RangerX3X 0 Posted April 15, 2007 I am building a new gaming rig with the following major components: Intel Core 2 Duo E6400 Conroe 2.13GHz Mushkin 2GB PC2 6400 DC RAM EVGA GeForce 8800GTX 768MB PCI-E I have stumbled upon this comment from Ondrej Spanel: "...Armed Assault is still a 32 bit application and there is no specific 64 bit support. On the other hand, current video card drivers often contain significant dual core optimizations, and as a result the framerate can often be 20-30% higher on dual core CPU." Will my Core 2 Duo be able to run this game because it is currently "not optimized for dual core processors" according to the Atari site? "2 GHz or better Intel or AMD processor, or equivalent of. Currently not optimized for Dual-core" I would like to get the US version when it comes out May 1. Any feedback from a Core 2 Duo user of the overseas versions would be appreciated. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wex-q 0 Posted April 15, 2007 It works on dual-core, of course, but it does not take advantage of the dual-core technology. Do some searches for Dual core, performance and alike on the forums, and your questions are probably going to be answered wex Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CameronMcDonald 146 Posted April 15, 2007 Beware of the all-too-often occurring 8800 problem still bugging Armed Assault. If you're buying a system purely to play this game, I'd steer clear of the DX10 cards if the problem hasn't been fixed when Combat Ops shows up - it's quite irritating. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Heatseeker 0 Posted April 15, 2007 8800 GTX in Arma works very well . I have tested 1.4, 1.5 and the beta patch with latest official nvidia drivers only. CPU... well... with some o'clocking . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
4 IN 1 0 Posted April 15, 2007 the ideas of nv driver is that even if the soft use only 1 core, the driver always shift the GFX workload to the less used one, it is sure that ArmA didnt fully take advantage of the dual-core technology, but the driver did so it still got a fairly good perforemce, if you set the rig just right........ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PeterEyres 0 Posted April 15, 2007 Surely BIS are working on a fix for dual core optimisation. To not do so, would be rather foolish. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gL33k 0 Posted April 15, 2007 I am building a new gaming rig with the following major components:Intel Core 2 Duo E6400 Conroe 2.13GHz Mushkin 2GB PC2 6400 DC RAM EVGA GeForce 8800GTX 768MB PCI-E I have stumbled upon this comment from Ondrej Spanel: "...Armed Assault is still a 32 bit application and there is no specific 64 bit support. On the other hand, current video card drivers often contain significant dual core optimizations, and as a result the framerate can often be 20-30% higher on dual core CPU." Will my Core 2 Duo be able to run this game because it is currently "not optimized for dual core processors" according to the Atari site? "2 GHz or better Intel or AMD processor, or equivalent of. Currently not optimized for Dual-core" I would like to get the US version when it comes out May 1. Any feedback from a Core 2 Duo user of the overseas versions would be appreciated. level up your E6400 to 3.00ghz . It can (must) be easily done , even with stock cooler. try a 375mhz x 9 , @ 1.35V on Vcore... 2.13 => 3.0 , a good boost. trust me Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bonko the sane 2 Posted April 15, 2007 ive got a similar setup, E6600, BFG 8800GTX and 2GB Ram , only rarely i get below 50 FPS with all options on high. So i'd say go ahead if you got the cash, runs all games i know at max settings with ease....expect Arma my current concern is that im planning to change my OS from XPPro32 to XPPro64 , adding an extra 2Gb RAM in the process, anyone out there knows if Arma runs ok in XP64 systems? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Heatseeker 0 Posted April 15, 2007 ive got a similar setup, E6600, BFG 8800GTX and 2GB Ram , only rarely i get below 50 FPS with all options on high. So i'd say go ahead if you got the cash, runs all games i know at max settings with ease....expect Arma my current concern is that im planning to change my OS from XPPro32 to XPPro64 , adding an extra 2Gb RAM in the process, anyone out there knows if Arma runs ok in XP64 systems? I really dont understand Arma. My setup is exactly the same (all stock speed just for now) and i was running a mix betwean normal and high with 30/40/50... Turning everything to high results in much more stable frame rates, rarely droping bellow 50 like you say . Does the post processing have a positive performance effect when used with anti aliasing on? That would make sense and it feels that way... Do the shadows use a diferent render... thing in high setting? I find them to look worse in high than in normal... I've read alot of complaints here about the 8800... weird LOD this, corrupt that, performance loss over time, etc. I have no problems running xp pro 32bit... this card is a fecking beast . I would like someone who knows what their talking about to explain me how Arma handles all this graphic load. edit: Arma is smooth like OPFR never was but the graphics beat the shit out of everything imo, i can have hell of alot more going on now, the sound "engine" is also very impressive, no more cut sounds when something happens. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Synide 0 Posted April 16, 2007 I run Win XP Pro 64bit version SP2 and have done for a year now. It runs very well. ArmA 1.05 runs without hitch. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bonko the sane 2 Posted April 16, 2007 I run Win XP Pro 64bit version SP2 and have done for a year now.It runs very well. ArmA 1.05 runs without hitch. txs for the info Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
