Video Card Poll

[simfreek@hotmail.com 48]

I was checking out another topic and the players in that topic want minnimum graphic settings implemented to keep people from cheating with low graphics settings.

It would look like the community wants a minimum of a GTX 660 to be used and then optimized to graphics settings so you would get about 30 fps. This would include high level of shadows and grass. A card like this costs about USD $215 ish before tax.

In the link below is a benchmark site already dialed in for a HD 6870 (which I use) and a GTX 660. Go ahead and change 6870 to the card you are currently using and then click on the "View Comparison" button. Then in the poll let us know if you meet or exceed the benchmarks of the card.

Yes, I realize other factors play in game performances but I want to keep this simple. You will see already that the 6870 doesn't meet the 660. With the posters of this other thread taking on a mentality of "buck up or shut up", I wanted to see how many DayZ players meet this minimum on their main gaming rig.

http://www.anandtech...duct/660?vs=540

[Fraggle (DayZ) 15720]

I only have an HD5770 but have always managed to get fairly good performance from Arma 2, DayZ and now Arma 3.

As you say there's many other factors that need to be considered, in the case of the RV engine BIS games use processing power is equally if not more important.

[thehero 119]

I have a gtx 670 so I'm going to assume its better than the 660........

Edit: I don't agree with forced settings at all by the way

Edited June 3, 2013 by whoknowswho

[simfreek@hotmail.com 48]

Just realized I put this up in the wrong thread, this was not intended to be in the Suggestions thread, I apologize. May I please have this moved to General Discussion?

[-Gews- 7443]

Huh? I don't even have a graphics card. I have on-board graphics. :(

[Death_Dealer 3155]

Stuck with a GT 540M on my craptop right now. Yikes.

New PC will have a GTX 660 though.

[narwaljunior 18]

I have a GTX 560 ti and a AMD 8150. I get decent fps now that I changed my fan settings. I get around 35 to 40 fps in cities like Chernarus but can reach up to 50~ fps in the woods and stuff. The GPU isn't all that matters when it comes to games, especially Arma 2.

[zecele 211]

I have a gtx 660 :)

[TurkishMonkey 62]

i have 2 3GB 7950s in CrossFire. I need it as im running at 2560x1440. Getting 40-50fps on low settings :(

Im really hoping the standalone is optimized. I would love to be able to run at 50-60fps.

[zecele 211]

Well Bohemia are terrible at optimizing games.

Lets hope dean and his team aren't.

[colekern 1364]

Gtx 680 FTW+ edition.

[Fraggle (DayZ) 15720]

Well Bohemia are terrible at optimizing games.

Lets hope dean and his team aren't.

Yeh, their track record for optimisation isn't great, Arma 2 sucked in that department. I have to say though, maybe they've turned over a new leaf. Arma 3 runs great for me so far and it still has lots of work to be done on it.

[Death_Dealer 3155]

What card do you have Fraggle?

[Fraggle (DayZ) 15720]

I only have an HD5770 but have always managed to get fairly good performance from Arma 2, DayZ and now Arma 3.

As you say there's many other factors that need to be considered, in the case of the RV engine BIS games use processing power is equally if not more important.

[fluxley 2228]

Ive got a HD6850 oc to about 6870 performance so no.

But as others have said, with the Arma/dayz engines CPU is far more important than GPU.

[Death_Dealer 3155]

oh derp. :P

[boneboys 7988]

I put this in tech Fraggles, not that it matters really.

[NozRee 4]

2x 680's Lightnings!

[callsignBravo (DayZ) 323]

I had an HD 6450 in and got maybe 20-30 frames at good times, for the hell of it i threw in an old Fx 580 got about a 5 FPS increase. then i read some stuff and set up my graphics right got about 10 more frames and get this-it looks better to. the trick is balancing cpu and gpu usage. The issue is Dayz is so popular so many people with inadeuquit rigs play it. im a year to young for a job, my income source is yardwork so it takes a while for me to get a better card. I want a GTX 650 Ti BOOST and im close to it but with minimum grapics settings i might be able to play i might not. what needs to be done is a set of optimized settings that make the game look crisp and still run good. like setting your 3D res too 100% (same as your fullscreen res) it helps. If you put everything on low it just clogs CPU useage so put some things a little higher to goto the gpu and balance out the equation. I think players who use low graphics do so because they have to. With a bad rig on low settings your at a huge disadvantage in frames and game playability. it makes it just a little easier to spot ghillie suits on sniper hill and things like that.

[finjesse 20]

Well im playing with radeon HD5770 and AMD phenomX4 3,4gh/z highest grafig and having 30fps

[disgruntled 38]

have 660ti. think that the ATOC setting should be controlled to an extent

[zecele 211]

Yeh, their track record for optimisation isn't great, Arma 2 sucked in that department. I have to say though, maybe they've turned over a new leaf. Arma 3 runs great for me so far and it still has lots of work to be done on it.

It may run great for you but for the majority of what i have read it doesn't for most other people. Myself i get around 30 fps on wasteland on high settings which isn't too bad. Still needs a lot of optimization as my computer smashes the reccomended specs.

[fluxley 2228]

It may run great for you but for the majority of what i have read it doesn't for most other people. Myself i get around 30 fps on wasteland on high settings which isn't too bad. Still needs a lot of optimization as my computer smashes the reccomended specs.

How does that compare to when you play on an Arma2 wasteland server?

[Fraggle (DayZ) 15720]

It may run great for you but for the majority of what i have read it doesn't for most other people. Myself i get around 30 fps on wasteland on high settings which isn't too bad. Still needs a lot of optimization as my computer smashes the reccomended specs.

The thing is, the people it doesn't run well for are the people that will be posting so you won't be reading hundreds of posts of people telling you that it runs just fine for them. Anyhoo, I can only say it as I see it, for me personally it runs far better and my friends report the same. I have read the issues many others have had though so I know it's not great for everyone. I hope they carry on optimising as they continue to build the game.

Part of the alpha process is to record player experiences/performance issues and address those as they move forward. Arma 3 is always going to be a very demanding game I just hope they manage to get everyone having a good consistent experience by the time it's fully released.

Edited June 3, 2013 by Fraggle

[NozRee 4]

It may run great for you but for the majority of what i have read it doesn't for most other people. Myself i get around 30 fps on wasteland on high settings which isn't too bad. Still needs a lot of optimization as my computer smashes the reccomended specs.

The low CPU/GPU usage is left over from the engine they're using. I doubt it will ever be much better.

off topic

Just because the game is in alpha doesn't mean they are going to fix issues that have been with the engine for years.