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

[Azamato 0]

i think you mean this

honestly i dont believe this is real.. at very high graphics, no way josay :=D

[jakerod 254]

i think you mean this

honestly i dont believe this is real.. at very high graphics, no way josay :=D

I don't think its that video. Maybe the same person but I remember the specs being in the comments section and that video doesn't have any.

[Supernova 0]

Damn. Thanks for the answer.

I second that. You will be lucky to achieve playable fps on the lowest settings. It's time for an upgrade.

Edited June 7, 2009 by Supernova

[jakerod 254]

I second that. You will be lucky to achieve playable fps on the lowest settings. It's time for an upgrade.

Thanks for the answer.

[Azamato 0]

anyone some comments about mine?

[Tumble 10]

Hi

Am I out of my mind to think this game will play on my system. Saying I wasnt and it was possible would the game be playable on the lowest setting with reasonable fps and could it manage anything more than lowest.

AMD Turion Dual-Core processor RM72 2.10GHz

Windows Vista 32-bit

4GB RAM

GeForce 8200M

Please somebody help im lost when it comes to this sort of thing.

[XOPEK 10]

Hi,gents!

Can anybody tell me about these: Now i have Core 2 Duo E8500 overclocked up to 4,0 Ghz but want to upgrade it on CoreQuad 9650&then overclock it -will it give more Fps in ARMA2 ? Do this game multicore optimized ?

p/s Sorry if question was discussed here,but 84 pages to read ... no time

p/s2 Thanks for your answers !

Edited June 8, 2009 by XOPEK

[galzohar 31]

Hi

Am I out of my mind to think this game will play on my system. Saying I wasnt and it was possible would the game be playable on the lowest setting with reasonable fps and could it manage anything more than lowest.

AMD Turion Dual-Core processor RM72 2.10GHz

Windows Vista 32-bit

4GB RAM

GeForce 8200M

Please somebody help im lost when it comes to this sort of thing.

Most likely no more than lowest, and even lowest will very possibly not give good FPS, but it's really hard to tell exactly how good a computer will do without actually trying. Note that my 3500+ AMD and 7900GS are having major difficulties at everything on lowest (except 100% fillrate and 1680X1050 resolution so I can actually see stuff).

[Smurf 12]

Hi,

any idea about specs to run a 50+ server, in terms of CPU, RAM and network Bandwidth?

Sorry if been posted before, coulndt find with the Search function.

[binkster 0]

Hi,gents!

Can anybody tell me about these: Now i have Core 2 Duo E8500 overclocked up to 4,0 Ghz but want to upgrade it on CoreQuad 9650&then overclock it -will it give more Fps in ARMA2 ? Do this game multicore optimized ?

p/s Sorry if question was discussed here,but 84 pages to read ... no time

p/s2 Thanks for your answers !

I have Q9650 with a gtx285 and I can play everything on high/veryhigh with terrain on low getting around 50 to 90 fps depending on what is going on. Alot of units running around I will stay in the 40's. Also I learned I get about 20fps more by using xp rather than vista. But that could be just my vista install. Not sure

What GPU will you have? Im assuming you have some good ram to get the 8500 to 4ghz? Do you sync ram and FSB? I have 1066 ram and without unlinking ram to FSB I can only get 3.6ghz cause my Memory doesnt like being overclocked.

[T.S.C.Plage 0]

I tried to get more familar with my new system and maybe something I stumbled about is also interesting for the AMD PhenomII (X4 955), AM3 socket mainboard or especially Gigabyte "UD5P" users or possible buyers.

As first a sidenote: The BIOS of the mainboard had to be flashed with the newest version (f3k) to even recognize the CPU correctly. I used the easy to use Gigabyte "Q-Flash" Utility to do this.

After doing that there're some new options available. I'll list the most important BIOS menu points below.

MB Intelligent Tweaker (M.I.T.)

Advanced Clock Calibration (ACC)

-> EC Firmware Selection "Normal" or "Hybrid". The last enables advanced overclocking of the CPU (in %).

I already saw people running @4800MHz but with extreme cooling and it's not recommend to go over +4% (standardly it's running at -2%) with normal cooling.

CPU NorthBridge Frequency

-> "Auto" or "Manual" (*X). "Auto" is set to 2000MHz but the board should support 2600MHz max.

So far I've manually set it to 2200MHz (*11) which is a slighty improvement.

Note that the "HT Link Frequency" has to be set to the same value as the "CPU NorthBridge Frequency". Elsewise the system will reset the NorthBridge Frequency to default (2000MHz).

Set Memory Clock

-> "Auto" or "Manual" (*X). "Auto" should be set to 1033MHz (*5) depending on the used RAM and if it's supported by the board. Max is 1600MHz (*8).

I hope the board will support more in the future because I'm currently running at max with no problem.

Note that this option will also be alvailable under the next mentioned menu point again together with some more specific RAM settings (latencies etc.) I'm not mentioning here any further.

DRAM Configuration

-> DCTs Mode "Ganged" or "Unganged". The selected mode is depending on how you configured your RAMs on the slots of the mainboard. The system should normally suggest the selected mode or has it preselected.

Unganged slot configuration [] [] || - Both controllers work as independent 64-bit channels (Dual-Channel).

Ganged slot configuration [] | [] | - When this mode is selected the controller operates both seperate 64-bit channels as single two-channel 128-bit system. This theoretically doubles the bandwith and should be an advantage with memory intensive applications.

( [] = RAM in Slot ; | = emtpy Slot )

I'm currently running my system "Unganged" but will change that the next days to see if it helps with handling ArmAII.

*** System Voltage (NOT) Optimized ***

Here you can manually adjust the voltages of various system parts. For example some RAMs can be operated with a higher voltage as the mainboard standardly provides. Changes should be made very carefully and according to the manufacturers references.

I changed the voltage for my RAMs from 1.300V to 1.800V for example. Besides that it seems like Gigabyte has the tendecy to show a little higher values in the BIOS and utilities as actually are really provided.

----------------------

So far I haven't overclocked the CPU but will maybe do "slight" tries in the next days and see if it has any measurable effects maybe together with the "Ganged" RAM mode. I've so far also not touched the graphic card.

With the other slightly improved settings, turned of V-Sync and the settings shown in the screen down below I came over 100 fps but it's also dropping to less then 50 or even 35 in some situations like for example in a fast mover above 600km/h "low-level" across Chernogorsk. Compared to the stats with V-Sync the fps are sometimes much higher without but also drop to the same levels like when it's turned on. I can't even aware the feeling that it's maybe even running a little smoother with V-Sync on (?).

Anywass, compared to GTA IV for example ArmAII doesn't seems to harmonize with my system. I also got 16391 points at 3DMark06 so far whichs isn't quite bad. But maybe there's help out there. The stuff is really new and not only BIS will work on patches/updates.

Btw, when I try to capture a video with Fraps (2.5.1) the frames drop drastically into the "red" area (<30) which I didn't even experienced with my old Athlon64 X2 5200+ (2x2.6GHz), 2GB PC2-800 CL5 RAM and a Crossfire X1950 (Crossfire Edition 512MB + XTX 512MB) combo at lower settings but the same resolution. I checked all Fraps settings, tried diffrent HDs as saving locations but no change. I noticed that it's running on just one Core like it should but I even tried all four but also with no effect. That's a little curious for me.

And some data for the interested.

.

Edited June 8, 2009 by T.S.C.Plage

[Litos 10]

It wont pull of very high i'd say. Look at my specs. I only get 28 fps. Nothing less, nothing more. Its like its "locked". :s And thats at Normal settings.

ugh, that doesn't sound good... I sure hope ill be able to do high. what is the main problem though? is it the processor? my ram is fine, graphics card is new (bouht about a month ago) and good, so...the processor is fairly old though =/...

[billbob543 10]

nvidia 9400gt 512mb

amd phenom 9550 quad core

4 gb of ram

i can run farcry 2 on medium to high settings but this game is way more epic so just asking rater than waste money

[Azamato 0]

P4 3.0ghz HT 2 cpu's

2gb ram

9600gt

can run FC2 high decent frames.

ArmA 2 on low/medium ? 1152/864 DX9 no AA or AF

[ChaK_ 10]

do you guys think it's really usefull to upgrade from my 4850 512mb to 4890 1gb?

[OneLunG 10]

This has kind of irked me, and is not meant to be a rant. I have been reading the forums and haven't seen a DEV comment on this issue, and was looking for some guidence.

Let me start off by saying, this game is fantasic. I think the potential is more than there, and I am glad to see a realistic game based on modern warfare.

I've been playing the OFP series since they first came out. I've helped run some of the first gaming leagues for OFP.

So that being said, I am a huge fan of BI and the relationship they have with thier fanbase.

That being said, this brings me to my issue.

Here are the system requirements for ArmA 2 from the wiki:

minimum specs:

• Dual Core CPU (Intel Pentium 4 3.0 GHz, Intel Core 2.0 GHz, AMD Athlon 3200+ or faster)

• 1 GB RAM

• GPU (Nvidia Geforce 7800 / ATI Radeon 1800 or faster), Shader Model 3 and 256 MB VRAM

• Windows XP

• DVD (Dual Layer compatible)

• 10 GB free HDD

recommended specs:

• Quad Core CPU or Dual Core CPU (Intel Core 2.8 GHz, AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+ or faster)

• 2 GB RAM

• faster GPU (Nvidia Geforce 8800GT / ATI Radeon 4850 or faster), Shader Model 3 and 512 MB VRAM

• Windows XP oder Windows Vista

• DVD (Dual Layer compatible)

• 10 GB free HDD

Now, my system:

Intel Core i7 920

3gb DDR3 Corsair ram

Nvidia 9800GTX+1gb card

RAID 0 HDD

Windows Vista64

Now, why can I not play the game EVEN closed to high settings? Even on medium settings the FPS is not that great, and the game just doesnt "pop."

I am curious why when I have a system that is above the recommended system I cant play ArmA2 at its full potential.

I'd like to know if this is indeed a recognized issue and its being looked at or not?

It just seems that performance should be better...

Well...thats the end of my rant (Hopes a DEV can shed some light for an ignorant soul!)

[Pyronick 21]

do you guys think it's really usefull to upgrade from my 4850 512mb to 4890 1gb?

Depends, if you will notice LOD popups.

This is due to the lack of burst memory reads.

The 1GB framebuffer should also improve performance when selecting higher resolutions, MSAA or higher fillrates.

[Razorman 10]

Hi,gents!

Can anybody tell me about these: Now i have Core 2 Duo E8500 overclocked up to 4,0 Ghz but want to upgrade it on CoreQuad 9650&then overclock it -will it give more Fps in ARMA2 ? Do this game multicore optimized ?

p/s Sorry if question was discussed here,but 84 pages to read ... no time

p/s2 Thanks for your answers !

C2D's handle this game better than quad's, you'll be wasting your money as you're allready running at a healthy 4ghz.

[Overwhelming 10]

Hello everyone. I'm thinking about updating my system, but I don't know if I should wait for the Core i5 and the DirectX 11 graphic cards that will come this fall. So I'm wondering if the game will be playable with good settings in my current system:

Core Duo E6600 @ 2,4GHz

4 GB RAM (although only 3 are used by my SO (Vista 32bits)

Geforce XFX 8800GTX 769MB

What do you think?

[mant3z 1]

Hello everyone. I'm thinking about updating my system, but I don't know if I should wait for the Core i5 and the DirectX 11 graphic cards that will come this fall. So I'm wondering if the game will be playable with good settings in my current system:

Core Duo E6600 @ 2,4GHz

4 GB RAM (although only 3 are used by my SO (Vista 32bits)

Geforce XFX 8800GTX 769MB

What do you think?

Get a proper cooling system, OC your processor to 3.2 and you should be: with high details in 1680 x 1050!

[Rho 0]

This has kind of irked me, and is not meant to be a rant. I have been reading the forums and haven't seen a DEV comment on this issue, and was looking for some guidence.

Now, my system:

Intel Core i7 920

3gb DDR3 Corsair ram

Nvidia 9800GTX+1gb card

RAID 0 HDD

Windows Vista64

Now, why can I not play the game EVEN closed to high settings? Even on medium settings the FPS is not that great, and the game just doesnt "pop."

Excellent question. I wonder if we will get any "official" reply?

I doubt it ...

[maddogx 13]

Now, why can I not play the game EVEN closed to high settings?

Excellent question. I wonder if we will get any "official" reply?

I doubt it ...

If you want an "official" reply, take your problems to customer support. The devs do browse the forums occasionally and do post in some threads, but if they had the time to track down every single complaint and answer them directly, they would never get any work done.

As for the performance problems, OneLunG, you're suffering from the misconception that fairly new hardware entitles you to max out your gfx settings. That may be the case with many games, but it's not gonna happen with Arma2. The minimal requirements you quoted show the bare minimum of hardware that is needed to run the game. The recommended hardware for Arma2 means nothing more than that the game will defitely be playable with that system. It says absolutely nothing about what kind of settings will be reasonable.

While the game is definitely lacking some optimization for performance, modern systems can still run it very well, if you take the time to do some tweaking, or just search the forums for optimal gfx settings. I run the game with most settings on very high, object details on medium, postprocessing on low, 100% fillrate and 2.5km view distance. That's good enough for me.

[Ez3kiel 10]

Ok if you were me, what would you buy between those 3 rigs (its a config specially for arma2). I will play on 1600*1050

1. i7 920 3GB DDR3 Asus P6T + Saphire 4890Toxic (approx 1200€ with screen)

2. Q9550 4GB DDR2 Asus P5Q Pro + Saphire 4890Toxic (approx 1100€ with screen)

3. Phenom 955 BE 4GB DDR3 MB GB + Saphire 4890Toxic (approx 1100€ with screen)

4. E8500 4GB DDR2 Asus P5Q Pro + Saphire 4890Toxic (approx 1000€ with screen)

I have to order soon

Edited June 8, 2009 by Ez3kiel

[mant3z 1]

This one is the best:

2. Q9550 4GB DDR2 Asus P5Q Pro + Saphire 4890Toxic (approx 1100€ with screen)

Or first and OC it to @3.2

[craig3000 10]

Ok if you were me, what would you buy between those 3 rigs (its a config specially for arma2). I will play on 1600*1050

1. i7 920 3GB DDR3 Asus P6T + Saphire 4890Toxic (approx 1200€ with screen)

2. Q9550 4GB DDR2 Asus P5Q Pro + Saphire 4890Toxic (approx 1100€ with screen)

3. Phenom 955 BE 4GB DDR3 MB GB + Saphire 4890Toxic (approx 1100€ with screen)

4. E8500 4GB DDR2 Asus P5Q Pro + Saphire 4890Toxic (approx 1000€ with screen)

I have to order soon

Number two is the best performer here, in terms of games anyway sometimes the i7 is a bit behind this core2quad, I'm guessing because the games were made prior to i7 release?

and it does seems arma2 doesn't like i7's as much? I'm guessing that's again because of less optimization?