lendova

Intel Dual core vs. AMD 8 core: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj7wnRA1yDo Once the 10GHz single core Intel chips arrives, we gona have the perfect CPU to play ArmA 3.

Tests shows, an i3 close to an overclocked pentium G in ArmA 3 which is still slow for me, maybe its enough for you.

Dont be silly! 8GHz should be enough, 10GHz for AMD.

None of them matters. http://i.imgur.com/F3IQGBP.jpg CPU 4.5GHz, 2GHz ram, GTX 760 OC, Sata 3 SSD Yes, its can go that low (campaign- preventive diplomacy). Marksman showcase: avarage 60+, Combined arms showcase: 30-40 once on the ground.

I would be glad, if an FX could provide that performance all the time. Its cant hold even 30 fps just in the campaign. Its doesnt matter if its a 6xxx or a 8xxx chip neither how high the clock speed.

Do you like hot beer? Thats how "fine" a shooter with ~30 frames.

You should forget ANY ArmA with AMD CPU. The game rely almost only on one CPU core performance. Just an example: Intel CPU 2 core vs. AMD CPU 8 core:

Define "fine". My FX6300@4.4GHz not even close to provide a "fine" perofrmance in this game.

I know, i wrote those numbers for singleplayer.

Except 80% of the time, when he/she get 30-40 fps.

Your system is enough to run the game...with horrible performance.

I'm pretty sure, if Arma gets DX12 support, it will be exclusive for the standalone expansion to milk the community again.

You stated that you can change only the motherboard, so what help do you expect? You will have from little to much less performance in almost(or every game) compared to a similar priced core i3. Even at 1km view distance, an overclocked FX provides poor perofrmance. Have fun to use 50% of your graphic cards power in ArmA 3!

I'm sorry, but thats the truth. Btw, who recommended to you to buy an FX CPU?

Be prepared for horrible performance.