Will my PC Run this? What CPU/GPU to get? What settings? System Specifications.

[cjph]

Sounds similar to some results I found when clocking my 6950 - I found upping the GPU speed rarely impacted the results and concluded the CPU was holding back the card in the benchmarks. I also saw decreases when using a RAMDisk - I think (but am no techie) that the CPU/GPU get the data faster and so have more processing to perform, hence the slight decrease in fps. When running from a slower disk the system processes what it can with the data to hand so fps goes up, but the you see texture pop ups when the data finally arrives and is added. I should add I am using fancycache these days as all the files are on SSD disks so there not much in it for a RAMdisk.

@Bangtail thanks for the info - I tracked VRAM use on the card and have seen it push 1.985Gb so believe the headroom of over 2Gb is a worthwhile increase and will also wait to see the next raft of Nvidia cards. Hopefully the multi screen feature will be fully understood then as I currently use Eyefinity and it works very well.

Incidently, I fixed a recent period of stuttering in the game which I had put down to either hitting the 2Gb VRAM limit or a disk/memory issue, but found no solution with either a RAMdisk, fancycache or reduction in detail/quality. The solution was my Crucial SSD, which had a firmware update to cure disk access stuttering which was passed on to the game. A quick firmware update to the latest version fixed the stuttering in a fhash (no pun intended). Daft thing was the stuttering was only on one or MP missions.

cj

[BangTail]

@Bangtail thanks for the info - I tracked VRAM use on the card and have seen it push 1.985Gb so believe the headroom of over 2Gb is a worthwhile increase and will also wait to see the next raft of Nvidia cards. Hopefully the multi screen feature will be fully understood then as I currently use Eyefinity and it works very well.

cj

Yep, it's a shame that Nvidia opted for a 2GB card on release. It seems a little short sighted with so many people in that segment gaming at high resolutions/multi monitors etc.

Considering the GK-104 is a very solid card, I can't wait to see what the GK-110 is capable of.

[froggyluv]

Don't know much bout it but Ill be registering with Nvidia's Step Up program which apparently lets you upgrade to latest release within 90 days by just paying the difference.

OT: Does ATI have a similar option as Digital Vibrance? I've been looking everywhere but can't find any way to add back my over saturated goodiness to Arma

[BangTail]

Sort of - not as good as DV IMHO.

Open CCC --> Desktops and Displays --> LCDs or whatever --> Display Color

The first box (Color correction) is what you are looking for. Playing around with those 2 sliders sort of emulates DV.

[froggyluv]

Ahh Saturation and Hue -finally found them in >My Digital Flat Panels > Display Color (Digital Flat Panel). I had been trying with Desktop Color Properties to no luck. Looks better now.

[froggyluv]

Sounds similar to some results I found when clocking my 6950 - I found upping the GPU speed rarely impacted the results and concluded the CPU was holding back the card in the benchmarks. I also saw decreases when using a RAMDisk - I think (but am no techie) that the CPU/GPU get the data faster and so have more processing to perform, hence the slight decrease in fps. When running from a slower disk the system processes what it can with the data to hand so fps goes up, but the you see texture pop ups when the data finally arrives and is added. I should add I am using fancycache these days as all the files are on SSD disks so there not much in it for a RAMdisk.

cj

Now heres something curious - I upped my cpu from 4.4 to 4.5; still using RamDisk and only Benchmark 8 (OA) jumped in FPS and twas a hefty 7-8 fps consistent averging at 103-105 fps. The strange part is that was on stock 7970 settings (1000/1425), when I Oc'ed the VC again (1125/1575) Bench 8 lost all of that gain averaging at 94 fps...

This really is too much I'll leave these benches alone now until 680.

[Leon86]

Yep, it's a shame that Nvidia opted for a 2GB card on release. It seems a little short sighted with so many people gaming at high resolutions/multi monitors etc.

Considering the GK-104 is a very solid card, I can't wait to see what the GK-110 is capable of.

not that many people play games at over 1080p. Besides, these cards were supposed to be the new 560Ti's, the top of the line gpgpu oriented powerhouses will lauch later in the year.

still, a 4GB model would've been nice, but I guess it's slightly more complicated then just sticking chips with twice the size on :P how hard can it be right?

[BangTail]

not that many people play games at over 1080p. Besides, these cards were supposed to be the new 560Ti's, the top of the line gpgpu oriented powerhouses will lauch later in the year.

still, a 4GB model would've been nice, but I guess it's slightly more complicated then just sticking chips with twice the size on :P how hard can it be right?

I should really clarify my statement, many in the segment that buy that kind of card do game at high resolutions and/or use multiple monitors, not many people in general.

Even though it is 'supposedly' a midrange card, it is not at a mid range price point, neither is it a mid range performer.

It's not much more complicated than putting more VRAM on the PCB but given the size of the physical card and the limited yields on the 28nm GPU, it was probably more cost effective to stick with a 2GB model for product runs etc.

[St. Jimmy]

Which would be better processor for Arma 2 (and 3)?
i3 2120
FX-4100
Phenom 965BE
Phenom 1045T

I've read that i3 beats those first two AMD processors but is it the same thing in Arma? And does that 1045T perform better than i3 2120? 1045T is only 5€ more than i3 2120.

/edit added 1045T

[Leon86]

Which would be better processor for Arma 2 (and 3)?
i3 2120
FX-4100
Phenom 965BE
Phenom 1045T

I've read that i3 beats those first two AMD processors but is it the same thing in Arma? And does that 1045T perform better than i3 2120? 1045T is only 5€ more than i3 2120.

/edit added 1045T

I'd get the 1045T, arma 2 might not be able to use all cores effectively but arma 3 will probably make good use of it.