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

[Pyronick 21]

Afaik, the DirectX 9 API was never really built for multi-GPU configurations and massively parallel processing.

But even with nVidia's 6th (technically 3th) generation and ATI's 3th generation multi-GPU configurations most games still have trouble.

Only if DirectX 10 was available to Windows XP...

[ChaK_ 10]

btw is arma 2 more cpu or gpu oriented?

my cpu is fine (q9650 no o/c), with 5gb, but my hs4850, while good enough only has 512 vram

[fov 10]

I got next system.

Processor AMD Athlon x2 3800+ (2.0 ghz)

Video Card Radeon 4850 512 mb vram

2gb ddr

How do you think, is it fine for arma 2?

[echo1 0]

CPU is on the slow side, but it will probably work.

[rundll.exe 12]

Hi guys, I need some help and/or advice.

I built my pc when arma came, and it runs at barely 25fps. But now im worried if Im actually able to upgrade for arma2

my current specs are

MSI P965 Neo motherboard

E4300 @1,8 Ghz

ATI Radeon X1950Pro 512mb

2GB DDR2 dual channel.

Now I checked here what my CPU upgrade possibilitys are.

The best option seem to be the E6700 2x2MB (2.66GHz) or E4700 2x1M (2.6GHz) but I find them pretty expensive for such old (arent they) CPUs. And I begin to doubt if its worth it... Will I gain enough from those?

How will the X1950 compare to the recommended 8800? I guess its not enough to run at even low settings...

I dont play games enough to do a full upgrade (mb, gfx and cpu) unfortunately. Bit silly to spend €600 on something I use just once a week :rolleyes:

Any thoughts? Thx in advance

[maddogx 13]

Hi guys, I need some help and/or advice.

I built my pc when arma came, and it runs at barely 25fps. But now im worried if Im actually able to upgrade for arma2

my current specs are

MSI P965 Neo motherboard

E4300 @1,8 Ghz

ATI Radeon X1950Pro 512mb

2GB DDR2 dual channel.

Now I checked here what my CPU upgrade possibilitys are.

The best option seem to be the E6700 2x2MB (2.66GHz) or E4700 2x1M (2.6GHz) but I find them pretty expensive for such old (arent they) CPUs. And I begin to doubt if its worth it... Will I gain enough from those?

How will the X1950 compare to the recommended 8800? I guess its not enough to run at even low settings...

I dont play games enough to do a full upgrade (mb, gfx and cpu) unfortunately. Bit silly to spend €600 on something I use just once a week :rolleyes:

Any thoughts? Thx in advance

Depends on your budget. With 250€ you could get a newer (but not much faster) Core2Duo and an HD4850. Go up to 350€ for an HD4870 and a slightly better C2D.

[Basil Brush 10]

Hi guys, I need some help and/or advice.

I built my pc when arma came, and it runs at barely 25fps. But now im worried if Im actually able to upgrade for arma2

my current specs are

MSI P965 Neo motherboard

E4300 @1,8 Ghz

ATI Radeon X1950Pro 512mb

2GB DDR2 dual channel.

Now I checked here what my CPU upgrade possibilitys are.

The best option seem to be the E6700 2x2MB (2.66GHz) or E4700 2x1M (2.6GHz) but I find them pretty expensive for such old (arent they) CPUs. And I begin to doubt if its worth it... Will I gain enough from those?

How will the X1950 compare to the recommended 8800? I guess its not enough to run at even low settings...

I dont play games enough to do a full upgrade (mb, gfx and cpu) unfortunately. Bit silly to spend €600 on something I use just once a week :rolleyes:

Any thoughts? Thx in advance

Cheapest option is upgrade to a 4870 or 4890 gfx card I would have thought and maybe get a good cooler and overclock cpu?.

[trini scourge 1]

I just bit the bullet and bought:

Core i7 920

6gb pc1200 RAM

ATI 4870 (512mb)

Knowing what happened with Arma and ATI cards, I'm a little worried.

[maddogx 13]

I just bit the bullet and bought:

Core i7 920

6gb pc1200 RAM

ATI 4870 (512mb)

Knowing what happened with Arma and ATI cards, I'm a little worried.

Well, the 1.16b patch for ArmA1 did allegedly fix the ATI problems. Did it work for you? If so, I don't see why Arma2 should screw it up again.

[MehMan 0]

I never had any of the ATI problems. I'll point my finger at you lot! BIS did a wonderful job, it's you who's the problem.

Edited May 26, 2009 by MehMan

[rundll.exe 12]

Depends on your budget. With 250€ you could get a newer (but not much faster) Core2Duo and an HD4850. Go up to 350€ for an HD4870 and a slightly better C2D.

200/300€ would be my budget, but I have the feeling CPU is the biggest bottleneck. A quick look at prices reveals that a CPU upgrade would cost me 150~200€ already.

Does someone know a good price/speed C2D supported here ??

Cheapest option is upgrade to a 4870 or 4890 gfx card I would have thought and maybe get a good cooler and overclock cpu?.

Overclocking only gains you a few percent doesnt it? Guess its not worth the hassle for 1 or 2 fps.

However I have a fairly good (big) cooler I dont want to break my PC for a game :j:

[OverDawg 10]

Its impossible to deny that ATI cards suffered poor performance on Arma. I haven't tried the latest patch but it seems to help a lot. I just hope Arma2 will be able to properly utilize multi GPU setups

@rundll: If the CPU is your bottleneck then overclocking the CPU gains you massive performance. C2D are really easy and safe to overclock

Edited May 26, 2009 by OverDawg

[telejunky 0]

Same with AMD's 4850e with its 45W TDP up to 3 Ghz by some people. I am running @ 2,75 Ghz stable and i have the feeling that it is faster (together with hd 4850 and 4gb ddr2). Overclocking is good if you can push the cpu further than "100mhz". ovlerclocking by 50Mhz is useless.

Mmh i think i have to buy two versions just to install it on my old pc and compare it to the new hardware of my gaming rig?...

Edit: Hell yeah i like the smiley, i think this is very good representing the feeling of an overclocked system :D

[Basil Brush 10]

Yeah I'm not a mega overclocker but my C2D 2.4ghz will run stable (and reasonably cool) @ 3.2ghz. I'm not sure how much fps is gained but its more like 5-15fps rather than 1 or 2.

[echo1 0]

Hi guys, I need some help and/or advice.

I built my pc when arma came, and it runs at barely 25fps. But now im worried if Im actually able to upgrade for arma2

my current specs are

MSI P965 Neo motherboard

E4300 @1,8 Ghz

ATI Radeon X1950Pro 512mb

2GB DDR2 dual channel.

Now I checked here what my CPU upgrade possibilitys are.

The best option seem to be the E6700 2x2MB (2.66GHz) or E4700 2x1M (2.6GHz) but I find them pretty expensive for such old (arent they) CPUs. And I begin to doubt if its worth it... Will I gain enough from those?

How will the X1950 compare to the recommended 8800? I guess its not enough to run at even low settings...

I dont play games enough to do a full upgrade (mb, gfx and cpu) unfortunately. Bit silly to spend €600 on something I use just once a week :rolleyes:

Any thoughts? Thx in advance

What about an E8400 and a 9800GT? Between the two, theyre about €250, and should be enough to make your system at "recommended specs" level.

EDIT: Seems like your motherboard can't support an E8400. Maybe an overclocked E6700 is the way to go. You could however replace the motherboard with something reasonably cheap like the Gigabyte GA-EP43-S3L, which is about €85. You say you don't want to do a full upgrade, but it might be worth it in the long run. Between that graphics card, the E8400 and the motherboard, it would cost a bit under €350, so it wouldnt be that over budget.

Edited May 27, 2009 by echo1

[Placebo 29]

I just bit the bullet and bought:

Core i7 920

6gb pc1200 RAM

ATI 4870 (512mb)

Knowing what happened with Arma and ATI cards, I'm a little worried.

I have 6gb ram and the same graphics card, ArmA2 runs great :)

[walker 0]

wrong topic

[=Spetsnaz= 0]

Guys recently last week i upgraded my pc for around $347 NZD which includes my mobo,ram and cpu and i was hoping if you guys could tell me if i could run it or not.

Here is my Specs so far:

Processor:Overclocked AMD Athlon AM2 6000+ Windsor 3.29ghz x2 Dual Core

Memory:Patrioit 4096mb DDR2 800Mhz (Now 667 had to downclock cause of OC of CPU)

Hard Drive:300GB

Video Card:HIS ATi Radeon HD 3850 512mb PCI-E

Core Clock OC from 730 to 775Mhz

Memory Clock OC from 980Mhz to 1070Mhz

Monitor:17inch SyncMaster 740T/740B 17inch

Sound Card:Internal Motherboard Sound Card

Operating System: Windows XP Professional 32bit Service Pack 3

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-M56S-S3 Motherboard

Im Hoping at least to run it at Med-High at a 1024x768 or a 1280x720 Resoultion , and maybe AA at low or normal,shadows turned off?

What you think? I just upgraded last week and am on a tight budget, the NZD is like $1 to 50c-60c USD, prices here are twice as expensive. If arma 2 won't run then im not gonna bother getting it..

[trini scourge 1]

I have 6gb ram and the same graphics card, ArmA2 runs great :)

:bounce3: Just what I wanted to hear.

[=Spetsnaz= 0]

anyone?

[NeMeSiS 11]

Dont upgrade untill you have played the game and are unhappy with the performance. It should run it quite well.

EDIT: It may not be the best PC around, its still a good deal for 347NZD. (Unless the NZD has gone up a massive amount since i left NZ :p )

[=Spetsnaz= 0]

The thing is i was on a crappy AMD Athlon 3500+ 2.21ghz single core, 1gb of DDR2 Ram, and a Asrock 939 socket mobo 2 weeks ago which lasted 3 years until i OCed my single core and accidently killed it, and i upgraded last week and i wanted to stay on a budget of $300 NZD..but hit extra $47 NZD, so from reading their optimal specifications? Do you think i could run this on med-high settings? with shadows turned off and AA maybe on low or medium? i want to play on a 1024x768 or 1280x768 resoultion. I always set my distance in ArmA around 500-3000 max, so hopefully 500-2000 for ArmA 2?

I get a mixed range of FPS for ArmA, 60 max. Everything is maxed except AA and Shadows turned off, texture set to medium.

Average is 30 FPS.

On CSS I get 100-110

Farcry 2 about 50-70

COD4 about 85-90

Fallout 3 about 70-80

COD5 about 70-80

also going to test crysis maybe next month,but then.. i just OCed my cpu and gfx yesterday i saw about a 15% improvement.. but i really hope i can ArmA2... just want some more opinions about my specs..

Edited May 27, 2009 by =Spetsnaz=

[Deadfast 43]

Bert, the guy who is streaming ARMA 2 live says he can run the game fine at medium to high details with C2D 2.2GHz, 2GB RAM and HD4850.

[=Spetsnaz= 0]

really? do you know what FPS he is getting?

[Simon C 0]

So basically, the game just won't run on my AMD Athlon 64 3400+ ? Seeing as it is single core? It runs ArmA fine, I'm starting to worry that it won't run ArmA 2 though...