zaira

M8, i like MW, realy nice. Hopefuly you make some other takistani scenario. Im tyred of SF playing scenarios... Ty, have a nice day

Arma 2 uses all cores and for arma2, 4 cores are better than 2 cores of same clockspeed (and same arhitecture). It is about 15% faster, with 4 cores than with 2. Shure it is better to have 50% more clock on 2 cores than 2 more cores on same clock. If you have quad you can play with affinity and with arma2 startup parameters ( http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma2:_Startup_Parameters ) and see yourself, with launcher it is even simppler.

And by maxed, you are not thinking about rendering at 200% :j: But it will definetly be some interesing stuff when it all comes up, I think i will get some 6 core socket R and 4GBx4 of ddr3 1600MHz, manly for Pro Engineer and Catia + some of other CAD, and Matlab (doing alot of simulink). Video card will be mainstream, but should be enough to run ARMA2 decent

I think it will be 20% better per clock, and with higher overclock (like 5GHz+) it could reach 30+fps... but this is realy oftopic, we are speculating about something that at best is 8 month away....

Ty, no flame wars from me, everyone has right to express his option :) I will buy next system only when it will be capable to run that bench on 30+fps, and i hope sandy bridge socker r, at 5+GHz can do that, now i get like 15, on 1680 alll very high 1600VD and AA and pp off

I will buy it.... But i would realy like more that BIS spends time to make their engine 21 century compatibile, for ARMA3.... like 64bit RAM adressing, and DX11, and hopefuly optimizing AI and rendering. MHO

You will get nice fps boost, but you realy need to have decent cooler. I have noctua nh-14d, it costs about 100$, but IMO it is well worth the price, it is simply the best air cooler avalable at the market (IMHO, dont want flame wars, check the web yourself). Best thing about that cooler is that it is compatibile with everything (socket 775, 1156, 1366), and it is compatibile with future sockets (1155 sandy bridge, socket r sandy bridge, and am3+). I get realy nice performance now, and i have great cooler for my future system. It is silent and performes great, but check if it fits in your motherboard, case, and ram compatibility. I have antec p182, and asrock p45de... silence and nice speed, i run it at 1.35V@ 438*8 (3.5GHz), and get idle temps of 46, to 67 (prime) load in closed case and using noctuas silence adapters runing it at 900rpms. Arma2 is cpu hog, it can run decent on some old systems, but even at 4.5GHz i7s it still can be cpu bottlnecked. Bangtail, pls run bench2 whin your beset system, and confirm. Ty

I just want opinion... I have 3.5 GHz Q6600 (438*8) dual channel 4GB DDR2, and ati 4850 512MB, im planing to get 6870 or 6850, so my question is what do you think will my cpu bottleneck 6870... Although it is old cpu, fsb and clock are raised significantly. Monitor has 1680*1050 res. My cousin has i7 with HD5970 and i seen linear scaling corelation betwin fps and clock while overclocking it from stock (i7 920) to 4GHz thus implying massive cpu bottleneck. Since 90s i buy new system only when there is 300% increse in performance (cpu/ram), and i dont plan to buy new system until sandy bridge R in q3/4 2011.

Sorry for offtopic.... But why you have H50 on such systems, it isnt crapy cooler, but just sticks from rest of components... Why didnt go for nh-d14, or some watercooling kit, or Watercooling system system... It just doesnt make sense to me:rolleyes:

Truth is that arma2 cd killed my dvd drive (i was having it in my dvdrw for more than 1 year). You removed dvd check with one patch (i think 1.05) for arma2, and that was great thing. Pls do the same for OA! Ty!

Well dont remember having a option for online activation (im not saying there isnt), are you guys shure all retail versions have one, becouse it takes long time to install both.... I never said it physicly destroyed anything, but having dvd inside reduces life of dvd drive (pure mechanical reasons, motor is spinning, optical sensor gets dirty, etc.) I would like if bis can confirm, that every retail version have option for "no dvd check", before i reinstall.

I DONT KNOW WHAT YOU HAVE.... I have retail version of arma2 and retail version of OA (both dvds), i installed them in same folder and i run co, and i get damn securom asking me for dvd. When i had just arma2, securom asked me for cd until patch 1.05. I guess BIS has policy to have cd check until they sold some number of DVDs. To me that cd check is pain in the arse, and i beg BIS to remove it just as they did with ARMA2. Ty in advance! Marko

I know bro, i just want it ASP. :) Honestly my last dvd stoped reading, and new one is aking strange noise hehe...:eek:

Everyone has bottleneck with cpu, so rather invest in some decent cooler and overclock.

Few things to have in mind. 1) Use H70 to blow air out of your case (not as corsair suggested) 2) C300 had big bug with old firmware regarding degradation of read and write speed, so check you have latest firmware 3) Use default in video memory setings 4) Use arma loader and set to 6 cores, this wont use HT "cores", and by default arma2 (1.07) runs with 4+ core chips at exthreads 7 (thread all) Overclock your CPU, i know you payed alot of money, but in reality cheap i7s like 750 and 920 are much faster than gulftown if they are on 4+GHz, arma just likes Freq, more than cores. Only then will your machine fly with good fps. If you use 3d resoution disable aa (you have same effect).

Shure it does, but not only arma benefits from HT off. HT is good for some aps, but generaly for gaming it is better off.

Why are you telling him that? He will probably cry when he gets sub 20fps on average with his phenom 2... :D

Some guys just dont realize that there realy isnt game like arma2. In many ways. There are alot of caluclations at any times, for example you fight, and 20km away from you some AI can fight (your cpu is calculating that). No other game has so much grafic detail rendered at the time... So n00bs will think about crysis and how great it looks, it does, but engine just aint rendering same distance (ditail is better, but overall number of information rendered at the time is lower than in arma 2). Many people say metro 2033 looks great, shure it does, but most of the time you have view of 10ns of meters, and how crappy the game runs by just rendering that tunnels and rooms... You can have hundreds of AI at some time, as far as i know no other game can do that. If you are flight sim fan (like me), you would know that with 4.5Ghz gulftown and sli GTX480 you are lucky to have 25FPS (and that is fine) on FSX at some places. There is nice topic about optimizations, read it. This game isnt for people that dont have time to read, im sry.

Allot of people told you that you dont buy another 4890 (including me). It would be far better that you spended money on nice cooler and overclock that cpu to 4+GHz. I think you can have great SP expirience playing with editor or running SP missions from armaholic, and now you biatch about game and performance. Arma2 is demending game, it renders hughe amaount of detail and AI in arma is not perfect but is by far better than on any other game.

M8 i dont want to argue with you, none can play with good fps arma2 maxed, there are people here with gulftowns at 4.5 and sli 480GTXs. Stop this, this is offtopic... Have a nice day, and chill out :)

No, it had only one (in review is 1.05, now there is 1.07), and there was performance increse but not drastic (i have arma and played it from begining). And on that review arma2 isnt maxed. ------------------------------------------------------------- You can fine tune arma 2 and play it fine on junk PC, but my point is, none can play it maxed.

BS, http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,743498/Geforce-GTX-480-and-GTX-470-reviewed-Fermi-performance-benchmarks/Reviews/?page=6 And that is on i7@4GHz And benchmark 1 doesnt realy represent in game fps, try playing electrozavodsk mission. Even next gen cpu with 50% overclock and top next gen gpu in sli/cf wont run this game maxed and with 60fps, PERIOD.

I totaly agree with you (and im not Intel fanboy, i had athlon 1000, xp mobile barton 2500, at the time better than intel). Only your last line.. Arma uses all 6 cores, but u just dont get any gain in performance. I think (im 99.99999999% shure) problem is that some of the thread/s in process wait for others to finish. For example core 0, 2, 3 "finished" tasks but whole process "waits" for core 1. You can have how many cores you want but when that is the case you wont get fps incr. The most threads i seen arma2 uses is 20, i dont know what is distribution to cores, but i guess by performance. To me core 1 (2nd core) is used bit more than other cores, and i guess on that core there are AI thread/s (maybe rendering). For my conclusion i used hundreds hours of server hosting with alot of ai.

I dont get why people buy crossfire or sli, it is just not reliable tech that works good on very few games. Why dont you sell your 4890 and get better one?? And benchark2 will lag on anything, no matter what gpu u use (cpu bottleneck).

IMHO this isnt a good advice. Your cpu isnt best option for gaming, maybe for video/audio editing and rendering. But for gaming any demanding (cpu intensive) game such as arma2, intel is better. There is only one game i know that can use 6 cores and gain few percents of fps, and that is FSX. In arma you wont get anything noticable, even amds phenom 2 965 is better. Arma 2 uses up to 20 threads (maximum i seen), but some of the threads in the process are cousing bottleneck (i think ai thread/s). Performance difference in my system when running arma on 2 cores (and with fixed affinity) are just 15% whorse then when i run it on 4 cores. I will give you a one nice refference of your cpu test, and read the bold conclusion yourself (and those games realy aint cpu intensive like arma2 is) http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/overclock-cpu-build-a-pc,2700-16.html