Alpha Specs - Hardware

[Dynamax 0]

dont get too worried about clock spped.. AMD's have slower clock speeds then Pentiums, yet they still perform as good if not better then P4's when it comes to games.

there is more to a CPU's speed then just its clock speed.

here's the rig i'll be getting for ArmA-note that if the FX56 comes out befor ArmA, ill get it instead of the FX55

AMD® Athlon™ 64 - FX-57 (Socket 939)

Asus® A8N32-SLI Deluxe, Socket 939, NVIDIA® nForce™4 SLi X16 Chipset w/ PCI Express x16 (ATX)

Corsair™ 2Gb XMS3500 TwinX Matched Low Latency Pro Series (TWINX2048-3500LLPRO)

ATI® Radeon™ X1800XT - Radeon™ X1800XT VPU w/512Mb GDDR3 PCI Express x16 Retail Box

[Madus_Maximus 0]

Erm, didn't the original poster also ask for the developers machine specs? I'm sure Suma was refering to those and not what Armed Assault will need to run. You need a massively powerful system when doing 3D work and the like, so I'd assume those monster machines will be used for rendering and modelling and what have you. The less powerful ones will most likely be used for 2D artwork like textures and cover art blah blah, and I'm sure all systems will double up as test rigs at some point to see how the engine copes with different set ups.

I expect the thing to be more demanding than OFP, but that's a given considering how things have progressed over the last few years. Having said that I'm sure it'll run better than OFP does on modern hardware, with all the DX9 optimisations and stuff. You may have noticed that a lot of DX7 and 8 games don't tend to run as smoothly as logic would suggest on modern graphics cards, OFP being a good example. DX7 was more CPU intensive whilst modern DX9 cards tend to do that job, but only on DX9 engines. I could be completely wrong but that's what I've been lead to believe!

[metalchris 0]

You know that o2 runs on every average joels pc.

Suma said they are testing the current alpha on pcs from 2-4 ghz and 512-2gigs of ram.

This means nothing , but that the game is running between these marks.

[Dynamax 0]

he didnt say they are testing it on thoes PC's.. he said that the PC's that they are currently using for the development of ArmA range from 2-4Ghz

[NeMeSiS 11]

This means nothing , but that the game is running between these marks.

And probably lower then those

[esti_the_big 0]

I just hope it won't be like when OFP was first released. It lasted 4 years until there was a PC which could actually run the game in full detail (all textures up and very high view dsitance)

But since the engine was actually optimized, I guess it'll run better on most machines than ofp1...

[Gollum1 0]

1,5 GHZ/512 MB? !! , you're going to calculate nuclear explosions with that or something?

[Evishion 0]

1,5 GHZ/512 MB? !! , you're going to calculate nuclear explosions with that or something?

nice find :P

[NeMeSiS 11]

But since the engine was actually optimized, I guess it'll run better on most machines than ofp1...

Probably not, theyll just put more stuff in

[Jabbah 0]

Be good to see Armed Assualt being multi-threaded for us Dual core and Dual CPU systems, also the dedicated server being multi-threaded would be a big bonus.

[Jones -PL- 0]

Quote[/b] ]Primary configuration of most of the development hardware we currently use is:

- Wide range of graphics card with Vertex/Pixel Shaders 2.0

- CPU 2 - 4 GHz

- 512 MB - 2 GB RAM

Um... so guys with graphic cards without or with earlier versions of vertex & pixel shaders can forget about ArmA?

[codarl 1]

@ Dec. 29 2005,08:44)]

Quote[/b] ]Primary configuration of most of the development hardware we currently use is:

- Wide range of graphics card with Vertex/Pixel Shaders 2.0

- CPU 2 - 4 GHz

- 512 MB - 2 GB RAM

Um... so guys with graphic cards without or with earlier versions of vertex & pixel shaders can forget about ArmA?

if a card doesn't support pixel shaders it just renders the stuff without them, easy as that.

[llauma 0]

@ Dec. 29 2005,08:44)]

Quote[/b] ]Primary configuration of most of the development hardware we currently use is:

- Wide range of graphics card with Vertex/Pixel Shaders 2.0

- CPU 2 - 4 GHz

- 512 MB - 2 GB RAM

Um... so guys with graphic cards without or with earlier versions of vertex & pixel shaders can forget about ArmA?

if a card doesn't support pixel shaders it just renders the stuff without them, easy as that.

Well the developers will need to make the game support the players not having shaders. I doubt it works as, if you dont have it, it automatically just skips it. But as others have said, the specs Suma gave are the ones they are working on, not what the game will require. This has nothing to do with the minimum spec's for the game.

About the pixel shaders. I am quite confident that pixel shader 1.4 which came with DX8.1 will be supported. This means that gfx cards with DX8 hardware support will run the game.

Then there's the question whether cards with older or no pixel shaders at all will support the game. As PS 1.4 was released in 2000-2001 I really doubt that they will bother adding support for older cards mainly because they are very old and not fast enough to handle a modern game of this size.

[Jones -PL- 0]

Ok, thx for reply.

[guerilla -MCY- 0]

I would like to buy a new Gfx-Card, but i'm asking myself if i gonna need DX9c or if DX9b will do the job. As i got AGP only, i'll have to make a last desicion as the new cards are only supporting PCI-E. Do i gonna miss somethink with the b version ?

here a GFX-Scorelist

http://www.3dchip.de/Grafikchipliste/Leistung_Graka.htm

[CameronMcDonald 146]

I'm kinda glad I upgraded when I did - I should be fine for AA.

3.4GHz P4 OC'd to 4.02GHz

2GB RAM

256MB DDR3 EN (NVidia) 6800GTO <- going to replace this beauty with one of them new X1800XTs from ATi, those 512MBs of DDR3 look irresistible.

10000rpm Raptor HD.

Cooling system - big fans.

[Journeyman 0]

I'm kinda glad I upgraded when I did - I should be fine for AA.

3.4GHz P4 OC'd to 4.02GHz

2GB RAM

256MB DDR3 EN (NVidia) 6800GTO <- going to replace this beauty with one of them new X1800XTs from ATi, those 512MBs of DDR3 look irresistible.

10000rpm Raptor HD.

Cooling system - big fans.

Thats gonna be noisy! U need water cooling for that beast!  

[GBee 0]

If the water cooling fails it will be the china syndrome, that machine will be so hot that it will melt straight through the earth

[Zorbtek 0]

For development on a large commercial game, you sort of need high spec computers because it makes actual development much faster and, most importantly keeps the game intact with todays current technology.  If you can run OFP with no problems, you could probably run VBS1 with no problems.  If you can run VBS1, you can probably run ArmA as well.  Only I suggest getting a new graphics card if you want to see ArmA at its fullest (for those of you who may not have updated recently)

The specs Suma gave out are for development, not for playing.

[ziiip 1]

I think my 6600 GT will be pretty much enough for ArmA.

[gonk 0]

I think my 6600 GT will be pretty much enough for ArmA.

maybe... reminds me of 640 K...who will want more than that!

[matt54 0]

will my machine work good?

Celeron D 2.8ghz

ATI Radeon 9550 (hates ofp took me a week to get it working -nomap and -nosplash fixed it)

512mb ram (probably upgrading to 1.5gb)

[ExtracTioN 0]

will my machine work good?

Celeron D 2.8ghz

ATI Radeon 9550 (hates ofp took me a week to get it working -nomap and -nosplash fixed it)  

512mb ram (probably upgrading to 1.5gb)

I think it should work well but 1 thing next time when you want to upgrade your PC dont get celeron processor just an advise

[Journeyman 0]

will my machine work good?

Celeron D 2.8ghz

ATI Radeon 9550 (hates ofp took me a week to get it working -nomap and -nosplash fixed it)  

512mb ram (probably upgrading to 1.5gb)

I think it should work well but 1 thing next time when you want to upgrade your PC dont get celeron processor just an advise

I had a 1.2 gig Celeron for a while and it coped very well with everything I threw at it including OFP! I ran it alongside a 2 gig pentium 4 with the same graphics card in each and the performance difference was not as great as U might think.

Moral: Don't scoff at a Celeron, they are still good processors!  

[matt54 0]

will my machine work good?

Celeron D 2.8ghz

ATI Radeon 9550 (hates ofp took me a week to get it working -nomap and -nosplash fixed it)

512mb ram (probably upgrading to 1.5gb)

I think it should work well but 1 thing next time when you want to upgrade your PC dont get celeron processor just an advise

I had a 1.2 gig Celeron for a while and it coped very well with everything I threw at it including OFP! I ran it alongside a 2 gig pentium 4 with the same graphics card in each and the performance difference was not as great as U might think.

Moral: Don't scoff at a Celeron, they are still good processors!

yeah celerons will always be around, they are a cheap way to get performance. like he said, plus this is still at stock speed. i can overclock it to something like 3.2-3.4ghz and it will be fine. very cool processor i mean that in a cold way. all i really lack is the ram to support it, 512mb doesnt get you far. neither does a Radeon 9550.