Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Will Armed Assault run on my system?
Armed Assault Info Forums > English > Armed Assault > Troubleshooting
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
King Homer
Because we have lot of "computer and what if -threads" lately, I opened up this thread.

Feel free to post your computer specifications here to tell us, how ArmA does run.
Furthermore we can tell you if your PC meets the minium requirement and what has to be upgraded.


ArmA runs smooth for me with average 30 FPS on following system (settings are high to very high):

AMD 64 X2 4000+ with 2048 KB L2 Cache (AM2)
Asus M2N-E nForce 570 Ultra Mainboard
2048 MB Corsair TWIN2X DDR2 PC800 RAM
Asus EN7950GT Geforce 7950GT

Windows XP Prof. SP2
DX 9.0c (latest version)

Installed on a 4 parition 250 GB SATA2 HDD.
Game drive has 80 GB left

ForceWare 93.71 driver
AntiAliasing 4x
Anisotropic Filtering 8x

Another option is THIS Test. Simply choose ArmA and run it
Old Bear
KH : I am happy you open this thread.
I was planning to open a spreadsheet in order to collect infos on what is working and what isn't.
The idea was to draw a synthesis and describe the right config for ArmA.

So KH, is my config. ArmA compatible ?

Mobo : Gigabyte GA-7VAXFS
CPU : AMD Athlon XP 2000+ (1,67Ghz)
Ram : 1,280 Go DDR-SDRAM
Graphic card : MSI NX 7600AGP
HD1: Seagate 60Go for OS and softwares
HD2 : Maxtor 100Go for datas

XP (sp2)
Direct X 9.0c

I have played Demo version, I am waiting for the 505Games release.
The game is running on my PC so the new I had posted on ArmA.info from Doupe.cz is true but I can't say it always run smoothly ! My video options, after a lot of experiments :

Quality pref. : high
Visibility : 719
Resolution : 1024x768

Terrain detail : high ----- Anisotropic filtering : disabled
Objects detail : high ----- Shadow detail : normal
Texture detail : normal ----- Antialiasing : disabled
Shading detail : normal ------ Blood : low
Postprocessing : low

For Demo version I have (using FRAPS)
- in Coop mission (full players=8):20 FPS in open field, 15/13 FPS along a road, 11/10 FPS in dense wooden area, 8/10 in urban area. Playable.
- in CTF mission (full players=16) : 9/12 , not great difference between sandy expense and town not smooth but still playable.
- in CTI mission : 7/9 FPS when the game is going on. When FPS falls to 7, it is not really playable

I know ..., I am in the low end ..., my amount of ram and my video card are helping but ....
Jason
My Specs and Performance on ArmA


Specs

Intel Core Duo - 3.4Ghz
2 Gig DDR2 RAM (2x1 gig RAM Sticks)
Nvidia GeForce 7500LE - 512MB Memory
300GB Samsung (I think) Hard Drive

Computer is 3-4 months old.
Latest drivers for all hardware installed.
Defraged twice since purchase of game.

Settings

Quality pref. : low
Visibility : 1200

Terrain detail : very low ----- Anisotropic filtering : disabled
Objects detail : very low ----- Shadow detail : disabled
Texture detail : very low ----- Antialiasing : disabled
Shading detail : very low ------ Blood : low
Postprocessing : low

Performance
Airport Runway on sahrani with just a civlian - 40FPS
In a small amount of bushes near runway - 20FPS
Center of Paraiso - 21FPS
Fighting in the first missions of campaign - 8-10FPS
CTI's - unplayable 4fps

thumbsdownsmileyanim.gif
King Homer
Old Bear:
Your problem will be your CPU and your VGA card. Especially the CPU is too slow and outdated. Do you use a laptop because of all the "2 go" hardware? Furthermore it's hard to upgrade a Socket A mainboard to a todays standard CPU.

Jason:
Your problem is definitely the VGA card. The 7500LE is crap, 512 MB of GPU memory doesn't make it any better. The 7800 or 7900 should be the best choice for your allover good looking system. But don't think about buying another LE or downgraded version - GT or GTX must be your choice.
Old Bear
I know the CPU (and main board) for being outdated issues.
I have already grow from 256 Mo Ram to 718 Mo and again to 1280 in order to play games such as Call of Duty or Operation FlashPoint along 2 years as I add a 2nd HD for Data in order not to slow down acess to disk with a 99% full disk.
I have, 4 months ago, at last upgrade from Gigabyte Maya Radeon 9000 64 Mo AGP 4x to MSI NX7600GS AGP 8x in a last attempt to have a PC ArmA compatible. As you see it meets minimal config specs.
But it's not enough ! cry3.gif
King Homer
You should have waited longer. Now you have to buy new hardware again, to get the game run properly on your system.
Deadeye
AMD XP 2600+ , Epox 8RDA+, 1024 MB Ram, MSI GF FX 5600, IDE HDD

What do you think will ArmA run on this machine?
I'd say maybe on very low settings.

NeMeSiS
I wouldnt recommend anyone to play this game with an FX 5xxx, i guess it should work on very low/low settings in 800×600.

Try the demo first wink.gif
Deadeye
QUOTE(NeMeSiS @ Dec 28 2006, 15:43) *

I wouldnt recommend anyone to play this game with an FX 5xxx, i guess it should work on very low/low settings in 800×600.

Try the demo first wink.gif

well that's the problem. I'm runniong on a gf ti 4200 atm and I'd be able to get the FX for 12€ so....
27th-Rob78
My system at the mo won't even run the demo version!
I've got :
3.2 Intel Celeron processor
2 x 512mb memory sticks
NVidia GeForce 4400Ti, 128 mb

I've been looking at upgrading the graphics card to one of these, especially as I'm on a tight budget http://www.ctretail.co.uk/shop/product.php...286&xSec=23
Can anyone tell me if this will be up to the job or recommend a similar one in a similar price range.
NeMeSiS
You can get an x1600XT (or x1650, not sure about the difference) for 120€

I have one and it plays the game quite smooth on normal settings without shadows on 1024×768.

To be honest i wouldnt recommend any lower then this, and i would never spend <100€ on a card you want to game on.

(both of those cards will play the game, but it will probably be a horrible experience, especially in forests, better save that money untill you can buy something better)

EDIT: 27th-Rob78, you have a celeron, so you are probably going to have problems anyway as those are ment for office stuff, not gaming.
Lt. Earth Apple
What's about :
2.8 Ghz Pentium IV (juk!)
2x512 mb DDR 2 Ram
MSI 7800 GS 256 mb
?
Jimboob
Should work fine Apple, though you'll probably get low frame rates still. I've got a similar system, and I get about 20 or so FPS in firefights
Lt. Earth Apple
Well, I think I will get really good graphics, but not much tongue.gif
another computer of my freinds, with A 7600 gT but a AMD 3700 is running on max details without Postpross. (I hate it anyway) extremely Fluently at 3500 M in South Sahrani ( I hate the north anyway too)
LooseKannon
Intel Core2 Duo E6700
GeForce 8800GTX 768mb
2gb PC8000 RAM
Creative Audigy4 Sound card
320gb HD
Antipop
Intel Core 2 Duo @ 3.2Ghz (Watercooling)
2x GeForce 8800GTX 768MB
4GB Corsair Dominator XMS (2x 2GB)
400GB SATA2 Seagate HDD

I can play everything on high with around 30FPS. smile.gif Perfect... tongue.gif
DaRat
Core 2 Duo E6700
2x GeForce 7950GT 512Mb (SLI)
2GB Corsair II
160Gb S-ATA II HD

Everything on Very high apart from post processing which is low (looks crap imo anyway tongue.gif )
BigglesTrevor
i got

AMD 64 2.2 ghz
1GB RAM
g-force 6600

i can run the demo only only low medium settings. i got £130 to spend on upgrading pc. i can afford a higher spec AMD with that, 3ghz +, but will that improve arma running? would it be more worthwhile investing in a new graphics card or extra ram with that cash instead?

a tiny bit OT i guess but im not happy with how ArmA runs at the moment, i dont feel im getting anything near the games full potential and anything that gains me some of that is worthwhile.
cptdennis
I have an AMD Athlon 2800 2ghz, Ati Radeon 9800Pro 128mb, 512mb RAM.
Full game works fine on medium settings, demo 10-15 fps on very low settings

btw, I'm going to upgrade my pc with 1gb extra RAM and a new videocard, any recommendments for a PCI-e videocard?
Antipop
Atleast a 7600GT, but best for your buck either a 7900GT or 7800GTX. smile.gif
King Homer
Yes, as minimum I recommend: ATI 1600 or Geforce 7800. It may run properly on older VGA cards aswell, but these are the current "standard". The 8800 is currently the highend, with that one you are one the safe side for this year wink.gif
Blackbuck
I'm upgrading my rig slowly to beable to play ArmaA.

ATM I have a pretty dire setup but i wanna know what you think about what im upgrading to.

By feb - march i should have

512mb DDR RAM -1024mb
128b ATI radeon 9250 - something under £100
Gielovic
QUOTE(King Homer @ Jan 3 2007, 12:51) *

Yes, as minimum I recommend: ATI 1600 or Geforce 7800. It may run properly on older VGA cards aswell, but these are the current "standard".


If you recommend an ATI 1600 you'd better recommend a GeForce 7600 as they have comparable performace. Also it makes a lot of difference if you have the 1600 Pro/XT and also the GF7600 GS/GT differ a lot. (sorry for bad english)
found that out after reading some benchmarks...

hope i'm right as i'm going to purchase a GF7600...



QUOTE(Helping Hand @ Jan 3 2007, 19:16) *

By feb - march i should have

512mb DDR RAM -1024mb
128b ATI radeon 9250 - something under £100


the ATI 9250 is waste of money imo...for 100 dollars or less you can have an X1300!!! that's way better
or an nVidia of course 7300 or something like that
Blackbuck
hmm i'll look into that wink.gif
Danny Boy '77
QUOTE(King Homer @ Jan 3 2007, 20:51) *

Yes, as minimum I recommend: ATI 1600 or Geforce 7800. It may run properly on older VGA cards aswell, but these are the current "standard". The 8800 is currently the highend, with that one you are one the safe side for this year wink.gif


I have the Czech version patched to english and find that my ATI X800X 256mb rund ArmA very nicely indeed.

Apart from that running 3.2Ghz P4, 1Gb RAM (sorry I have no other details, I'm on a mine site).

ATI X800X highly recommended for ArmA.

Thanks.
Jason
Processor: Intel® Pentium® Dual Core CPU 3.20GHz
Memory: 2048MB RAM
Hard Drive: 300 GB
Video Card: NVIDIA GeForce 7500 LE - 512mb Memory
Operating System:
Windows XP Home Edition (5.1, Build 2600) Service Pack 2
------------

First version of game was unplayable on even very low settings. Now on very low settings I get 25 fps in an average fight with about 20 people and a small town.
I know the problem, its my graphics card.. i'm looking for a new one but just picking a good one is the main thing. I'm thinking Nvidia GF 7600 - 7800 if I cant find a better price on the new 8 series.
Jimboob
The cheapest ive found for the Geforce 8 is £380 w/ VAT. Just wait for the R600 to come out and it should drop quite a bit, or just get the R600 and get a better card.
NeMeSiS
QUOTE(Helping Hand @ Jan 3 2007, 19:16) *
128b ATI radeon 9250 - something under £100


You dont want to play ArmA with something slower then a x1600XT (which you can easily get for those 150€ smile.gif )

@Jason, hope you learned to never buy a dell anymore wink.gif
Blackbuck
Maybe??

Well i'm thinking about getting this for my video card.
DaRat
A nice trick for SLI users to imporove performance is to go to the root folder, and rename your arma.exe (not sure of the name, I have the demo tongue.gif) to FEAR.exe
FEAR is a stable SLI-using game, and makes full use of the technology through fooling your PC into thinking it's running a SLI-using game smile.gif (apparently)
Worked wonders for me, I'm currently playing all settings @ V. High and getting 30-40fps constant (apart from the inevitable mass foliage areas where it drops to around 20-25) laugh.gif
King Homer
QUOTE(Helping Hand @ Jan 11 2007, 15:49) *

Maybe??

Well i'm thinking about getting this for my video card.



You may check different benchmark checks before buying a VGA card. Higher numbers not always mean more power wink.gif
Blackbuck
@KH In you oprinion what is a good video card for me to get for ArmA then? apart from the few you listed above... Because i don't have £400 to spend on an 8800
King Homer
X1600XT?
Blackbuck
OK. Narrowed it down to a couple choices and i'd like your opinion of them both...

Sapphire X1600 Pro 512MB DDR2
Sapphire ATI Radeon X1950 Pro 512MB GDDR3
Tumble_Dry
Ok, So I got the demo and It was rather unplayable. Even with the lowest settings I still got video lag.


3.00 gigahertz Intel Pentium 4
8 kilobyte primary memory cache
512 kilobyte secondary memory cache

241.98 Gigabytes Usable Hard Drive Capacity
WDC WD1600JB-00REA0 [Hard drive]
RADEON X700 Series [Display adapter]
1024 Megabytes Installed Memory

Is it my video card?? For serious... WTF.

Im missing out on the greatest game ever.
NeMeSiS
Its probably your x700, they are quite slow.
What is your FPS in
1. Desert
2. Forests
3. Cities
(download FRAPS if you cant see your FPS)
ilmari
I'm running ArmA - newest version - on a nforce2 mobo based Athlon XP 2400+ system with 0.75 gigs of memory and a Radeon 9800 pro 128mb - no serious lagging or problems yet, a lot smoother than some other new games (like F.E.A.R Extraction point). On pretty low settings, of course, but it's very playable and that's the main point for me :-)

Of course my Windows installation is fine tuned and hard drives are defragged and other basic stuff to make sure I'm not wasting resources.

luix_luix
QUOTE
128b ATI radeon 9250 - something under £100

You dont want to play ArmA with something slower then a x1600XT (which you can easily get for those 150€ )

@Jason, hope you learned to never buy a dell anymore


whats wrong with the ATI radeon 9250?? does ArmA runs with it?


Anybody knows if the ATI x1300 is AGP?

i need an AGP card that can run Arma, do you know about one??

thanks!
Lt. Earth Apple
actually i'm using a Geforce 7800 GS AGP, and forget the 9250, it's to old.
The problem with agp is the cars are much more expensive, my geforce for example ist worth 240 Euros
RM AKITA
AMD 64 3400 (2.2GHZ)
2mb ram
256mb rad 9800 CAT drivers 7.3

the game is terrible even on low slow fps, jumpy,blocky colours all wrong white sky......

If i chose to go for new 512 rad card would this make a difference bearing in mind i wanted cheaper option instead of new pc. I just upgraded ram from 1mb to 2mb.
Or am I throwing away more money and my AMD is just not worth updating and I should go for one of these new dual processor super pci fandango things next year? with 2 graphiocs cards in it!
Lt. Earth Apple
I think I found out your problem.
It's not enough RAM, you should upgrade NOW.
With 2mb, you can't even play ugly CS 1.6 tongue.gif

(na, I know you meant 2 gb, or at least I hope so)

I guess you've an AGP, so you can chose between some options :
1) Buy Crads for AGP much more expensive than PCI-e
2) Buy a new mainboard and a new porcessor for a PCI-e Videocard
3) Buy an old mainboard for your old processor for a PCI-e Videocard
RM AKITA
QUOTE(Lt. Earth Apple @ Apr 12 2007, 23:51) *
I think I found out your problem.
It's not enough RAM, you should upgrade NOW.
With 2mb, you can't even play ugly CS 1.6 tongue.gif

(na, I know you meant 2 gb, or at least I hope so)

I guess you've an AGP, so you can chose between some options :
1) Buy Crads for AGP much more expensive than PCI-e
2) Buy a new mainboard and a new porcessor for a PCI-e Videocard
3) Buy an old mainboard for your old processor for a PCI-e Videocard


Thanks for that. I take it then AGP cards are not much cop. I have tried changing AGP settings, in game I found I crash at 8x 4x is more stable.Ive never tried turning them off completely though may give it a go.
So if I go for a 512 AGP card (any tips) will my athlon be able to reap all the benefits of the extra 256 that I will be getting.Or is my processor just not gonna be able to cope with some of the games out next year because its too slow.
Blackbuck
QUOTE(luix_luix @ Apr 12 2007, 20:39) *
whats wrong with the ATI radeon 9250?? does ArmA runs with it?
Anybody knows if the ATI x1300 is AGP?

i need an AGP card that can run Arma, do you know about one??

thanks!


No it doesn't work with the 9250...

Mine is going out the window very soon.
Deadeye
yes

yes

yes

yes

With this kid you will be able to play arma on the highest settings smile.gif
Blackbuck
*Grins* Just a matter of finding the remaining £70 i got 350 atm
Deadeye
Oh wait, the CPU aint a Core2Duo? Is it an older C2D processor?
reVealR_2012
Helo all,

Three PCs, first one runns the game with perfection but the second and third I have not tested yet and was wonder what you guys thought.

First is a Quad Core running at 3.2gh x4 w/ a single 7950gt w/512 ram and 2gig of DDR3 OS is Vista Ulamate.

Second is an Intel 850GB Socket 423 @ 1.3gh adapted to socket 478 @ 2.8gh w/ 1.5gh of RD Rambus and a GeForce FX5950ultra w/ 250 of ram OS is XP PRO sp2.

Third is an Intel 850GH Socket 478 @ 2.4gh w/ an FX 5950 ultra 256 ram and 2gh of PC2700 OS is XP Pro sp2

?
?
?


Thanks Everyone!!!
reVealR
Deadeye
FX cards and ArmA aren't a good combination.

Do I undersand it correctly you overclocked the 1.3 Gh one to 2.8? Nice.
reVealR_2012
I tested the 2.4 P4 w/ 1gb or ram and FX5950 ultra last night. It will run the game in VERY LOW smoothly and it is playable in LOW but anything above that is just to choppy for a vet player.

As far as the 2.8 I will test it out tonght... I look forward to this one as it has been around scence the iseption of ofp.... although she has gone threw major sergical reconstruction in order to be useable w/ modern gaming.

The chip itself is not overclocked it is an actual 2.8 Northridge P4, however the original 428 socket has been fitted w/ an inexpensive addapter that allows for the use of any 478 chipup to 2.8 gh... some say 3.0 but I have not seen a 3.0 tested yet. The only reason I use this board is it is rock solid and I realy like RD Ram.... ha ha I know its old and out dated but so am I.

reVealR
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2024 Invision Power Services, Inc.