Hi,

Sold my last system....again....and going to buy a newer one....again. (love it really).

So I am wondering about the 975 BE or i5 2500(k) with respect to playing ARMA2 and ROF.

Everyone seems to say that the i5 2500 is a way better CPU but paired with the same GPU would one see a difference in these games? I know that ARMA2 is a huge hog so is that a good test?

I sure would like to see a side by side FPS test of these CPU's on ARMA2.

Always like to check here for the good advice.

Thanks

I have an i5 2400 and ArmA2 is one of my favourite games - in fact, I run the weekly ArmA2 event here on SimHQ.

I ran E08 Benchmark from ArmA2 OA. I use a resolution of 1680x1050 with visibility at 1600 and all settings on 'very high,' except for anti-aliasing, post process effects, and HDR quality which are set to 'normal.'

Testing with fraps, my frame rate maxed out at 60fps viewing units in open areas. Viewing unpopulated urban centres, it dropped down to around 45fps. Watching infantry and tanks rolling through the same urban centres, I got around 30fps. The benchmark reported my average fps as 36.

I only have the ROF Demo, so I loaded up the Observation Escort mission. Playing with absolutely all settings at maximum yielded a fairly steady 25-30fps, flying at tree top level with about a half-dozen planes withing visual distance. A bit lower than I care for, so I could probably dial back the AA from 8x to maybe 2x for a boost.

Overall I love my i5 2400 and can't recommend it enough. Great bang-for-buck performance. I can only imagine the 2500k is better.

Here is a good side by side test with most of the actual Intel and AMD CPU´s in the ARMA-OA E8 scenario: http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/proze...ation_arrowhead

It´s in German, but the numbers show a significant difference between the i5-2500k and the best AMD CPU.

Wow. Thanks!

It seems the 955/965/975 cant really keep up with the i5 2500k. Up to this point I always went with the AMD but now, with those FPS differences, I might have to get the i5. No slam against AMD, I am sure their next best thing is right around the corner. Such is the game of computers.

Also,

With respect to SSD's.

I see several systems come with the OS on a seperate SSD. I can imagine that this speeds up the bootup process but does it make games faster? It seems to me that putting the game on the SSD would be the "faster" way. I am sure I am wrong but it doesnt make sense to me.

I haven't tried putting games on the SSD, but it should only make loading things into memory faster. Maps, textures, sounds, models, missions... During gameplay, you should expect to see less drops in framerate, when the system goes hunting for these things on the drive. So less stutter and framerate dips less deep. IMHO