Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22

Thread: Does Arma 2 run faster with NVIDIA or AMD cards?

  1. #11
    I have the Sapphire HD5850 2Gb Toxic, which will run the game on the very high settings provided you do not want huge battles, it can easily handle upto around 200 ai with average fps around 25-35, however I recently OC the card using their built-in Auto Tuner which took it from stock 765 & 1125 to 880 & 1280, quite an increase and the same 200ai mission runs at around 10-15 fps faster. I run a Windows7 64bit and have turned the visual settings of Windows to performance rather than windows being visibly attractive just to see if this would do anything, well I was really surprised it did not really add anything to the fps but the game runs really smooth now without those occasional annoying stutters, I can only conclude that it made a performance difference cpu side. I tend to mission smaller skirmishes of around max 80ai or so and the card runs the game great with average 40-50fps, it did very well on stock values, but its that little bit smoother with a little higher fps now its been OC'd..
    (quoting the lad that built my Arma2 PC and will be building my Arma3 PC in 2012, if its on time)-'Of course the marry between your cpu and the gpu can make a big difference, you could get a great card but if the cpu does not like it then your in for lower fps etc'..I told him what I was going to want to make missions of ai wise etc, and he kept the price down to a sensible level.

    I would be thinking Arma3 as its not too far away, build for that and you won't have much trouble with Arma2..

    My settings: (just to give you an idea)

    Standard Overall Quality Setting: Very High

    Advanced Settings: (left to right)

    Tex: Very High
    Terr: Very High
    Postpro: Disabled (just don’t like the effect)
    Vid Mem: Default (or VH)
    Objects: Very High
    Interface: Small
    AF: Normal
    Shadow: Very High
    Ratio: 16:9 (my res is 1920x1080)
    AA: Normal
    HDR: Normal
    V Sync: Enabled (monitor is 60hz so possibly holds the average fps back a little)

    Edited: 07/11/2011, V sync now disabled, wow the difference in fps... nough said..
    Last edited by HR4 Elite; Nov 7 2011 at 19:36. Reason: Change in settings

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by BangTail View Post
    FYI, Crossfire is not advisable for ArmA 2. I tested it again recently using 2 6970s and the 580s were killing it.

    AMD makes great hardware but their drivers leave something to be desired tbh (to be fair, they have improved but not anywhere near enough).

    Bad info here... Something must have been wrong with your AMD setup.

    The 6970s CrossFired run great. Game runs perfectly smooth with absolutely no stutters or pauses. Tried some 3GB 580s and they were indeed very fast but had major micro-stutters and sometimes stalled / slowed requiring the infamous need to "shift - flush" after 30-40 minutes. Nvidia cards seem to have had this problem since the first ArmA release - I know from first hand frustration (remember the ALT-TAB thing?). AMD hasn't had this issue since around the release of their VPU feature - not sure if this is a factor or was a coincidence.

    AMD 6970s work very well with ArmA:OA, ArmA 2 and Armed Assault, and so does the 5870 or 6970 CrossFire setup.
    Windows 7 Pro 64bit | Intel SSD
    Intel DX58SO | i7 980 | 6GB DDR
    ATI 6870's CrossFired | Catalyst 11.8
    onboard sound & Intel NIC | simple, stable & runs cool

  3. #13
    No, no bad info here - only my first hand experience with every card AMD and Nvidia has on offer (590 and 6990 were both pants JFTR).

    I said the 580s easily beat the 6970s and I didnt have any 'micro stuttering' or 'stalling' so I submit that your Nvidia setup had 'something wrong with it'.

    I didn't notice stuttering or stalling on either setup but the 580s were considerably faster and more efficient in ArmA 2.

    SLI is a better and more proven technology than Crossfire, and while CF has improved significantly, it is still not consistently on par (or better) imho.
    Last edited by BangTail; Sep 2 2011 at 17:38.
    Lest you forget, Mr. Hunter, we are a ship of war, designed for battle.

    You don't just fight battles when everything is hunky-dory.

    What'd you think, son? I was just some crazy old coot putting everyone in harm's way as I yell "yee-haw"?

    Capt. Frank Ramsey
    USS Alabama (SSBN 731)

  4. #14
    Moderator [FRL]Myke's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 27 2007
    Location
    Yay, Rank 34 of 47119 and catching up.
    Posts
    6,570
    Does Arma 2 run faster with NVIDIA or AMD cards?
    Yes, Intel and Matrox aren't capable of runnin ArmA 2 decently.

  5. #15
    Sergeant Major OldBear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 3 2006
    Location
    Marseille, France
    Posts
    1,818
    Here are some infos from a benchmark on the French Hardware.fr site


    Conclusions :
    Les Radeon HD 6900 ne sont pas à la fête et terminent ici derrière la Radeon HD 6870. Etrangement, la Radeon HD 6950 1 Go est 10% plus performante que la version 2 Go et talonne la Radeon HD 6970.
    If, by mistake, you are not French speaker : "AMD 6870 is working better than AMD 6900" ( I agree with that for I have a 6970 and my son a 6870 ), "AMD 6950 1 Go performed 10% better than 2 Go version" ( that is always confirmed in all tests with card featuring "too much" memory like on the GTX 580 3Go vs 1.5Go)

    Nvidia 560Ti and 570 cards seems to get slightly better performance in Arma2, Nvidia 580 1.5 Go been probably the better performer ATM.
    Last edited by Old Bear; Aug 26 2011 at 13:26.

  6. #16
    The 6870s were fairly decent performers. I had a couple for a short time when they were first released.

    There is no such thing as 'too much memory' if you run at 2560+ and I really don't notice the cards I have now being any faster or slower than the 1.5GB 580s I had previously. There is probaby a slight speed adavantage in favor of the 1.5GB cards due to memory latency but as I said, I don't notice it.
    Last edited by BangTail; Aug 27 2011 at 01:01.

  7. #17
    Sergeant Major OldBear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 3 2006
    Location
    Marseille, France
    Posts
    1,818
    Due to the memory chips overproduction many card makers are "offering" cards with extra memory but as on Point of View GeForce GTX 550 Ti 4 Go,
    those extra 4 Go using a 128 bits interface in lieu of the vanilla 192 bits one, it's only a commercial thingy, not related to any performance jump

    Speaking about GTX 580 3Go vs 1.5Go performance here is the link to a benchmark. Alas no Arma 2 results in benchmark from this site ... they found the results too much CPU related...
    Last edited by Old Bear; Aug 26 2011 at 13:58.

  8. #18
    Yeah, those results are right along side with my experience
    Last edited by BangTail; Aug 27 2011 at 00:59.

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by BangTail View Post
    No, no bad info here - only my first hand experience with every card AMD and Nvidia has on offer (590 and 6990 were both pants JFTR).

    I said the 580s easily beat the 6970s and I didnt have any 'micro stuttering' or 'stalling' so I submit that your Nvidia setup had 'something wrong with it'.

    I didn't notice stuttering or stalling on either setup but the 580s were considerably faster and more efficient.

    SLI is a better and more proven technology than Crossfire, and while CF has improved significantly, it is still not consistently on par (or better) imho.
    This is an overgeneralizing statement when instead it should be applied to one game. Not only that, it's just plain false, and borderline fanboism.

    For the 6xxx series, crossfire has consistently scaled better than Nvidia in a majority of games.

    http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/..._nvidia_vs_amd

    http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/...rifire_review/

    http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/...lowup_review/6

    http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/..._card_review/9

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ling,2865.html

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...fire,2878.html

    http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/...rifire_review/

    And no, I didn't just search for all of these just for this post. :P I used some of them in a post a long while back, so they were pretty accessible.

  10. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by TheCapulet View Post
    This is an overgeneralizing statement when instead it should be applied to one game. Not only that, it's just plain false, and borderline fanboism.

    For the 6xxx series, crossfire has consistently scaled better than Nvidia in a majority of games.

    http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/..._nvidia_vs_amd

    http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/...rifire_review/

    http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/...lowup_review/6

    http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/..._card_review/9

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ling,2865.html

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...fire,2878.html

    http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/...rifire_review/

    And no, I didn't just search for all of these just for this post. :P I used some of them in a post a long while back, so they were pretty accessible.


    No fanboyism, no falsehoods, just my own firsthand experience with flagship cards from both camps (SLI and CF) side by side. The 580s were a little faster in most games I tested, with Crysis Warhead being a notable exception.

    To be honest, there really wasn't much in it except where ArmA 2 was concerned.

    I was very objective in my response, giving AMD credit for much improved drivers, although they still have a ways to go.

    If AMD were actually better, they'd be in my boxes - as they were when Nvidia screwed up the 480 launch or in the heady days of the 9700 (an excellent card).

    I won't bother posting links because there are sites that say Nvidia is better and sites that say AMD is better. I know what I have seen with my own eyes.

    I dont have time for brand loyalty or fanboys so don't bother replying to my posts if you're going to resort to the usual humdrum zealotry.

    My opinions are from my own 'hands on' experience, not regurgitations from tech websites. I would never knowingly offer any advice that I did not know to be true and equally, I try to refrain from giving advice on hardware that I don't have experience with.

    I buy what is best, PERIOD. Performance is all I care about.
    Last edited by BangTail; Sep 4 2011 at 05:31.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •