Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

i7 3770k or i5 3570k for ArmA 3 Build - AGAIN, Sorry!

Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 30, 2013 4:19:45 AM

Afternoon guys,

I am looking at a build aimed at running ArmA 3 on Ultra settings. I will play a fair bit of single player, along side a fair bit of MP.

I am aware the ArmA series is quite CPU-intensive. I had planned the following build:

i7 3770k (With options to OC it in the future) w/ 8GB RAM
GTX 660 Ti 2GB
--- OR ---
GTX 760 2GB
2TB HDD
120GB SDD

I want to run ArmA 3 on ultra (or as high as possible) settings, getting the most I can for my money. My budget is about £900 tops.

I have seen several threads regarding the age-old "i7 3770k's are pointless for gaming, as no game uses hyper-threading" angle. That said, ArmA 3 taxes the CPU heavily, as well as the Gfx card. I dont want the CPU to bottle neck reaching "Ultra" settings.

Given that ArmA 3 relies on a beefy CPU, would it be more worthwhile going for the i5 3570k, OCing it, then investing in a better Gfx card?

Please bear in mind that I would like something that is future-proof for a good few years to come, and still has the clout to run games well for a long time to come. Other games like BF4 etc on high-/ultra-settings are important.

Also, for the above set up, what sort of Wattage PSU would I be looking at?

Cheers!
Matt.

More about : 3770k 3570k arma build

Best solution

a b à CPUs
July 30, 2013 8:18:27 AM
Share

i7 3770k is the answer. for cpu intensive performance, the i7 is the path to victory lane. regarding the gpu go for the 760 gtx..its has a faster chip plus a advantage of 256-bit memory path as compared to a 192 bit -bit memory on th 660ti. Psu such as corsair, seasonic with a supply of 550- 600 should suffice you.
a c 104 à CPUs
July 30, 2013 8:24:10 AM

go with the gtx 760 for sure and the 3770k if it is in your budget. 2 760s in SLI are more powerful than a titan (i wouldn't have believed it myself if i didn't google it), and over all it is a damn good card. other than that, the rest looks good. Enjoy your system!
Related resources
a c 104 à CPUs
July 30, 2013 8:26:34 AM

if you ever feel the need for more gpu power, just get a second gtx 760 and up the psu :D 
July 31, 2013 2:49:33 AM

The motherboard that I am looking at is this one:
http://www.dabs.com/products/gigabyte-pre-assembled-ult...

But I cant find any mention of SLI. Is this board capable of it or would I have to replace it as well? Got to be honest, I dont really have a proper grasp of the whole SLI thing...
a b à CPUs
July 31, 2013 3:46:14 AM

You don't need an i7 that's for sure. It would be a waste of money. i5 3570k or Haswell. No CPU modern CPU will bottle neck any of those games. They're CPU intensive but won't touch them even at stock speeds. As for a video card I'd recommend EVGA GTX 770 SC or MSI lightning 770.

Why do you need a 2TB HD? If you want to future proof it then a 4gb video card would work but.. it also depends on your res that you play at.

650watt 80 bronze would be fine unless you want to SLI in the future then go up to 750 or 800 if you want.

760 is a nice card but it won't really future proof your computer. You can even get two of them with the 4gb models but I'd rather just run 1 770 gbs and then change later on if I so desire and it'll be cheaper.

Also if you lower BF settings or arma 3 you'll get a much better game play (more fluid). I'm not saying like low settings but full ultra will kill your FPS in some areas and not really give you the most fluid play.
a b à CPUs
July 31, 2013 3:55:14 AM

the person asked for the game arma...he didnt mention whts his budget. everybody knows that arma is a cpu intensive game & the person wants to game on ultra.
2tb is the person personal choice, it doesnt matter if its 3 or 4 or even 10 TB every user has his own storage requirements
4 gb card is a waste if it isnt for more than monitor.
a b à CPUs
July 31, 2013 4:10:15 AM

caj said:
the person asked for the game arma...he didnt mention whts his budget. everybody knows that arma is a cpu intensive game & the person wants to game on ultra.
2tb is the person personal choice, it doesnt matter if its 3 or 4 or even 10 TB every user has his own storage requirements
4 gb card is a waste if it isnt for more than monitor.


Thanks for an uneventful and also useless post! I appreciate it. ;) 

Actually 4gb GPU isn't a waste if he plays at 1440 res.. Also he said he's going to buy it so why get more space than he needs? Yes arma is CPU intensive but nothing that even an i5 2500k can't destroy if OC'd. So an i7 is just overkill and not needed. As for the game on ultra when it's out of beta he'll need more than any of the option he choose so i gave him some alternatives.
July 31, 2013 12:12:20 PM

Budget is at very most £950....
a c 452 à CPUs
July 31, 2013 12:26:50 PM

Are you needing OS included in this build?
August 1, 2013 4:33:40 AM

All good advice gents, I will go with an i7.
a b à CPUs
August 1, 2013 4:37:26 AM

i7 is a waste of money if you're just gaming on it. If you're doing HEAVY rendering as well then the i7 would be the way to go.
September 14, 2013 4:08:21 PM

fnatic said:
i7 is a waste of money if you're just gaming on it. If you're doing HEAVY rendering as well then the i7 would be the way to go.


For other readers who are searching for a awnser: you won't notice allot of performance increase between the i5 and i7, as of yet, in most games. But more and more games will be able to benefit from the extra cores in processors. Also the extra 3mb cache in the i7 does help increase performance even now. Especially in arma 3. Good luck and have fun playing!
!