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

[=Spetsnaz= 0]

Dunno it doesnt say its a case from the store itself maybe if u see a picture u can recognize it

http://www.codima.be/product/2065/codima-multimedia-77504gb500gbhd4650dvdrw71glan.aspx

Is that REALLY necesarry? Cause why would they put that hardware in it if the psu wouldnt be able to handle it.

Because they want to make money off it?...

If you decide to keep the generic psu, be waiting for a ticking time bomb, if it anything goes wrong with it so does the rest of your components. You can also tell if its a good PSU by its weight, the heavier it is the better. That means all the components inside the PSU are big and fat :). I can help you pick a good reliable PSU if you want?

Edited July 5, 2009 by =Spetsnaz=

[echo1 0]

You can also tell if its a good PSU by its weight,

Best way to tell is by the brand name really... At the moment, best value for money are Corsair PSUs. For a setup like Azamato has, I'd recommend the 550W unit.

[=Spetsnaz= 0]

Best way to tell is by the brand name really... At the moment, best value for money are Corsair PSUs. For a setup like Azamato has, I'd recommend the 550W unit.

Yea Cosair is a good brand, but ive had this thermaltake and have been happy so far.

[Litos 10]

Hey guys.

I want to know which processor will be better to buy for better ArmA 2 performance and being able to film ArmA 2 in FRAPS with good graphics/resolution and without a major FPS decrease.

An E8500 Dual Core:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115036

A Q9550 Quad Core:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115041

Also, I have no problem buying a separate heatsink/fan. Would be great if you recommend one.

As for my graphics card, I am using a GTX 260 which I bought not long ago so I'm not changing that, and 4GB DDR2 RAM, and am running Windows 7 RC 64bit.

Please respond! I don't want to make a mistake when buying a processor for this game.

Thanks!

[M1Garand 10]

Will my PC run here are my specs: 8gb of DDR2 ram, a GEFORCE 9400GT videocard, and a AMD Phenom 2.3 ghz Quad core procceser.

[=Spetsnaz= 0]

Hey guys.

I want to know which processor will be better to buy for better ArmA 2 performance and being able to film ArmA 2 in FRAPS with good graphics/resolution and without a major FPS decrease.

An E8500 Dual Core:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115036

A Q9550 Quad Core:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115041

Also, I have no problem buying a separate heatsink/fan. Would be great if you recommend one.

As for my graphics card, I am using a GTX 260 which I bought not long ago so I'm not changing that, and 4GB DDR2 RAM, and am running Windows 7 RC 64bit.

Please respond! I don't want to make a mistake when buying a processor for this game.

Thanks!

Go with the quad , then you can also OC that if you like

[Litos 10]

Thanks;

Just curious, why? A friend told me the dual core is better, because games/programs don't use more than 2 cores and such. But I wasn't sure since ArmA 2 depends on the processor more than other games. So why exactly is the quad core better?

Oh and my GTX 260 is good right?

[Azamato 0]

Because they want to make money off it?...

If you decide to keep the generic psu, be waiting for a ticking time bomb, if it anything goes wrong with it so does the rest of your components. You can also tell if its a good PSU by its weight, the heavier it is the better. That means all the components inside the PSU are big and fat :). I can help you pick a good reliable PSU if you want?

that is f'd up :(

too bad that pc only has that one, im not building a pc btw thats why. :(

[swe 10]

i have asked this question before, but no one answers. There must be something wrong with my computer or is this normal:

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

My computer:

-q9550

-4gb ram

-nvidia gtx 285 1gb

-vista 32

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

I play ArmA on settings:

texture - normal

video memory - normal

anisotropic filtering - disabled

terrain - normal

object - normal

Shadow - disabled

postprocess effect - disabled

interface resolution 1680*1050*32

3d resolution 1260*786

View dist 2000

And i have 15-27 fps in arma 2

I have pretty old drivers and have no idea how to uppgrade then (how to uninstall the old and install the new)

pleas, someone, answer this, i can send you money or something...

im getting desperat

[SnowFox 10]

Hey guys

I've thought about buying a new pc for Arma 2, as it runs pretty bad. Well bad for me (20-35 fps or so, depending on settings of course)

My current computer is only 1.5 years old though and consists of the following:

Core 2 duo 6850 @3.0 GHz

2 gigs of RAM

Nvidia Geforce 8800GT 512 mb

Running XP home

Do you think it would be a better idea to just buy a HD4890 for instance, instead of investing in a whole new system??

Would that be enough to get a signifact increase in performance?

[cartier90 0]

SWE, increase vid memory to very high, you'll be pleasantly surprised....

Same as well for you Snowfox...

[swe 10]

Snow, if i had 20-35 i would be so happy!!!

And my computer is 7 days old.

---------- Post added at 08:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:29 PM ----------

Cartier, now i just tried that on an almost empty server and yes, i had when i was alone 25-27 fps when i changed from normal to verry high. If i join a full server i will still have constant below 25

[DarkBytes 10]

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/ARMAII_gpu_performance/

[cartier90 0]

FPS on Multiplayer is apparantly quite slow, try it in normal game should give better boost.

I have a stock I7 with a GTS250 - and 4 GB RAM, and get 30-40. You have a much better card so should be getting better rates....someone whos more knowledgeable

should be able to help you.

Edited July 5, 2009 by cartier90

[-=seany=- 5]

Not really that weird, it just shows how CPU intensive this game is. I still wonder why, compared to Arma1, it is this way. Especially since we can use all our cores now...it doesn't make sense to me, that part is weird.

[swe 10]

cartier, what are youre settings on resulution and graphics in the game?

[DarkBytes 10]

not really weird ?

mate middle range cards perfoming better then high end ones , I would call it a little weird

[Potatomasher 0]

SWE, increase vid memory to very high, you'll be pleasantly surprised....

Hahah. You mean get ready for a lagfest. Strange tips you gave to people...

I dunno about 1gb gfx card, but i know that 512mb is definetly not enough.

[cartier90 0]

Only in $ / FPS

[-=seany=- 5]

1-2 fps difference isn't that big of a deal between cards, that just means they cant go any higher because the CPU is stopping them. And the high end cards that are getting beat by mid range cards are all Dual GPU, which means there is something up with their SLI/CrossFire setup. I have 2*9800 gtx and I'm pretty sure they give better FPS even when cpu limited. Although it might be interesting to test.. I get way better FPS when the Cpu is not a factor..eg in a forest.

[cartier90 0]

ah, I got 1GB card, perhaps thats why it improved...nm

[mutters 10]

There seems to be a lot of confusion in my and i guess other peoples minds as to which is the best operating system for games and why.

I'm using vista 32 and have had no problems with all other games but arma2,arma1 runs fine.

So which is the best OS and why.

[MegaSevan 10]

whatever works for you, and you have access to.

[Desert 10]

Exact!

[galzohar 31]

A lot of people have been having serious performance issues with Vista, that's all I can tell you certainly. Arma 2 is also a 32 bit application so there's no real point in a 64 bit OS.