Futur3marin3

i have used both and i havent seen much difference between the two.

ok so i have gotten xp installed and so far it is working alot better then it was on vista, and i think im going to keep it its alot more stable of a fps and its at about 30fps with everything on high and res a 1680x1050. that and it seems like my system is running alot cooler then it did before, but idk what thats about. oh and im going off playing the campaign not the arma2mark, i cant find where that is.

ya im getting tired of trying to install xp and i think im going to try win 7 ---------- Post added at 04:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:14 PM ---------- oh and yes in it includes sp2

i dont know.its version 2002 if you can tell me

ok so im pretty much going to try to do a triple boot with xp win7 and vista and see what i get.

will do. i have some stuff i need to transfer from my vista partition to me win7 and then ill try to install xp again, for some reason it didnt work the first time.

i tried to oc to over 2.8 but my rig became really unstable and the processor is already running hot, i think i may have to reset my heat sink and all, i really wish i could oc more but its pretty much as far as i can go now. im working on installing xp now but all i have is a 32-bit and that may make me loose some frames.

I think im going to look into that.

for some reason xp doesnt want to install on my pc. iv been guessing its because i have a quad core and 8 gigs of ram but only 32-bit xp, and i dont have the monay to buy the 64-bit

ya the nvgs are a joke in Arma 2. Every time i play a night mission a have to use a m203 with flares just to shoot someone. they need to add thermals or fix the nvgs

Right now i can use the Windows 7rc , or Vista. Does anyone have a greater performance in one or the other? I have played in Vista and its pretty good but its been crashing and now Vista has been crashing all together so if its worth it for me to fix it i will but if not ill install in Win 7.

ok so iv been working on getting my FPS up in Arma 2 for about 10 hours now, i dl the evga patch, the 1.02 patch, and did that -winxp thing to get my sli to work. so it works now and it really didnt improve my fps so i started mess with the vid setting in game and in the nvidia control pannel. i set my res and settings to as low as they went, i got around 12-30 fps but it mostly was under 25 ish. the i started just bumping things up because i read in another thread that some higher setting might increase the fps. so i put the res to 1024x768 and all other setting on normal with antialising and anisotropic off. i lost nor gained fps. so after keeping the res at the same and messing with the settings for a while, i was like f it ill just set everything to high put my res on 1680x1050 and see what happens. and BAM! i was getiing 20-50 fps and it only goes below 20 hardly ever now. i had left the antialising and anisotropic off and i decided to turn them on low, i didnt loose any fps at all, i put them on high and i lost about 2 or 3 and but it stays high most of the time. right now im running. EVGA 780i mobo Q6700 oc to 2.8 8gigs of ddr2 800mhz oced to i think 844mhz 2xBFG 9600gt oc plus i oc them even more myself vista 64-bit sp2

and just remeber he has a dual core clocked at 3.7ghz, i have a quad at 2.85. I if a dual core can do 1000 with out having to pack it with ice, think what a quad can do. correction: it was at 4.6ghz

no problem

the i7 is the new intel processor, its has 3 cores and a memory controller or somthing that basicly make you system run faster , i dont have an i7 and have never really looked into them that much so ya.the core 2 has 2 or 4 cores and are good processors. and for what the gamers favor its really just an prefrence for how you ask from what i know. alot more people who overclock there systmes have amd that and amd is cheeper. but intel processors tend to be faster. i like intel because i havent had a problem with one, where amd i have had a few pcs die on me that had amds.