Poopy fps need geek help

[Camboo15 6]

My specs are

 

AMD Athlon 5350 AD5350JAHMBOX 2.05 GHz Quad-core Desktop Processor

ASUS 2GB Graphics Cards R7240-2GD3-L

 

i am getting 10 frames on a full server rendering distance all the way down and around 20 on a server with 20 people rendering also down. Super low graphics setting too. Please recommend what I should do. And no Microwaving the cpu doesn't enhance internet speed 

;)

 

[orcpoc 121]

get a better computer

[BENJI 1021]

Well first off, if your playing on a 16:9 res thats one of the reasons because your graphics card is specifically made for 4:3 resolutions. It has 730 MHz Core Speed and 1800 MHz Memory Speed, which tbh is not the greatest. And your CPU is only 2.05 GHz. Your Gpu and Cpu are both low tier pc gaming components. So, that's why your frames and performance aren't the best

[Ham 1027]

1 hour ago, Camboo15 said:

My specs are

 

AMD Athlon 5350 AD5350JAHMBOX 2.05 GHz Quad-core Desktop Processor

ASUS 2GB Graphics Cards R7240-2GD3-L

 

i am getting 10 frames on a full server rendering distance all the way down and around 20 on a server with 20 people rendering also down. Super low graphics setting too. Please recommend what I should do. And no Microwaving the cpu doesn't enhance internet speed 

;)

 

Nvidia is more optimized for ArmA, if you wanna run ArmA on good frames you have to have an Intel Nvidia build, unless your looking to see some frame dropage, overall nvidia and intel are better for arma, and your cpu isn't very good at all, ArmA 3 is cpu intensive, which basically means that 2.05 GHZ ain't gonna do shit. I would recommend A intel i5 4690k and maybe a gtx 750 ti

[BENJI 1021]

Just now, Ham said:

Nvidia is more optimized for ArmA, if you wanna run ArmA on good frames you have to have an Intel Nvidia build, unless your looking to see some frame dropage, overall nvidia and intel are better for arma, and your cpu isn't very good at all, ArmA 3 is cpu intensive, which basically means that 2.05 GHZ ain't gonna do shit. I would recommend A intel i5 4690k and maybe a gtx 750 ti

NOPE!!!!!

[Ham 1027]

1 minute ago, Benjamin Remer said:

NOPE!!!!!

I run a intel i5 4690k and a Gtx 750 ti, while getting good frames, 50-60 everywhere and 70-80 warzone while being on very high settngs, the gtx 750 ti is a good cheap solution to a graphics card if you have a low budget, you don't need a beast to run arma, you need a solid computer.

[BENJI 1021]

2 minutes ago, Ham said:

I run a intel i5 4690k and a Gtx 750 ti, while getting good frames, 50-60 everywhere and 70-80 warzone while being on very high settngs, the gtx 750 ti is a good cheap solution to a graphics card if you have a low budget, you don't need a beast to run arma, you need a solid computer.

Ya but you play on a 4:3 resolution....

[Ham 1027]

Just now, Benjamin Remer said:

Ya but you play on a 4:3 resolution....

16:9

 

[BENJI 1021]

7 minutes ago, Ham said:

16:9

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9-RxCdtEm8

So your saying that this is a 16:9 res?? HELLO!!! 4:3 HELLO!!!

[I Am Fuzzy 997]

17 minutes ago, Benjamin Remer said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9-RxCdtEm8

So your saying that this is a 16:9 res?? HELLO!!! 4:3 HELLO!!!

High Definition 16:9

[JBruesch 483]

You use vda, dvi, or hdmi?

[orcpoc 121]

54 minutes ago, Ham said:

I run a intel i5 4690k and a Gtx 750 ti, while getting good frames, 50-60 everywhere and 70-80 warzone while being on very high settngs, the gtx 750 ti is a good cheap solution to a graphics card if you have a low budget, you don't need a beast to run arma, you need a solid computer.

I use this same setup and can confirm it runs arma pretty damn good for the price

[Ham 1027]

44 minutes ago, Benjamin Remer said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9-RxCdtEm8

So your saying that this is a 16:9 res?? HELLO!!! 4:3 HELLO!!!

Sorry about the recording of shadowplay, if you can find more examples, plz share.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Ham said:

I run a intel i5 4690k and a Gtx 750 ti, while getting good frames, 50-60 everywhere and 70-80 warzone while being on very high settngs, the gtx 750 ti is a good cheap solution to a graphics card if you have a low budget, you don't need a beast to run arma, you need a solid computer.

Best bang for your buck cards are the GTX 970 and the R9 390 which will run ya about 325 bucks give or take.

 

If that doesn't fit the budget I'd recommend a 760  @140 bucks. A 750ti is utter dogshit and a waste of money and you get much better performance out of a GTX 760 for like 30-40 bucks more. Seriously, a GTX 760 is the lowest card I'd ever recommend someone get for playing ArmA. The i5 4690k is a solid choice.

 

 

[Kenji 33]

1 hour ago, McDili said:

Best bang for your buck cards are the GTX 970 and the R9 390 which will run ya about 325 bucks give or take.

 

If that doesn't fit the budget I'd recommend a 760  @140 bucks. A 750ti is utter dogshit and a waste of money and you get much better performance out of a GTX 760 for like 30-40 bucks more. Seriously, a GTX 760 is the lowest card I'd ever recommend someone get for playing ArmA. The i5 4690k is a solid choice.

 

 

Can confirm GTX 760 is a beast. Get on average around 50 (60-80 in campaign and 20-40 in kavala) with a GTX 760 super and i3-4130, which for its price is pretty impressive.

[Rogue 376]

10 minutes ago, Kenji said:

Can confirm GTX 760 is a beast. Get on average around 50 (60-80 in campaign and 20-40 in kavala) with a GTX 760 super and i3-4130, which for its price is pretty impressive.

i have about the same but with an i-7 but i only get 20-30 lol

[Kenji 33]

no you dont

8 minutes ago, Tragic said:

i have about the same but with an i-7 but i only get 20-30 lol

I call bullshit. Unless your talking about kavala your doing something terribly wrong.

[Camboo15 6]

8 hours ago, JBruesch said:

You use vda, dvi, or hdmi?

HDMI

7 hours ago, McDili said:

Best bang for your buck cards are the GTX 970 and the R9 390 which will run ya about 325 bucks give or take.

 

If that doesn't fit the budget I'd recommend a 760  @140 bucks. A 750ti is utter dogshit and a waste of money and you get much better performance out of a GTX 760 for like 30-40 bucks more. Seriously, a GTX 760 is the lowest card I'd ever recommend someone get for playing ArmA. The i5 4690k is a solid choice.

 

 

So will a gpu or cpu help me more and if I upgrade cpu will it wipe my computer & stuff.

[Bubbaloo - Reusable P Cup 2934]

10 hours ago, Camboo15 said:

My specs are

 

AMD Athlon 5350 AD5350JAHMBOX 2.05 GHz Quad-core Desktop Processor

ASUS 2GB Graphics Cards R7240-2GD3-L

 

i am getting 10 frames on a full server rendering distance all the way down and around 20 on a server with 20 people rendering also down. Super low graphics setting too. Please recommend what I should do. And no Microwaving the cpu doesn't enhance internet speed 

 

Hey bud.  Do you have budget for a new PC?.  I can help you work out the kinks.  Let me know. 

[Camboo15 6]

10 minutes ago, Bubbaloo said:

Hey bud.  Do you have budget for a new PC?.  I can help you work out the kinks.  Let me know. 

Ha hell noo... I build my potato at the end of the summer. I plN on upgrading it.

Im thinking abiut getting a EVGA GT 740 sc single slot

4 gb

[Bubbaloo - Reusable P Cup 2934]

If most of your gaming is focused on Arma I suggest you also invest on a processor. 

[Sqwallify 127]

First Arma has been a more CPU intensive game rather than GPU. Next NVIDIA is better then AMD when it comes down to reliability and bang for your buck. AMD is cheaper but can get the job done NVIDIA is being more supported on games then AMD. Next let's go over CPUs INTEL beats AMD in quality and just being better. Don't get me wrong I run a AMD A6-6300 6 CORE. It's a work horse and gets the job done. AMD CPUs are good for overclocking your PC. AMDs have an awesome amount of cores which makes it good for it. But INTELs are faster and the best around. AMDs are by far way cheaper so you can get higher end ones for as cheap as an I5. I run an AMD A6 6300 FLfor my CPU and GPU I run a NVIDIA 760 2GB enthusiast edition. I get about 20 fps on Standard graphics and clouds off. If you want better FPS your gonna have to break out the old wallet it can't be fixed with your specs. Only replaced you'll have change alot depending on your PSU RAM MBOARD AND POSSIBLY RAM.

[BENJI 1021]

12 hours ago, McDili said:

Best bang for your buck cards are the GTX 970 and the R9 390 which will run ya about 325 bucks give or take.

 

If that doesn't fit the budget I'd recommend a 760  @140 bucks. A 750ti is utter dogshit and a waste of money and you get much better performance out of a GTX 760 for like 30-40 bucks more. Seriously, a GTX 760 is the lowest card I'd ever recommend someone get for playing ArmA. The i5 4690k is a solid choice.

 

 

I would have to agree with 100%. I currently use a Geforce gtx 770 Superclocked and a i5 4690k, the 4690 imo is the best i5 out there atm. If you OC that thing it is like a brand new i7. And I've personally haven't looked to much into the specs for a 760. But from what I've heard and read, that's a great component for a GPU if you're on a budget and want your spendings to count.

[Linka 2942]

Benji the PC god. 

[JBruesch 483]

6 hours ago, Camboo15 said:

HDMI

Try running with DVI or even VGA. I had tater fps when i had hdmi, but i swapped out to DVI and sweet jezuz it runs sooo much better.