arma 2. get the best from it.

kencon32

Can anyone help me? I have played armed assault on my pc. It runs ok. Not great at high level graphics. jumpy and would always crash. I got arma 2 and it will not run good at all. I am a little pissed off with great games not working. So I am just asking any advice on what pc and spec to get to run games like this at there full level. Getting the best out off the game. Not cutting back on anything.

Numina

Well what are the specs that you're running it on?

Effluo

Wow third thread in a week about Arma II not running as well as people want it to!!

Arma 2 is one of the most demanding games going. It is also one of the most buggy and if you look at this thread
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055671105

you'll see even this guy isn't happy with it's performance and his rig is just about as high end as they get!

This review was taken only last month

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2009/08/10/arma_ii_gameplay_performance_image_quality/5

It's hard to get really great levels of performance out of this game right now! But there are patches due which should help greatly with it's performance and stability...

I've put in a reasonably expensive and big psu in their just in case if you ever want to go xfire with the ati 4890's and the processor although only 2.66ghz it is easily overclockable. A different cpu fan however is recommended if doing so.

Get a few more cheapy case fans and it would do Arma 2 pretty nicely! A solid state hard-drive wouldn't go astray either in a build like this!

I'll stick a build up which from the review would suggest the best setup for the game right now.

ScumLord

I don't know, I think you have to give the humble PC a bit of credit here Arma2 isn't your average game. I don't think people can expect to run this game full whack with it's kilometers of terrain and expect the PC to control maybe a hundred or more AI on top of that without slowing down a bit. True it's buggy but still in fairness Arma2 has allot going on at any given moment and I've only noticed slow down when I've used the editor to put two large opposing forces on the same tiny island just to watch all hell break lose.

Maybe it was a mistake to allow the game to scale up way beyond the abilities of current pcs but that's just the open ended nature of the game.

Effluo

ScumLord wrote: »

I don't know, I think you have to give the humble PC a bit of credit here Arma2 isn't your average game. I don't think people can expect to run this game full whack with it's kilometers of terrain and expect the PC to control maybe a hundred or more AI on top of that without slowing down a bit. True it's buggy but still in fairness Arma2 has allot going on at any given moment and I've only noticed slow down when I've used the editor to put two large opposing forces on the same tiny island just to watch all hell break lose.

Maybe it was a mistake to allow the game to scale up way beyond the abilities of current pcs but that's just the open ended nature of the game.

There's no doubting that this game is well and truly "something else". I only know it from video's and reviews but it looks quite amazing.

I would argue however that on average it only used on average around half of the quad core in the review.
Also something to note is the fact that it's multiple gpu support is uber crap. If it's multi-gpu was better this game would run amazingly well on a 4870X2!

But the fact is that the game has just not been made well. For instance look at the performance of the 285, the 4890 and even the 4870 beats it! The game just doesn't get the best out of the better cards....
The technology is there, the reviews prove it! It's just the game can't make use of the technology...
Which is really very unfortunate

kenon

I've been playing it for a good while now and don't find it graphically buggy. I dont get crashes either, unless my internet goes down, that seems to cause a crash.

We're using a new map on ArmA II and not only does it look better but the fps has increased aswel.

Its hard to offer tips and tweaks when the OP gave no information on his spec.

ScumLord

Effluo wrote: »

There's no doubting that this game is well and truly "something else". I only know it from video's and reviews but it looks quite amazing.

I would argue however that on average it only used on average around half of the quad core in the review.
Also something to note is the fact that it's multiple gpu support is uber crap. If it's multi-gpu was better this game would run amazingly well on a 4870X2!

But the fact is that the game has just not been made well. For instance look at the performance of the 285, the 4890 and even the 4870 beats it! The game just doesn't get the best out of the better cards....
The technology is there, the reviews prove it! It's just the game can't make use of the technology...
Which is really very unfortunate

I think that's all the nature of the game again. It's a small company trying to make something huge, but problems have been there since operation flashpoint and I suppose you'd expect them to have fixed those problems instead of just working on more content.

Overall though it's one of those games that you can forgive the annoyances because there's nothing else like it. One mission can last longer than the entire COD game, I haven't played it for a while due to the amount of time you have to put into it, last time I played it I looked at the time and realised I'd been playing for 9 hours straight and I had to go to work in 3 hours.

Solitaire

From what I've seen the biggest issues seem to be terrible map optimisation and the CPU's habit of choking on said. At the moment now that drivers are being optimised the lack of CF/SLI isn't the killer and the HD4890 is perfectly capable with this game but the issues with CPU and optimization are really killing it. Even if the map bugs are worked out the amount of number-crunching will keep this game more of a CPU-muncher than a GPU-killer.

TheDoc

Its a game that everyone knew would be released way to early, and the game would have constant patches fixing bugs and performance, I knew it well before the game came out, its how that company work.

MY PC runs arma 2 ok, its decent settings, I can appreictae the scope and the quality, I just want better.

Its such a scoped game that it would be hard to REALLY push it to the limit, this game absolutely spanks the Cry Tech engine when it comes to spec requirements.

kencon32

System. Microsoft Windows xp. HP Genuine Intel CPU T2500 @2.00 GHz. 2.00 GB of ram. Card is nivdia geforce go 7600. I understand this is a little low for the game. But it not working even on very low settings. + in the game the trees and grass are white.
Anyone know if this game is going to be the same on the xbox? Some how I can't think that it would be as good. I do hope so.

ScumLord

I doubt Arma2 will make it to xbox, your probably thinking of Operation Flashpoint 2 which is being made by a different crowd.

Your PC isn't up to the task at all really.

Solitaire

Try uninstalling and reinstalling the entire lot - could be corrupt or missing texture/shader files. After that its probably an issue with your GPU drivers, and given how dire nVidia's legacy support is... well, that's why I went ATi

Anti

I tried this game out because of a friends reccomendation. What a load of **** My pc is no monster by any means, but its still pretty decent. all details on low 1680*1050 with <20 fps... Uninstalled it. Biggest waste of cash ever. I knew i should have got it from torrent and played on a few hacked server before i spend cash on it. And buggy.... You have no idea.

ScumLord

Anti wrote: »

I tried this game out because of a friends reccomendation. What a load of **** My pc is no monster by any means, but its still pretty decent. all details on low 1680*1050 with <20 fps... Uninstalled it. Biggest waste of cash ever. I knew i should have got it from torrent and played on a few hacked server before i spend cash on it. And buggy.... You have no idea.

Did you install the patches? I haven't had too many problems in game but I never played it without the patches. The training was very hit and miss though.

kenon

kencon32 wrote: »

System. Microsoft Windows xp. HP Genuine Intel CPU T2500 @2.00 GHz. 2.00 GB of ram. Card is nivdia geforce go 7600. I understand this is a little low for the game. But it not working even on very low settings. + in the game the trees and grass are white.
Anyone know if this game is going to be the same on the xbox? Some how I can't think that it would be as good. I do hope so.

Thats a laptop yeh? It never really had a chance of running it.

System requirements:

---

Minimal PC System Requirements
• Dual Core CPU (Intel Pentium 4 3.0 GHz, Intel Core 2.0 GHz, AMD Athlon 3200+ or faster)
• 1 GB RAM
• GPU (NVIDIA GeForce 7800 / ATI Radeon 1800 or faster) with Shader Model 3 and 256 MB VRAM
• Windows XP
• DVD (Dual Layer compatible), 10 GB free HDD space

Recommended PC System Requirements

• Quad Core CPU or fast Dual Core CPU (Intel Core 2.8 GHz or AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+ or faster)
• 2 GB RAM
• Fast GPU (NVIDIA GeForce 8800GT or ATI Radeon 4850 or faster) with Shader Model 3 and 512 or more MB VRAM
• Windows XP or Vista
• DVD (Dual Layer compatible), 10 GB free HDD space

The minimum specs quoted here really wouldnt run the game well at all so you'd be looking somewhere between the top and minimum specs for something to run.

Heres a tweak guide anyway.