Will my PC Run this? What CPU/GPU to get? What settings? System Specifications.

[ziiip 1]

That stuff is as obsolete as my grandma. No offence though. ;)

[Potatomasher 0]

I wonder how much more CPU dependant is Arma2 compared to Arma ?

I can run arma on normal and some settings high with stable 30 fps even though i have very old CPU with only one core.

[ohara 0]

Arma2 depend more on CPU then armed assault, AI use that much more intensive

[rundll.exe 12]

Knowing that, will ArmA II run more smooth on the same dual core CPU as arma? Or is the game that much heavier.

Arma doesnt run too good on my E45000 (1.8ghz c2d) but its indepentent of graphics settings, so it seems my gfx is fast enough.

[Potatomasher 0]

Arma2 depend more on CPU then armed assault, AI use that much more intensive

Thanks a lot for quick response. Now i know that i need to update my CPU to year 2009 before Arma2 sees light of the day.

[ohara 0]

Im playing arma2 on dual core and ATI 4870 and its work well, we tested X2 cards and work fine without problems. I dont have same hw as i had when develop AA, so cant compare directly.

[rundll.exe 12]

Ok thx for the fast answer. I should upgrade my CPU anyway I guess, but better do that when its out and can gather some user experiences.

[ohara 0]

For better performance you can use some small fast SSD disk, it really help for game loading and lods and texture streaming.

[niQ® 0]

a duel core E8500 and GTX260 may suffice?:j:

[cross 1]

the worst dilemma is for the upgraders.... :(

If you need to upgrade your system and stay up to date, it is wiser to upgrade to new socket system Corei7 motherboard.

But an i7 compatible CPU (i7 940) with the same specs as Q9650 is 2 times more expensive.

So if you are tight on budget, you may want to go for a low-speed-new-technology solution at the start with the hope of upgrading in a year to a faster CPU which will probably run ArmA2 better.

If you are really really tight on budget, and have a very old system, you may upgrade to an old system with 775 socket motherboard and Q9650 quad-core cpu which will easily handle everything for at least another 2 years with some overclocking. I think this setup should run ArmA quite good if coupled with a decent Gfx card and a small fast SSD as stated by Ohara

[william1 0]

Arma II'd better run on a shitty 3.20 Gz Pentium D because other way it won't run at all. :depressed:

[SaBrE_UK 0]

For better performance you can use some small fast SSD disk, it really help for game loading and lods and texture streaming.

How would we go about doing this? Anyone? Like, install it on a USB drive and run it from there?

[echo1 0]

But an i7 compatible CPU (i7 940) with the same specs as Q9650 is 2 times more expensive.

Heh, no. The Core i7s are about 20% more efficient than the Core 2 Quads clock for clock. Therefore, the Core i7 940 at stock speeds is about the same as a Q9650 overclocked as far as it can go. If you overclock the 940 it would go much much faster... Either way, I wouldn't bother with the 940 and get the 920 instead, much better value for money.

How would we go about doing this? Anyone? Like, install it on a USB drive and run it from there?

No, you'd want to buy an internal SATA one. A good choice would be the OCZ Vertex 60GB. Dabs.co.uk has them.

[echo1 0]

That's weird, my reply to another thread seemed to end up here...

Edited April 19, 2009 by echo1

[Pyronick 21]

For better performance you can use some small fast SSD disk, it really help for game loading and lods and texture streaming.

That is a very nice hint. I'm waiting for X58 boards to get cheaper and SAS SSDs to be available, then I'll switch from U320 to SAS.

SCSI has very smart TRIM commands which can improve SSD bandwidth after being written on multiple times.

Edited April 19, 2009 by SgtH3nry3

[SaBrE_UK 0]

No, you'd want to buy an internal SATA one. A good choice would be the OCZ Vertex 60GB. Dabs.co.uk has them.

Thanks for the info. I suppose I'd have to purchase a motherboard that supported multiple SATA hard drives, too :/

[sidhellfire 0]

After that crazy video of Samsung's 32 SSD discs on Raid I've got nightmares.

[echo1 0]

Thanks for the info. I suppose I'd have to purchase a motherboard that supported multiple SATA hard drives, too :/

As far as I know, most motherboards come with at least two SATA ports.

[celery 8]

Is my PC good for gaming and will it run ArmA II? It scored around 1700 in 3DMark06 after a bit of tweaking.

[Pyronick 21]

Is my PC good for gaming and will it run ArmA II? It scored around 1700 in 3DMark06 after a bit of tweaking.

It might just run ArmA 2. You'll have to see when a demo or sth is released.

[Bush 0]

Is my PC good for gaming and will it run ArmA II? It scored around 1700 in 3DMark06 after a bit of tweaking.

No, it’s too slow. You will need a dual core for ArmA2 and the graphics card is just too old and slow, I would not even try ArmA1 with that computer.

[cm 0]

the worst dilemma is for the upgraders.... :(

If you need to upgrade your system and stay up to date, it is wiser to upgrade to new socket system Corei7 motherboard.

But an i7 compatible CPU (i7 940) with the same specs as Q9650 is 2 times more expensive.

So if you are tight on budget, you may want to go for a low-speed-new-technology solution at the start with the hope of upgrading in a year to a faster CPU which will probably run ArmA2 better.

If you are really really tight on budget, and have a very old system, you may upgrade to an old system with 775 socket motherboard and Q9650 quad-core cpu which will easily handle everything for at least another 2 years with some overclocking. I think this setup should run ArmA quite good if coupled with a decent Gfx card and a small fast SSD as stated by Ohara

HAve you forgoten about AMD or what?

Just buy yourself an AMD Phenom II X3 or X4. A full upgrade with a HD4870, 4GB RAM, decent mobo and X3 720 costs about $1200 AUD. I can play arma on max settings at about 40-50FPS with a 3km draw distance.

You don't need to spend 2-3K on a PC to have something that is really fast.

[Pyronick 21]

I'd wait until after ArmA 2 is released, then you can upgrade when you really need it.

By than current-gen hardware will be cheaper and next-gen hardware will be out.

The instant gratification "needs" of people often leaves them with nothing.

ArmA 2 is expected on 26th of June, around that time AMD-ATI's RV800 series will be released.

[Steakslim 1]

I'd wait until after ArmA 2 is released, then you can upgrade when you really need it.

By than current-gen hardware will be cheaper and next-gen hardware will be out.

The instant gratification "needs" of people often leaves them with nothing.

ArmA 2 is expected on 26th of June, around that time AMD-ATI's RV800 series will be released.

Do what H3nry says. Wait till ArmA 2 is out, and save up your cash till then. We truly do not know what the performance will be till there are benchmarks and reviews released.

[ahmedjbh 0]

Hi,

Im sure there are others like me who are really excited about arma2.

Now my current pc is too old, and im not even going to pretend it will be good enough. So I am getting a whole new pc, mainly just for arma.

With that in mind, I would really appreciate someone who is involved in the making of Arma2 to suggest what brands seem to work well with arma2.

It is well known some games are more cpu dependant, and some are more ram dependant etc etc, some seem to be better with Amd / ati components etc. Can we have a little info about arma 2 performance?

I know Suma wrote that a fast dual core is probably better than a slower quad, but have they been able to do any benchmarking, and has Suma got any further advice for us in this regard?

many thanks.