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

[seedo81 10]

hi:

my arma 2 not likeing my specs so much though the VGA card is so good please can i have an advice?

this is my specs

CPU AMD Athelon 64 bit 4200+ dual core X2 2.2 GHz

2GB RAM DDR2 (dont know about the BUS)

VGA Nvidia XFX 1GB DDR3 9600 GT

so whats the problem

am thinking about the RAM and the CPU

Arma2 runs like this

texture: normal

shadow:high

postprocess: normal

antialising: normal

memory:high

anistropic: normal

res:1280x1024

anyway i have nothing on very high

crysis runs on very high on my PC why not arma2?

[echo1 0]

Are you sure it's a 9600GT? I have a 512MB 9600GT, and it runs acceptable on high-ish settings. What OS are you running? What sort of CPU do you have?

[seedo81 10]

Yes am extremely sure

this is my Processors

CPU AMD Athelon 64 bit 4200+ dual core X2 2.2 GHz

My OS is XP 32bit SP3

[echo1 0]

The problem is that your CPU is quite slow, so even if you got a really fast card, the game would still be choppy. You'd be better off upgrading that before the video card... How much money can you spend?

[seedo81 10]

i can spend up to 368 $

[seedo81 10]

hello guy & hot chicks :D

yes am happy i got my new Processor its

...........

.......

...

.

THE AMD X2 64bit 6000 DUAL CORE 3.00 GHz

is that enough?:p

the X4 ones are Expensive

this is why i got that

the X4 ones that is cheap they have 512x3 or 512x4 Cash

the one i got is 1024x2 cash so its practically almost the same performance

i hope its good enough for this demanding Game (i love it)

i will turn off my pc now to put the processor and see what will happen

[cs_killem 10]

have ordered a new pc from cyberpower pc. but it wont be here for a while and i was wondering if i could run ARMA 2 and what kind of performance I would get.

CPU-AMD X2 250 Black Edition Dual-Core 3.0ghz

Video card- Ge Force 9400 GT with 1GB

Memory- 3GB

System- windows xp pro

hard drive-500GB RAID 0 memory

Thanks

[seedo81 10]

have ordered a new pc from cyberpower pc. but it wont be here for a while and i was wondering if i could run ARMA 2 and what kind of performance I would get.

CPU-AMD X2 250 Black Edition Dual-Core 3.0ghz

Video card- Ge Force 9400 GT with 1GB

Memory- 3GB

System- windows xp pro

hard drive-500GB RAID 0 memory

Thanks

your case is similar to mine now am so satisfied with my specs read my posts above i hope it helps:)

hi guys:

i dont know if you wonder what happen to my arma 2 after i replace the processor

wa wa wi wa is so good i can run it on very high not just that it runs better now and faster i will give it 4 stars because the antialising better to keep it below high:p

now in the advance setting everything is on very high except the antialising

if ur screen is 19 inch or below set the resolution to 1024x768

if ur screen is bigger then let the arma 2 decide by simply choosing the quality from the basic setting menu

well thats all guys

here is what i learned

if ur CPU speed is lower than 2.8 GHz (regardless how many cores u have arma 2 uses only 2 cores) then you will have a problem and make sure that the CPU cash is high i prefer 1024 KB

for the graphic cards here is a thing always get the DDR3 one they r better

so lets say 512MB DDR3 will run better than 1GB DDR2

use LSI if u can

for the hard disk try to get sata1 or higher the higher buffering is the better and the more rounds per minutes is also better

for the RAM

if ur system is 32bit only then dont bather to put alot of RAM cuz the OS will let u use only 1.5 GB no matter how much ram you have and thats y Microsoft created the 64bit OS version it will use all ur RAM as needed

if u have a stable 64bit OS then use it it will work better but u will face some incomparability problems depending what software u wanna install

for xp go with pro edition (with 32bit Support)

with vista go ultimate

and please dont rum a lot of softwares with the game in the same time it will eat ur RAM

conclusion:

Microsoft lie at us each time they create a new OS Y? ok

lets go to xp supports 32bit only at the begining then people discovered the ram issue so the made XP 64bit which not so stable depends on ur specs

now vista how in the world u except to have a smooth running OS if the interface is killing the ram with Heavy interface graphics and ofcource the 32bit 64bit trick:)

now the windows 7 is coming lets hope it will be good i will not judge it

am not saying i hate Microsoft no i love the products buts its too damm commercial thingy like a chines or Indian stock :rolleyes:

and thats why they use linux or unix to creat games:)

bless you

[echo1 0]

the X4 ones that is cheap they have 512x3 or 512x4 Cash

the one i got is 1024x2 cash so its practically almost the same performance

For one, the Phenom II X2/X3/X4 has 512KB L2 cache per core + 6MB of L3 cache shared between all of them for a total of 7-8MB per chip. The Athlon X2 6000+ has 512kb per core for a total of 1MB...

Secondly, cache doesn't equal performance in games. There are plenty of cases where chips with a lot more cache were outgunned by ones with much less, the Pentium 4 vs the Athlon 64 being a classic example.

Microsoft lie at us each time they create a new OS Y? ok

lets go to xp supports 32bit only at the begining then people discovered the ram issue so the made XP 64bit which not so stable depends on ur specs

That limitation with 32bit existed long before Microsoft existed :p

Also, the instability and lack of backwards compatibility with 64-bit Windows is over-exaggerated. I've been using 64-bit exclusively for the past year and have had no issues.

if ur CPU speed is lower than 2.8 GHz (regardless how many cores u have arma 2 uses only 2 cores) then you will have a problem and make sure that the CPU cash is high i prefer 1024 KB

Gigahertz and cache ratings are largely meaningless when dealing with multiple types of CPUs. A 2.66GHz Core i7 will outgun a Core 2 Quad at about 3.2GHz which will outgun a Phenom II running at about 3.6GHz.

for xp go with pro edition (with 32bit Support)

with vista go ultimate

No point in getting either with Windows 7 around the corner.

for the hard disk try to get sata1 or higher the higher buffering is the better and the more rounds per minutes is also better

Do they even sell SATA1 or IDE drives any more?

And lulz at the "Rounds per minute", in this context, RPM is "Revolutions per minute", referring to the rate at which the hard drive's platters spin.

Edited September 27, 2009 by echo1

[seedo81 10]

:D man its look like u r an expert but about my processor that i got it doesn't say that in AMD website

lolzzzzzzz for the RPMs i think arma 2 effected me

and the sata1 yes they r good as well am talking about something can anyone get

man am not talking about the best

am talking about what is cheap to get:bounce3:

and am trying to be simple in delivering infos

peace:)

oh about win7 my advice don't get it till Microsoft force u to

and i said the xp 64bit stability depends on ur specs

make a research about it

Edited September 27, 2009 by seedo81

[echo1 0]

and the sata1 yes they r good as well am talking

My point was that all hard drives made in the past 2-3 years are SATA 2. I dont think you can get SATA 1 any more unless you buy second hand.

oh about win7 my advice don't get it till Microsoft force u to

and i said the xp 64bit stability depends on ur specs

make a research about it

I've been using 64-bit Windows 7 for almost a year now, even in the incomplete stages it was still much better in terms of reliability and performance than Vista or even XP, and usually I'm not much of a Windows lover.

[m5holmez 10]

My point was that all hard drives made in the past 2-3 years are SATA 2. I dont think you can get SATA 1 any more unless you buy second hand.

I've been using 64-bit Windows 7 for almost a year now, even in the incomplete stages it was still much better in terms of reliability and performance than Vista or even XP, and usually I'm not much of a Windows lover.

I have recently moved over to win 7 x64 and it seems to run like a dream, have ran both xp and vista previously and win 7 is the most reliable and defintely runs smoother out of the 3. Arma 2 also runs a bit better under win 7 than vista/xp imo.

Edited September 28, 2009 by m5holmez

[aulias 10]

Hi All,

I'm about to upgrade my CPU, RAM and motherboard, and I'm trying to decide between the i5-750 and i7-860. Both would be with 4Gb of ram.

They are quite similar cpu's, but:

-the i7 has hyperthreading whereas the i5 doesn't;

-the i7 is 2.80Ghz versus 2.66GHz for the i5 (but I'm sure a mild overclock would make up this up on the i5).

In benchmarks on Tom's hardware and Anandtech the main performance difference occurs when an application uses hyperthreading. Otherwise there's not much between them due to the similar clock speeds. Unfortunately no Arma II benchies on either of them though.

So, does Arma II make much use of hyperthreading? Has anyone got any benchies with either of these cpus?

I'm leaning towards the i5 at the moment as its about 25% cheaper, but I could probably stretch to the i7-860 if it produced good gains with Arma II!!

Thanks,

aulias

[Kalikorz 10]

I'm trying to optimize my gaming right now I get a lot of slow loading textures and choppy game play especially in multiplayer even If I am the host. what should I set my settings too.

Pentium D (it is dual core) 3.11 ghz (slightly overclocked)

GtX 260 55nm Black label Rex

3 striped SATA2 Hdrives 7200 rpm each (though the doc files are on the unstriped drive because it wants my docs)

8 gb ddr2 6400 ram

Win XP Pro 64 bit (yes it can handle up to 128 gigs of ram!)

1080P projected screen

Zalman 800w power supply

Zalman brand high performance cpu cooling unit.

120mm external fans.

Scorpion Northbridge cooler

C-19A SLI 1.0a Motherboard ( I think it's 1066 FSB)

Have tried both FAT32 16gb paging file [though it likes to set it to 4gb automatically] on dedicated drive partition(disk interior) and No paging file as I have 8gb of RAM.

From everything I have read I should be rocking the performance but I'm not very happy with it at all. I read a thread about a wierd problem with 8gigs of ram but it seems limited to Vista. I think I am just clueless on the best performance options. Anyone got any tips.

I did can you run it which told me t cpu speed was fine but the actual cpu was below recommended. so how can I reduce the strain on the cpu? my GPU can handle fo sho.

Edited September 29, 2009 by Kalikorz

[hamis 0]

In benchmarks on Tom's hardware and Anandtech the main performance difference occurs when an application uses hyperthreading.

There is thread about it in these forums.Don't use it because it only causes trouble with the game.

[MullattoJones 10]

Are these specs good enough to fully enjoy the game?

Core 2 Duo

E7400 2.8 3MB 1066MHz 45nm

MSI soc 775 Core 2 Duo 1333 MHz Motherboard MATX PCI-E A/V/L

1 GB PC6400 800MHz Kingston

2GB PC6400 800MHz

1 GB Asus GeForce 8500 GR PCI-Ex16 DDr2 DVI

1TB 7200 RPM SATA 32MB Cache

64 bit so I can always upgrade my ram

Edit: Running SP2b but will get win7 when it comes out

So will this lag or should I be able to play on medium-high graphics??

Building my comp, should have it done by Wednesday but I don't want to buy the game unless I will be able to play.

Thanks in Advance.

[seedo81 10]

Hi Guys

Arma 2 like 2.8GHz or above

check what happen to me and now arma 2 runs on everything very high except the anti-aliasing

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=72181&page=336

[-DirTyDeeDs--Ziggy- 0]

Are these specs good enough to fully enjoy the game?

Core 2 Duo

E7400 2.8 3MB 1066MHz 45nm

MSI soc 775 Core 2 Duo 1333 MHz Motherboard MATX PCI-E A/V/L

1 GB PC6400 800MHz Kingston

2GB PC6400 800MHz

1 GB Asus GeForce 8500 GR PCI-Ex16 DDr2 DVI

1TB 7200 RPM SATA 32MB Cache

64 bit so I can always upgrade my ram

Edit: Running SP2b but will get win7 when it comes out

the 3gb of ram (using different pairs) and the gfx card are weaknesses that will affect how well the game will play on the higher settings

try this app to gauge how well it will run

Can You Run It

lol, my web browsing computer fails

Edited September 29, 2009 by [DirTyDeeDs]-Ziggy-

[MullattoJones 10]

I can always upgrade my ram

seeing as i dont have my new computer yet it doesn't help me but surely this one can't. 756mb of ram and 64mb of video ram n_n

Thanks man, that was basically all I needed, mind directing me somewhere where i can read up on how to operate interface etc?

---------- Post added at 01:00 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:42 AM ----------

Thanks man, that was basically all I needed, mind directing me somewhere where i can read up on how to operate interface etc?

Edited September 29, 2009 by MullattoJones

[aulias 10]

There is thread about it in these forums.Don't use it because it only causes trouble with the game.

OK, thanks, I hadn't come across that thread yet.

[-DirTyDeeDs--Ziggy- 0]

Thanks man, that was basically all I needed, mind directing me somewhere where i can read up on how to operate interface etc?

see your pm

[Cascinova 10]

Im sure many have heard this already, but just wanna give a tip to anyone running Vista. I have a dual core 2.2 ghz, with 1 gig 9800 Geforce, and 4 gigs of ram. I was getting a really choppy screen on default settings. However, i opened my task screen, and set Arma2 as a priority high, and it runs a lot smoother now. Try it if you havent already, it helped me a ton. I am able to run on high settings now with pretty smooth performance, although i still get CTD's ocassionally if theres a large battle going on or some large explosions near me. I think its due to my system running out of ram, since with Vista 32 bit, theres only about 3 gigs of ram total, and only about 1.5 gigs free once you subtract how much vista is using. Id rather run it on normal settings than default high settings, but it wont let me adjust it to normal settings since I installed patch 1.04.

Edited September 29, 2009 by Cascinova

[Cobra Pilot 10]

i bought a 9600GT and just pluged it in today, i can almost max out all the settings in the demo. is it going to stay like this in the full game? (not sure if this is the right thread though)

[echo1 0]

Yes, the 9600gt performs well with high-ish settings.

[txalin 2]

Nevermind, i posted on troubleshooting section