=DiG= Zgraphz 84 Posted June 21, 2013 The sole reason of this topic was to find a hardware to play DayZ comfortably. I was not expecting a holy war in this topic. But it seems you want one :(The fact that it is based on an old engine, doesn't change the fact that Arma 2 performs bad on AMD processors, that it doesn't give a dam about multy cores systems, and it runs bad on pretty much everything. And I'm not comparing arma 2 performance with "normal FPS" whatever it means. I'm comparing it with any game I've ever played (MMO, Openworld RPGs, Openworld FPS...)From all games I've ever played, including some pretty bad optimized titles, Arma 2 still holds a flag of the game with the lowest performance."Arma2 will never be "optimized" as we already have ArmA3 out."Well I know. They need to write new engine or rewrite oldone for those problems to be solved. Same case with Arma3, since they basically used same engine with enhancements.lemme just tell you something and i'll pull key words out of your post to tell you how and why your wrong I Quote "From all games I've ever played, including some pretty bad optimized titles, Arma 2 still holds a flag of the game with the lowest performance." one, arma 2 is not a game, its a combat simulator. two: arma 2 is not like MOST GAMES YOU'VE PLAYED, because arma 2 is not like any other game because ITS NOT A GAME. go into COD, world of warcraft, starcraft, BF3, Counter-strike GO, Assasinscreed 3, bioshock, farcry, left 4 dead. see if any of those games folder's have any PBO files in them, they don't. they .exe off your HDD and your RAM GPU AND CPU are the contenders but arma 2 however is all about PBO files that have to be indexed if your HDD is slow your processor and gpu are gonna bottle neck as a result. This "Game" is not poorly optimized, i run it at 80-100 fps on highest settings, how is that possible, if the game is SO poorly optimized? Get a SSD/(intel) 3.0ghz(AMD) 3.5ghz processor and a gtx 5 series and/or radeon hd 7 series and up, there u just got 70 fps and thats minum, but again that can't happen because like you said, its poorly optimized. gambla knows arma 2 engine better than anyone i;ve met on these forums, so your talking to a brick wall mate, you and your holy war can stop actting like you have any knowledge about this "GAME". Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
=DiG= Zgraphz 84 Posted June 21, 2013 i'll say this amd sucks compared to intel in performance but in price AMD blows Intel away by far. amd 3.0ghz isn't as fast as a Intel 3.0ghz, i love AMD and i Love Intel, both are great products i just love performance and if i have the extra dollar, Intel gets it Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
monoking 22 Posted June 22, 2013 (edited) If you want more FPS, intel does a better job. This game thread/core scaling is horrible, the devs neglected this on arma 3 too. If this game would only support proper multithreading, the fps would skyrocket for sure and wouldn't bottleneck much on CPU.Many people are complaining about the poor cpu usage here as well. http://forums.bistud...-issues/page208This game runs horrible on my 2500k on 5.0ghz. My gpu usage was always around 70%/80% and my cpu never exceeds 50%...on my I7, it would only go up to 25% due to hyperthreading, does this game even detects hyperthreading properly?So if your gonna go amd 8 core, your performance is gonna get even worse due to the horrible cpu scaling. theres no point in getting 6 or 8 cores as this game doesn't even use more then 50% on my i5 .... Edited June 22, 2013 by monoking Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The_Neon_Effect 0 Posted July 8, 2014 I get 45 in cherno and 140 everywhere else evga 750 ti fx 6300 x 6 3.5ghz Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
