banenwn

well i game on and off with over 100 people on arma and only know a handful that said they got SLI to work properly, and even the ones that did they were only seeing a 10-15 fps increase,which isnt bad i guess but it isnt great either.Im using SLI GTX 460's myself and am thinking about just going to one card and getting a radeon 7950 in a few weeks unless i can get sli to work.I know how to enable SLI it just simply doesnt work maybe i need a new driver ill test a few.I have the latest right now though

for most people SLI doesnt work if it works for you great but it has been an on going issue since the game cameout.To sit here and have people tell this guy a 1090T doesnt cut it and he has to upgrade is ridiculous.BangTail what kind of card do you have in SLI and was there anything special you did to get them to work properly?

seriously dont listen to these guys.You got plenty there to run arma 2 just fine.I have a phenom 2 965 be with 2 gtx 460's and i only get a 1 fps difference between 1 and 2 cards.SLI simply doesnt work in arma 2 the way it should.I seem to get an extra 15 fps in the actual arma benchmark but the game itself i get about the same.

Hey all if anyone would be interested in an every other saturday meetup for operation arrowhead id be interested in getting atleast 3 players.I have 3 other friends that play co-op with me but its always just 2 of us at a time,and would be much better off with a minimum of 4 guys 6 if possible.If anyone is interested let me know.all of us are 40+ years of age and laid back.Most of us are fairly new to arma 2 and just looking for a few people who are friendly and just want to have fun succeeding or failing lol. thanks

I decided to add to this post instead of making a new one.I would like to maintain 4+ player co-op missions for operation arrowhead.I got 4 guys that should beable to play steady but got 4 more open slots.the co-op scenarios i play support 8.were all 40+ aged gamers and like to have fun,but would like to be involved with good teamwork.if anywones interested let me know.It would be bi weekly

wisconsin got a friend in cali who maintains about 80 ping so anywhere in the usa should have solid ping

another clueless person show me one review where 2 motherboaards in the same class show a more then even 1 fps difference between them you cant.significant difference between motherboards are when they switched from agp to pci-e.seriously learn more before giving people misimformation.all am 3 boards will perform pretty much the same.they run on the same chipsets.this is like comparing 2 different brand graphic cards they will perform pretty much deadnutts the same unless one is overclocked.if you spend more money for a board typically your spending for added features nothing more it will NOT make a difference in performance sorry.this is coming from someone who has built countless PC;s over a 10 year period so i know what im talking about.like i said prove me wrong find 2 motherboards with the same chipset and show me they are different in performance like i said 1 fps at most.the only other difference you might get is if one is an 8x pci express and the other is 16x but even that is negligable

ok i stand corrected on my benchmark scores.i went through my settings and somehow most of my settings were set to medium.i switched everything to very high and for some reason most of my settings were still set to normal.i just set everything to very high and turned off aa and af and post proccessing and i scored 33 fps average.1920x1080 res.not sure why my settings were normal must be something i hit in there that set it back to that.should also add my view distance was set to 4000 so i apologize for my stupidity

actually that is a decent board ive owned a few biostar boards there solid motherboards.motherboards are overrated you wont see any perfromance gain between a 60$ board or a 200$ board the only difference is added features

obviously you dont read i got 61 fps in operation arrowhead benchmark then i ran the original arma 2 benchmark there are a total of 3 between arma 2 and operation arrowhead theres no back tracking there.i max out everything at 6500 draw distance and yes the game is playable for me at 10000 altho i dont play with 10000 as i will stutter from 10000 from time to time but its still playable.unplayable for me is less then 20 fps anything above that in arma 2 is plenty playable.

actually i dont even hit 20 fps in the 2nd test and running the first test i hit 54 fps average maxed out i fell below 30 for a few seconds.i get high benchmark scores but it doesnt neccasarily represent ingame like i said i average about 37-38 ingame deffinetley playable ---------- Post added at 03:44 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:43 AM ---------- and this is from someone who thinks benchmarks are opinions

for starters sli doesnt work for most people and even when it does you only see a difference in open areas.sli isnt nearly as good in arma 2 as other games that sli actually works for.me myself i lost 1 fps from 1 card to 2.btw thats not even the benchmark i ran i ran the one that came with arrowhead so ill run the one they have in the benches you posted and get back to you and this is on topic

Ive been building pc's for 10 years and im not someone to exaggerate my own benchmarks.when i run actual in game benchmarks i use FRAPS i run 180 second benchmarks ive run them in 3 seperate missions and my lowest fps was actually 33.ive been playing arma from the beggining myself and ive built this rig specifically for it.i was running an e8400 but wasnt happy with the performance i was one of the ones that couldnt break 20 fps in haflway decent size gunfights.you find me a recording program that doesnt take away game performance id be happy to run my benchmarks and post it on youtube.

i didnt say i played the game at 60 constant read the post.i said in the benchmark i averaged 61 fps.i can post the settings and results if you would like.the game itself i havent dropped below 34 fps in any of the missions ive played.believe what you want i really dont care.this game likes certain configs better then others i know alot of people with i7's with the same or stronger gpu's that have trouble running the game at high settings its luck of the draw with this game im suprized you havent figured that out yet.if were talking pure game performance im running average upper 30's.i fluxate from 34-80 fps but it sticks more to upper 30's to low 40's.the benchmark ive hit 100 fps at one point for a few seconds and yet ive dropped to low 30's which accumulates a higher fps then i probably deserved but nonetheless i averaged 61

200% res looks no better to me then 100% and actually i got my view set to 6500.view distance never really killed performance for me it was shadows.now i dont have this problem anymore only when i was running a dual core e8400 did i have to lower shadows.even at 10000 view its playable.at these settings i get 61 fps in the arma2 benchmark

I run arma 2 maxed out at 1920x1080 never drop below 34 fps and im only running a phenom 965 be with a gtx 470.i get very playable frames maxed so ya there are people out there who can crank everything

u wont see more then a 5 fps improvement id guess.i went from a gtx 260 to a radeon 5850 and i noticed very little improvement and the stepup you are talking about is roughley the same.the game is very cpu dependant and with an i7 920 like you have i doubt u would see much improvemnt nomatter what you did.for me sli would not work for arma 2 if you can get crossfire to work it would deffinetly help.i had sli gtx 465's and i actually lost 1 fps in the benchmark with 2 cards over 1.some people can seem to get it to work but i guess i was just one of the unlucky ones.if anything id try to crossfire those 4890's

you cant compare game reviews to a review with numbers involved.A game review is how someone percieves it not actual benchmarks that have numbers to back it up that is a fact.there still isnt a game with better graphics then crysis that game cameout 5 years before its time.problem is no game utilizes 6 cores now and by the time they do the 1055T will be outdated and wont benifit much from it.so are you going to tell me that a nissan sentra is faster then a corvette?are you saying that is an opinion because the numbers are just opinion? there is no opinion when it comes to this its either faster or its not if you want i can link to the 10 sites or so ive found and the 1055T doesnt beat the 965 be in any game tested at any resolution it is slower in all games and i do mean all why i got th 965 to begin with i did my research.

mine is not an opinion it is a fact.i almost got 1055T myself so im not knocking it.The guys running the benchmarks know what they are doing im pretty sure they are not out to lie to the public.1055T was made for an all around chip it does everything well but not great.if your happy with it thats all that matters but in the end the 1055 simply cant keep with the 965 be gaming wize and it even out performs the 1090t most of the time

actually the 965 be crushes the 1055T in gaming period.the 1090 T is more or less the same performance gaming wize as the 965 be.Tom's and other tech sites confirm this. If you do a lot of video editing/conversion, graphic design, ray tracing or similar work, a hexacore would be of more benefit. Not saying a 1055T is a bad cpu especially since there decent overclockers and the 1090t isnt worth the extra 100$ over the 1055T in my opinion but gaming wize the 1055t performes closer to the 940 be,you seriously need to look at benches theres atleast a half dozen that compare the two and every bench comes with the same results.like i said not knocking it but the 965 black edition is simply faster in games

actually the 955 and 965 be 4 core are better for gaming then any of the 6 core amd.

5770 is not a bad card better then the gts 240 for sure ---------- Post added at 11:47 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:42 AM ---------- depends i said in another post that if he is someone who overclocks the 465 gtx is the better card clock for clock the 465 beats the 460 hands down.i got my gtx 465 beating my 470 in severals gaames and benchmarks cant overlook the power of a 465 with alittle overclocking and what makes it better is theres a chance he could unlock one to a gtx 470 and for 220$ thats a steal