

For this reason, e.g. a relatively cheap AMD FX-4350 works much better with Arma than some of the very expensive new 8 core processors.

 

[domokun 515]

2 hours ago, ZN Anhor said:

Actually, the answer is relatively simple .....

 

Since Arma never uses more than 2 cores, do I need 8 cores? No

 

All that matters is a high clock frequency.

 

For this reason, e.g. a relatively cheap AMD FX-4350 works much better with Arma than some of the very expensive new 8 core processors.

 

Not exactly. There are other factors which significantly contribute to A3's performance (in order of importance & with links to reliable benchmarks)

1. IPC, i.e. any Intel CPU will deliver higher performance at 4GHz than a AMD at identical speeds (true for FX series in 2013, true for Ryzen in 2017 & still true for Zen+ in 2018)

2. RAM speed offers massive performance boost (minor in most other games) as demonstrated in many benchmarks, e.g. Ryzen 7 @ 4 Ghz with DDR4-2400/2667/2933/3200, i7-7700k @ 4.9 GHz with DDR4-2400/3000/3600/4200, i7-6700K @ 4 GHz with DDR3-1600/2166/2400/2666/2800 vs DDR4-2133/2400/2666/2800/3000/3200/3466/3600, i7-2600k @ 4.4-4.8 GHz with DDR3-1600/2133, i7-7700k @ 4.4 GHz with DDR4-2133/3000/3866, i7-6700k @ 4.50 GHz with DDR4-2133/2400/3000/3600/4000, i7-6700k @ 4.50 GHz with DDR4-2133/3000

3. SSD, helps reduce stuttering and/or LoD thrashing (especially when travelling at high speeds and/or with large view distances, e.g. vehicles, jets)

[Dedmen 2703]

On 1/30/2019 at 1:19 PM, ZN Anhor said:

Since Arma never uses more than 2 cores, do I need 8 cores?

That's wrong. It uses all your cores. The load is just not evenly distributed. And if you wanna say that Arma puts most of the load on 2 cores, no it doesn't. over 90% of the load is in a single thread, not two.

 

On 1/30/2019 at 1:19 PM, ZN Anhor said:

All that matters is a high clock frequency.

Not only. High memory speed is important too, and more CPU cores help too because you are never running ONLY Arma. There are always programs running, and moving the programs to other cores so that they can't interfere with Arma is a good thing.

[CertainDeath7 11]

I went from an overclocked fx 8320 to overclocked i3 8350k when coffee lake came out. Tripled my FPS from 15-30 fps in TvT Multiplayer to 45-90 fps.
FX Series is Pure Trash for Arma, very bad single core performance, slow DDR3

 

Ryzen is fine, way better then FX Series. Its not best. If you wanna get best Arma experience, get Intel, or wait for Zen3. An i3 or i5 8xxx or 9xxx will have 20-30% more Singlecore Performance then any current Ryzen, which results in 20-30% more fps. And you can overclock intel much better. 4,8-5,2 Ghz is what you can achieve with gen 8 and 9 intels and a somewhat decent cooler. Ryzen stops at 4,2ghz.
Rumors say, that Zen3 will have comparable SC Performance.