What I thought would be a simple graphics tweek for ArmA II became a full scale benchmarking session leading to what I think will be a eye opening glimpse into the demands that ArmA II places on hardware to utilize maximum settings.

Using a EVGA GTX280 SC factory overclocked to 621 MHz on the GPU, 1350 MHz shaders, and GDDR3-2268, raising the bar even more for true hardcore performance. I took the EVGA GTX 280 to an Amazing 701 MHz on the GPU, 1523 MHz shaders, and GDDR3-2268.
The GTX 280 is a Monster card in shear size processing power and power consumption. With it's enormous 10.5" Length and double slot size, you will need a nice sized case to install it and to top that off at lest a 650 Watt PSU at minimum to feed it's 236 W craving for power. But its payout is well worth the investment.

The Intel Core i7 920 will become another legendary chip such as the Q6600 . The i7 920 is easily overclocked and for this session I ramped it up to 3.8 Ghz  which is a 42% over clock on stock air.

For Benchmarking results I used ArmA Mark II with the recommended presets listed below.

ArmA Mark II

Texture Detail: Normal
Anisotropic Filtering: Normal
Terrain Detail: Normal
Objects Detail: Normal
Shadow Detail: Normal
PostProcess Effects: Low
ArmA II Patch 1.03 Steam version

Test System Configuration
CPU: Intel Core i7-920 Stock Clock: 2.66 GHz, 1.25 volts, 8 MB shared L3
Overclocked: 3.8 GHz (19 x 200 MHz) 1.30 volts
Motherboard: ASUS P6T V2 Deluxe BIOS 7.3 (04-17-2009)
Intel X58/ICH10R Chipset, LGA 1366
RAM: GSKILL 6.0 GB DDR3-1600 CAS 9
at DDR3-1600 CAS 9-9-9-24 (1T)
GPU: EVGA GeForce GTX 280 1 GB
701/1523 MHz GPU/Shader clocks, GDDR3-2268
GPU Driver: GeForce/ION Driver Release 190 Version: 190.38
Hard Drive: Western Digital Caviar Black 500 GB
7,200 RPM, 32 MB Cache SATA 3.0 Gb/s
Sound: Integrated HD Audio
Network: Integrated Gigabit Networking Software
OS: Windows XP 32-bit SP3
Windows 7 RC(7100) 64-bit

The benchmarking procedure I use is first to establish a good stable overclock for the CPU and GPU measuring temperatures at both idle and full 100% loads and monitor CPU load spread across all cores with a 24 Hr burn-in time. I tested the i7 at stock and OC and left the GPU locked to the same OC setting as my base to observe the impact overclocking the i7 would have on the FPS. What I found really shocked me since I was expecting to see the most dramatic increase with the EVGA GTX 280 as opposed to the EVGA 8800GT that certainly was no match for ArmA 2 at high settings. But since this is a benchmark to compare your i7 settings to I stuck with the above ArmA Video Settings.

Below as you can see are Stock i7 920 settings 2.66 GHZ 1.25 volts Windows XP Pro SP3 32-bit. With a ArmA Mark Score of 4785.46 best of 3 


And now Windows XP Pro SP3 32-bit i7 920 with the 3.8 GHz overclock with a ArmA Mark score of 5883.16 best of 3

Next I tested Windows 7 RC (7100) 64-bit with the same procedure pitting Windows XP Pro against Windows 7 RC.
Again below you will see the stock i7 settings with a ArmA Mark score of 4365.6 best of 3

And now the i7 with the 3.8 GHz overclock with a ArmA Mark score of 5366.49 best of 3

Crunch Time

Now that we have gathered all the data we can see how the i7 920 stacks up to ArmA with clock speeds vs overclock speeds as well Windows XP Pro SP3 32-bit vs Windows 7 RC (7100).

Stock vs Overclocked

With Windows XP the i7 920 at stock speeds posted a ArmA Mark score of 4785.46 with the i7 OC rounding out with a fairly impressive score of 5883.16 a total gain of 22.9% not a bad gain for a simple OC

With Windows 7 and the i7 920 at stock speed posted a ArmA Mark score of 4365.6 and the i7 OC posting a score of 5366.49 with again a gain of 22.9%

Windows XP vs Windows 7

Windows XP vs Windows 7 with stock clock i7 920 the winner goes as expected to Windows with a 9.62% increase in performance.

Windows XP vs Windows 7 OC i7 920 again the winner goes the Windows XP with a 9.62% increase in performance.

So there you have it if you have a low to mid range computer sticking to Windows XP should yield a 9.62% increase over Windows 7

So even though Windows 7 is still a little heaver on resources then XP its not by much and high end systems are not going to have a problem with ArmA II and Windows 7. But for thoughs who still have mid-range system I sugest to stick with Windows XP and if you have Windows Vista it proabley time to ditch it for Windows 7. I wish I could have thrown Windows Vista into the mix however I refues to run due to preformance issues.

Summery

While ArmA II makes tremendous demands on the GPU which is to be expected with as much geometry as there is to render, the real shocker here for me is how much more the CPU contributes to the FPS, ArmA II utilizes all the cores available to it using as much as 45 – 75% load on the i7 depending on how much geometry there is to render in the scene, movement, action and AI calculation. COD 4 on the other hand registers mere 14-30% CPU use on the i7, it kinda makes me feel cheated or like my computers lazy or something, heck you have to run Folding at Home to get the processors warmed up if your playing COD 4 on a i7, come to think of it my E6600 never broke a sweat running COD 4 with a 8800GT 512 MB and still achieved 125 FPS in most places. But for all the enjoyment I have gotten out of my $3,049 ArmA rig (that's $3000 for the Rig and $49.99 for the game) I have had endless hours of tweaking enjoyment with the hopes that some day I will be able to run ArmA II at Maximum settings and 60 FPS. Well Im close but still hoping like most of you. I cant wait to play the game it really looks like a blast. But with all fun aside I do want to thank all the fine people at Bohemia Interactive for there farsighted approach, raising the bar to a new level of realism and detail. They have there best and brightest working on this and with all things, it's a work in progress.

Conclusion

So this is what it all boils down too, just as with any new latest and greatest game that has ever come along like Quake, Crysis, Left4Dead and Fall Out 3 that would not run at there full potential when they were released to market so goes ArmA II. This is how it always will be, if not we would still be playing games on 8088 XT's @ 4.77 Mhz and with CGA monitors with 4 color graphics and 320×200 pixel resolution if you were lucky enough to afford it. So lets do what we always have done to have fun, go buy the latest and greatest video game for $49.99 and then drop 3 Grand to play it. Thats how you play the game!