Hardware requirements?

[Tom_Pynchon]

I know it's too early for this one, but is there any word as to what the system requirements for ARMA III would be?

Will the game be able to take better advantage of the hyper-threading?

I'm sure I will need -- absolutely need! -- to get this game. So this early, I want to start setting money aside for a PC upgrade. :o

This is the kind of game you build your rig to.

[Enad]

Checking the website usually helps.

But if you're lazy..


OS: Windows 7 / Vista
CPU: Intel Core i5 or AMD Athlon Phenom X4 or faster
GPU: Nvidia Geforce GTX 260 or ATI Radeon HD 5770, shader Model 3 and 896 MB VRAM, or faster
RAM: 2 GB
HDD: 15 GB free space
DVD: Dual Layer compatible
DirectX: 10

[Kristian]

What does the Dual Layer DVD mean?

[CameronMcDonald]

Dual Layer DVDs have bigger capacity, if memory serves, in this case I imagine they are referring to the install disk for hard copies.

I would say that the vast majority of DVD players these days have no trouble with dual layer DVDs. If yours doesn't, give it a Viking funeral because it's archaic.

[Leon86]

Or get a downloadable version :) But seriously, all dvd players can read dual layer dvd's

[aart112]

are these minimal specs or recommended ?

[DMarkwick]

are these minimal specs or recommended ?

All we know is that's what they're suggesting now :) in a year's time - who knows. It would be inadvisable to build a PC now for a release a year from now :)

[Steakslim]

What does the Dual Layer DVD mean?

Basically already been answered but to be technical it's a DVD9. Most burnable discs you find and old first generation dvd's were DVD5's, and had a capacity of little over 4gb. Now and days DVD9's are used by most companies for distribution of games and dvd films as they have somewhere closer to 8gb of data capacity. All dvd drives today can read them as it's standard, some can even burn them if specified, yet I believe burnable dual layer blank discs are rather pricey still, though to be honest I haven't checked in a while.

[OB1]

are these minimal specs or recommended ?

Judging from what is required to run Arma2 maxed out smoothly I'd say they are minimum... :eek:

[Assasine]

The hardware requirements shown on the website.....hahaha.....this will never be enough to play ArmA 3 with 40 - 50 FPS.......Never.....:(

Look at ArmA 2 or OA....

But I think the only chance is if the Game Engine is really optimized für multicore Cpu´s.

It´s better to have an core i7 (one of big cpu´´s), 4 GB or 8 GB RAM, and the biggest Graphiccard you can get in 2012 when the game will be released.

Assasine

[RSharpe]

Why even bother with trying to come up with recommended specs now when the game is over a year away. In that time, we'll have Intel's new 22mm Ivy Bridge and Nvidia and AMD will be releasing their next generation of video cards.

Instead of speculating on absolute uncertainties, people who want the best PC possible when the game comes out are better served by saving a few bucks every month and buying a new computer next year.

[OnlyRazor]

In that time, we'll have Intel's new 22mm Ivy Bridge and Nvidia and AMD will be releasing their next generation of video cards.


*nanometre

22mm processors are like mountains in the microchip world, so mind that.

[RSharpe]

*nanometre

22mm processors are like mountains in the microchip world, so mind that.

Hahah. Sorry. My typo :D

[oyman]

my face when i saw the requirements



http://assets.head-fi.org/0/0f/0fda0e90_spongebob-wallet.jpg

[Derbysieger]

At least the CPU seems to be a recommended requirement:

Dwarden a few days ago:
[22:39] <@<hidden>> well let me put it this way
[22:40] <@<hidden>> my HD5770 and C2D on 4GHz still runs A3 :)
[22:40] <@<hidden>> so there is always some hope ;)

[ArmAriffic]

basically contact NASA and ask about there prices

[Steakslim]

At least the CPU seems to be a recommended requirement:

Dwarden a few days ago:
[22:39] <@<hidden>> well let me put it this way
[22:40] <@<hidden>> my HD5770 and C2D on 4GHz still runs A3 :)
[22:40] <@<hidden>> so there is always some hope ;)

Mad jelly I am, yes.

[Coffeecat]

as a optimist id say if you can run arma2 maxed out atm with your setup, you will also be able to run A3 with very good settings. its not a new engine so there must be very much go wrong that the requirements make a very big jump. i expect a very optimized engine and better optimation for quadcores.

[mrcash2009]

My PC is very old in terms of latest, but still chugs away surprisingly well. However it will not support this next instalment, so I will use A3 as a nice benchmark tool and guide to getting my new PC upgrade for next summer :)

[InstaGoat]

I doubt the requirements will be much higher than those of A3. I have an intel Core2 Duo E8400 running at 3 ghz for each core, an Nvidia GTX260 and 4 gigs of DDR3 RAM, and I can run Arma 2 at decent framerates on Chernarus with around 300 Units and a viewdistance of about 4000.

A3 might even get more streamlined and optimized, and run better than Arma 2. At least, that´s what I hope. Graphics after all are good enough, what´s important is gameplay and content.

[mrcash2009]

I doubt the requirements will be much higher than those of A3.Well, going by the actual requirements, it does :) Coupled with the fact that its a year away also and thats 1 year more into new kit.

I think on the specs you refer too (very similar to me) you might get it to run OK but will hit AI brick walls and bottle necks quicker, and would have to step down the defaults you have now, so its either stay and get it and scale down ... or to stick to your defaults your used to now and go a little further, do an upgrade.

Personally I do need an upgrade for more reasons and this will be the kick up the arse to do it and justify it with some more things on my list of "worth upgrade niggles".

[COGlory]

I don't have the money for a new PC, and I wont a year from now either with College starting up. My guess is that's what the PC running the test version was. (I hope, anyways.) Let's pray quad-core owners can get away with that.

According to the Steam survey, ~60% of Steam users are still running dual-cores or less. It'd be insane to alienate half of the market just like that.

[Flash Thunder]

2012 rig

Hexacore CPU @<hidden>+ ghz
Dual GTX 560ti 's
8GB dual channel 2000 mhz
TrackIR unit
24' 1920x1080 LED monitor

120GB SSD

:eek:

[CannonousCrash]

I know it's too early for this one, but is there any word as to what the system requirements for ARMA III would be?

Will the game be able to take better advantage of the hyper-threading?

I'm sure I will need -- absolutely need! -- to get this game. So this early, I want to start setting money aside for a PC upgrade. :o

This is the kind of game you build your rig to.

It would require computer components that arent currently released to the world...

[Assasine]

Here my PC spec:
Intel Q6600 @<hidden> MHZ
Corsair Dominator PC 1066 CL6 (4 GB)
Asus Rampage Formula
Nvidia GTX275
OCZ Vertex2 SSD

But this will not be enough....:(

[OnlyRazor]

So, I better do a good upgrade on my BF3 upgrade iteration :bounce3:

[elvinjones]

I would reiterate that it's just a bad idea to build a PC for a game released a year from now.

Someone mentioned GTX 560s above. Put into context (Arma 2 was released in 2009), that would be like having a midrange graphics card from 2008 for the Arma 2 release.

If you are happy with Arma 2 on an nVidia 8800 or ATI HD3870, then go ahead and spec your PC now. Even if there is less tech push on newer cards, there will be big price changes. Wait until it comes out, wait for benchmarks, and you'll end up with better graphics for less money playing Arma 3.

[Svenc]

C
OS: Windows 7 / Vista
CPU: Intel Core i5 or AMD Athlon Phenom X4 or faster
GPU: Nvidia Geforce GTX 260 or ATI Radeon HD 5770, shader Model 3 and 896 MB VRAM, or faster
RAM: 2 GB
HDD: 15 GB free space
DVD: Dual Layer compatible
DirectX: 10

Hi folks!


Having played Flashpoint back in the day and being blown away by it, I'm keeping an eye on Arma2 and 3 alike. I'm also close to building a new system, as my AM2 system is starting to show its age. There are two paths: Going with an AM3+ board and a Phenom II 955BE - and a H61/67 and a Core i3 2100.

Does anybody have reports of whether Arma 3 might perform as well with Core i3 2100 processors as most of today's games do? It outperforms and matches the old Core 2 quads and many Phenoms II even in games that are supposed to be optimized for multiple cores:
http://www.behardware.com/articles/816-10/intel-core-i3-2100-lga-1155-sandy-bridge-dual-core.html
http://techreport.com/articles.x/20188/7

I'm not planning this to be a bonafide gaming build, but I wouldn't mind if by switching to a better video card the coming year Arma 3 would become playable too. Thanks!

[Nikiforos]

Do you think I would be able to run the game with medium settings with my current rig?

[PuFu]

i am certain it should do. The specs for A3 provided by bis is something between minimum and recommended anyways.

[Derbysieger]

I would reiterate that it's just a bad idea to build a PC for a game released a year from now.

Someone mentioned GTX 560s above. Put into context (Arma 2 was released in 2009), that would be like having a midrange graphics card from 2008 for the Arma 2 release.

If you are happy with Arma 2 on an nVidia 8800 or ATI HD3870, then go ahead and spec your PC now. Even if there is less tech push on newer cards, there will be big price changes. Wait until it comes out, wait for benchmarks, and you'll end up with better graphics for less money playing Arma 3.

Very true. I'm going to upgrade my GPU next summer. By then we'll know more about how the game performs... I'm planning to stay on LGA 1366 at least for another 1,5-2 years. The i7 is still a powerfull CPU.

[Aussie_Osiris]

Don't forget that as of right now you can get a 5770 for $120-$150 (Australian assuming it's almost the same for US) so by the time this game comes out the minimum specs you could probably get for around $500