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

[walker 0]

Hi all

Bench Marks

For both CPU:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,687567/ArmA-2-im-Test-Benchmark-mit-18-CPUs/Rennspiel-Sportspiel-Simulation/Test/

And Graphic card:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,685661/Armed-Assault-2-Grafikkarten-Benchmarks-plus-Optikvergleich/Rennspiel-Sportspiel-Simulation/Test/

Kind Regards walker

[=Spetsnaz= 0]

ok i have a problem here, i have the 64bit windows 7 version however i am on windows xp professional 32bit and can't seem to install it , and i can't seem to boot the bootable disc either. I burned it as an image onto the disc on imgburn. But can't get it to boot :S

[echo1 0]

When the computer is booting up, there should be means of bringing up a boot menu. It will be either displayed on the loading screen, or you can find it in the manual. Usually it's Esc, F8, F11 or F12. That should let you select to boot from the CD. And you can't upgrade from XP to Windows 7 64 bit. (possibly not Windows 7 32bit either)

[dan2101 10]

hey guys,

how do you think it will run on a:

Quad core q9400 2.66ghz

8gb ram

geforce 9600gs at 768 ghz

thanks in advanced.

[StefX 0]

Hello I am about to buy a new cg for arma, my budget allow me to get the ATI 4890 or Nividia 275 GTX .

As CPU I have a quad Q9550 @ 3.4GHZ and 4 gig of RAM.

Which one is better at high resolution (1920X1200) for ARMA2. I don't do SLI btw. I will give my old and so good 8800GTX to my bro.

[Keva161 10]

If I upgrade my gfx card.. how will this run it?

C2D E6750

4GB DDR2

4890 1GB

[maddogx 13]

The HD4890 is superior to the GTX275 as far as I know. Also, use the Arma2 system specs thread for questions like this.

[uki7 10]

Get the ATI card. In the benchmarks Iv seen it fairs better than the Nvidia cards. I myself am regretting getting my gtx 260 over the 4870, which also runs ARMA 2 better.

[Overwatch 10]

got the game today. To anyone with....

8800GTS and dual core 3.4 at 1900*1200

Game runs nice and smooth but the default graphics settings are poor. I'll have a surf and play for suggested settings and optimizations and let you know.

[walker 0]

Hi all

HD 4890 1G

As others said use the existing thread if you had you would have seen that I posted this link:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,685661/Armed-Assault-2-Grafikkarten-Benchmarks-plus-Optikvergleich/Rennspiel-Sportspiel-Simulation/Test/

Kind Regards walker

[StefX 0]

Sorry I did not see this thread and I wanted a precised answer.

Do you know why ARMA2 is running better on aTI card?

[twobells 0]

The GTX is the better card for Arma 2, and I have both gpu's and although the ATi is slightly faster in this particular game overall the Nvidia card outshines the Ati.

tb

Edited June 18, 2009 by twobells

[ISVRaDa 0]

I will buy next month this one, Sapphire HD 4890 Toxic.

http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/sapphire_hd4890_toxic_vaporx/

[Nutlink 10]

As a GTX 275 owner, I say go with the 4890. It trades blows with the GTX 275, and even sometimes beats out the 285. It overclocks like a champ and it can usually be found for roughly $20 cheaper than the GTX 275. Only reason I picked the GTX 275 over the 4890 was because I like to enable/disable AA in individual game profiles, where as with the ATI drivers it's all or nothing (unless you use ATI Tray Tools, but that's not Vista 64 friendly).

[NoBF2boy 10]

4890 Toxic with 1Ghz/1075 RAM FTW, i play on very high 5k view distance on 1680x1050 200% fillrate even in multiplayer and i never drop under 20fps. owns the 275 by far as far as ive seen it. a mate got the 275 and as he saw me playing arma2 he sent it back! :)

[StefX 0]

wow thanks all for your replies is what I wanted to know!

I will go for an 4890. Is there any BIS programmer who could explain why arma2 is so in love with the ATI card?

[walker 0]

Hi all

The PC Games Hardware Benchmarks For ArmA II CPU and Graphics card are now also available in english.

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,687620/ArmA-2-tested-Benchmarks-with-18-CPUs/Practice/

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,685770/Armed-Assault-2-Graphics-card-benchmarks-and-visual-quality-compared/Practice/

Maybe this could be appended to the first post in this thread; so people do not have to trawl through all the posts for a simple answer to the relative capabilities of different CPU or GPU?

Kind Regards walker

[echo1 0]

Thanks for the link. Confirms what I thought applies to ArmA II - don't bother with an i7. Get a Phenom II 955 and overclock (not that much performance difference at stock speeds anyway)

[CinnamonPun 10]

in walker's link http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,687620/ArmA-2-tested-Benchmarks-with-18-CPUs/Practice/

where would a C2Q Q8200 2.33 GHz and a C2Q Q8300 2.5 GHz fit in?

[Palad1n 10]

I got Phenom II 3.0GHZ 4GB DDR2 HD4850 512GDDR3 and it runs very nicely 1920x1200 high/very high details (terrain and objects details set to normal), but sometimes, especially in forests and in areas with trees and houses, there is some major fps issues.

I tried even almost 1000 AI soldiers and it almost never dropped under 20 fps.

[Killerwatt 0]

Hmmm... I see the ATI 4870 2 gb card isn't in that list. I would have liked to have seen a comparison between that and the ATI 4890 1gb card

[walker 0]

in walker's link http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,687620/ArmA-2-tested-Benchmarks-with-18-CPUs/Practice/

where would a C2Q Q8200 2.33 GHz and a C2Q Q8300 2.5 GHz fit in?

Hi harrypotter

Just a guess but somewhere between the C2Q Q6600 and the C2Q Q9650.

Kind regards walker

[CinnamonPun 10]

thanks walker, much appreciated

[Shadow NX 1]

I only use a Phenom 1 X49850 2.5Ghz and the difference between some things in A2 that are CPU dependant is extreme.

I made a little fight in a village on CHernarus where two groups with 30 men each engage each other with some Su25s and Hinds flying above.

It works very well even on high settings but as soon as the medic simulation module comes into play the performance drop is extreme and even on mid settings things start to get more and more sluggish over time.

It doesnt seen GPU related as even if i use the -flush command it doesnt change much.

I take the module out and all runs fast again.

Guess thats also why missions like counter strike ( Gegenangriff ) or the missions in the industrial area run so sluggish because these all feature the medic modules.

They are weird anyway as with them active you sometimes need to hit a enemy several times to bring him down while if the module ist active one does the job most of the time ( with a SVD for example ).

But i guess this is more better gameplay releated than a bug.

So i dunno, the 9850 and my HD4870 512 were enough for all games so far, i know however that A2 is really different from other games but core features that cant be switched off should either scale so they run ok on hardware that is on par or above the recommended settings or not be implemented.

If this was a option that i can switch off i wouldnt even care but as it is now it spoils my fun and so i didnt play the campaign very far yet hoping i can buy a new PC sooner or later...

Or BIS somehow manages to get this game more AMD / ATI friendly finally as it was promised before which i offcourse would prefer.

Edited June 18, 2009 by Shadow NX

[davidoffo 10]

Operating System: Windows XP Home Edition (5.1, Build 2600) Service Pack 3 (2600.xpsp_sp3_gdr.090206-1234)

System Manufacturer: Dell Inc.

System Model: Dell DXP051

BIOS: Phoenix ROM BIOS PLUS Version 1.10 A03

Processor: Intel® Pentium® 4 CPU 3.20GHz (2 CPUs)

Memory: 2046MB RAM

Card name: NVIDIA GeForce 6800

If i chance my videocard to a XFX GeForce 9600GT is there a chance that I can play arma 2 on normal and maybe some things on low?