Mahatma Gandhi

Speaking of Ryzen: I optimized my RAM timings a bit more and see what I get in the YAAB with a Ryzen @ 3.8GHz: I do think thats quite competitive (and also fast enough for me by far)

Update: With further improvements on the RAM timings, I am at 60.7 FPS now with a Ryzen 1700 @ 3.8 GHZ CPU clock Low Preset @ 1920x1080 @ Radeon 470 4gb - stock Given the CPU clock, I think thats quite remarkably good!

In case one of you is still reading this thread: I think I finally found very good RAM timing settings. ArmA3 now absolutely flys on my Ryzen even at only 3.8GHz CPU clock.

Thanks for your minireview on a AMD budget assembly! I can report that Ryzen is absolutely well performing in ArmA3 and I would say faster per clock than many Intel CPUs. I am running a 1700 @ 3.8GHz with FlareX RAMs @ 3200MHz (optimized timings) and a 4G Radeon 470. When I am running YAAB in the "LOW Preset" (to avoid GPU limitations) under 1920x1080 I get this meanwhile. If of interest, I can also run it at standard settings and report here. Absolut key for good ArmA3 performance on a Ryzen Sys is the RAM.

My setup: CPU: Ryzen R7 1700 @ 3.8GHz RAM: 16gb G.Skill FlareX @ 3200MHz [timings tuned a bit] GPU: XFX Radeon 470 [no OC] MONITOR: 1920 x 1080p STORAGE: 1T Hard drive, 7200 RPM; Samsung 850 128gb Sys OS: Windows 10 64bit PSU: Enermax Triathlor 300W Results: Low Preset: 56.4 FPS Standard Preset: 48.2 FPS Personal impression: Game runs very smooth even at Ultra Preset. Totally happy with the rig.

Many Thanks Horus! That was a very interesting read! Based on this, I played around with the timings of my RAM and improved the YAAB Framerate by another 9% without touching RAM clock or CPU clock. Please note, 9% starting from the already good XMP settings. Its obvious that ArmA3 loves low RAM latencies. Here are the settings I am using now (still improving): EDIT: Further improved timings (will give you even more FPS than the above): This is YAAB under Standard Preset +Standard Settings and below the values for "Low Preset" --:54.5 FPS

Surely not before the implementation of the Enfusion engine. BIS is still looking for engine programmers to develop this engine so I assume this will be the base of the future ArmA engines. It probably won't hit ArmA3 though.

Of course you don't have any problems as your 6700k is a pretty powerful CPU. The only thing I am telling you is, that you should not tell people wrong things just because you don't like AMD or do not know better. Nobody forces you to buy their products if you don't like them... Ryzen is not slower than Skylake/Kabylake clock by clock in single threaded Applications and is significantly faster in the vast majority of multithreaded applications. Its a convenient buy on a brand new plattform. Other than personal preferences, there is no good argument against it. EDIT: I have no words.... We just benched and yours was slower. Well than... live long and prosper!

That's not true and you know it. Why are you coming up with this maquez? I benched it on 1.78 too (see above) and your result looks pretty poor in comparison.

You have to compare identical Versions of CPU-Z You used 1.78 I can use that too but you would be very disappointed with your result! Et voila:

Fair enough, but your experiences from several years back do not match nowadays situation and as long as you don't know better, there is no justification for telling people incorrect things as a fact. I took a screenshot of the latest version of the CPU-Z Bench (1.79) just for YOU, so you can compare to your system by simply downloading CPU-Z. Best, Mahatma P.S.: A Skylake 6700k has 455 in the single thread bench and 2363 in the multi thread bench.

Maybe you wanna update you knowledge before you post such hard statements, things changed substantially since the realease of the Ryzen μArch. Not only regarding threading but also regarding single thread performance.

And thats something AMDs Ryzen cannot?

Any reference for that? I've got the same and they just work out of the box. They have the Samsung-B ICs which seem to always work fine. Worth reading here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/62vp2g/clearing_up_any_samsung_bdie_confusion_eg_on

Most importantly, you need to set the XMP Profile for those FlareX RAMs and run them at 3200MHz

It makes a huge difference for ArmA3 performance but it has its pricetag, as you can't use any 3200MHz today but will need modules with Samsung B ICs. Those are the only ones that run 3200MHz on Ryzen systems to date without any problems. One example is the Trident Z 3200MHz CL15 modules. (CL16 Modules don't work as those are Hynx IC based) If you're really into ArmA3, I would recommend the investment. For rendering or encoding, it doesn't really matter.

As you can read in this thread... your RAM is the most serious bottleneck .... Arma3 runs very well on Ryzen...

The latest BIOS/UEFI update (AGESA 1.0.0.4a) gave shorter latencies accessing the RAM.

@MrHamburgler Well, of course you'll have a huge jump from 4 threads on your i5 to 12 threads on the R5. Also you'll definately have more resources to do something like encoding or streaming in the background but whether this will be a good investment for playing arma totally stands and falls with the RAM you're planing to buy and your current RAM. We did some benchmarking in a german forum with a guy addressing ARMA3 and RAM performance impact on his overclocked 5GHz i7 7700k and the result is very clear. If your CPU is weak, ARMA performs weak no matter what. However, if your CPU is strong ARMA CAN perform well if your RAM clocks high at short latencies. On my 1700 I get ~55FPS @ 3.8GHz with my RAM clocked at 3200MHz (CL14). Using 2400MHz (CL11) RAM he gets to about 47 FPS on a 5GHz i7. At 3000MHz CL14 and i7 @ 5GHz he is roughly where I am at 3200MHz CL14 and R7@ 3.8GHz suggesting that the R7 performs somewhat better clock by clock (larger caches?). Yet, if he overclocks his RAM to 4200MHz CL17 and i7 @ 5GHz his machine totally takes off. I haven' overclocked my RAM yet as my B350 Board does not offer this option (yet). Most likely this is no different for AMDs Ryzen, it is not advisable to go for a 1700x and run out of money to buy good RAM. This is also true for the i5/i7 obviously. The sweetspot might be @ 1600x/7600k or if you are up for overclocking, the R5 1600 on a X370 Board is a great choice but under no circumstances go for an expensive CPU at the expense that you'll end up with slow RAM becuase you're running out of money (if you love playing ArmA3). I'd recommend the R5 1600(x) plus TridentZ @3200MHz CL15 (that one has the SamsungB Dice - dont take the CL16! - those are Samsung E and Ryzen does not like those) or FlareX or good DualRank DDR4 that runs the 2667-2993 MHz on a Ryzen Board. It just feels wrong to spend the same amount of money for a QuadCore i5 if you can get 6C/12T. Hope that helps, Mahatma P.S.: In my opinion it is worth noting that all these data are very interesting from a theoretical point of view, however, an R5 1600 or i5 7600 with decent RAM are both well within very solid performance in ArmA3 when combined with decent RAM. You don't need >70 FPS in the YAAB to make playing ArmA3 a great experience.

In my list, when standard settings is applied it is mentioned. Standard settings however are not 'standardized' but depend on the preset chosen. Hence, I switched to presets entirely by simply choosing the indicated presets. In other words: If you're running YAAB after selecting ULTRA presets and press 'S' your results will be very different over running YAAB after selecting low preset and hiting the 'S' key. Hence, simply pick standard preset and run YAAB.

I cannot tell much about other games as I am running ArmA3 or I am working with my build (no other games just ArmA3 or rendering, videoediting and encoding). What I can say is that ArmA3 meanwhile runs very very smoothly on my 1700 @ 3.8GHz . I have posted several screenshots of benchmarks and frametimes here. But for you again: ~47 FPS is what I get using standard preset today. This is what you would also roughly get with a 1600x @ stock. So instead of posting youtube videos, it would be great if you just run yaab on your build (whatever it is) and post the screenshot here. This will help putting Ryzen into context. Everything else remains pure speculation. Cheers, Mahatma

it is relevant because your overclocked rig, as it is, is most likely slower than a Ryzen 1600x build out of the box in ArmA3 and outside Gaming anyway! If Ryzen is not a good buy, an i5 is even worse. So why do you think this is not a sensible buy?

How come? I do have a Ryzen and I am having better Framerates and Frametimes in ARMA3 than ever before. What is your current rig?

@Brisse I can confirm your results. The Creators Update gave another ~9% in ArmA3 on my Ryzen build.

Own experience or what the net says?