Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Ati or Nvidia to play Arma2?
Armed Assault Info Forums > English > Armed Assault > Troubleshooting
fordsal
Hi,

I wish to buy a new pc, principally to play Arma 2 at his best. I hesitate between a GTX275 and radeon 4890.

As arma 2 will use the improved engine of arma 1, is there a better graphic card to play arma 2.

Some games working better on ati than nvidia or inverse.. Is it the case for arma 1 ?

Thank you in advance

Salford
Willus Killus
Hm, most games do prefer Nvidia or ATI over the other but im not really sure about ArmA. My ATI Radeon 3850 runs it nice and smooth on high and on 1680x1050. Not really sure how Nvidia is with ArmA.

You should also check out some comparison sites and such, sure theres some info on new cards such as the ones you listed.
STALKERGB
i'm using Nvidia for ARMA1 and it seems fine, i think with the two crads you mentioned the ATI is better at lower resoltions but the Nvidia performs better on higher ones. There is also the thing about ATI not liking wierd texture ratios, the size of a texture had to be to the power of two (i think) so like 256x256 or 1024x512 and so on. I fell foul with making a texture something like 126x104 and some people reported missing textures on my addon and it turned out they used ATI cards. Not sure if they have changed this with the newer cards (infact they most likely have) but it might be worth considering if they haven't.
Old Bear
BI has said ArmA was optimized for Nvidia cards. I believe they are working with PC Nvidia equiped.
I am playing ArmA with an ATI card, now an "old" MSI 1950Pro 512, playing fine on high, has to disable Anisotropic and Post-processing options to have a nice game. I was playing things smoothly while some people were having issues with high end Nvidia cards.

Some problems have been reported on ATI cards user since the release of the 4800 serie, and BI has announced that this problem with ATI card has been solved for ArmA and ArmA2, I have read something about that in an ArmA Database Mission interview [of course it's in German ...] but you can understand that now, ATI card users can use options in the "Video options" in order to correct the problem.

From these bits of informations, I will conclude that it will be easier to play ArmA2 with Nvidia card without having to tweak the video options, ArmA2 will be playable with ATI cards with some works on the adjustments ... with less money needed sweatingbullets.gif

I am working on the same question GTX275 or ATI4890 for myself ... and I will wait a bit after the release of the game, reading the forums and asking questions before coming to a decision, for spending more than 200€ on a video card is a difficult move even for a dedicated ArmA player/fan as I am. blues.gif
Old Bear
I have found an interesting GPU ArmA2 Benchmark on the PC Games Hardware site.
Here is the link : http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,685661/A...imulation/Test/

It's all in german but there are pics, here is an extract from the results on high end video cards on "Normal" settings :


The whole benchmark is quite interesting ... and here is a "BabelFish" translation of the conclusions :

For the high end cards Armed Assault 2 favors ATI cards, the HD4890 has better results than the GTX 285 and the HD 4870 / 1Go than the GTX 275. In the middle class the HD 4850 / 512 Mo up is side by side with the GTS 250 / 1 Go, the HD 4770 is faster a whim than the old 8800 Ultra. On the Geforces 512 Mo produces a strong performance brake, a GTS 250 / 1 Go is approximately 30 by cent faster than the 9800 GTX + / 512 Mo ms identical but for the memory size. For the Radeon HD 4870 the average lead is 10 per cent, but it rises up to 30 per cent for the minimum FPS.

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.