Lonbjerg
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 4,419
- 0
- 0
Looks like the raising of the BS flag is quite common following a post by Fx1...
Just put him on ignore...he is either lying to hard...or to ignorant to understand technical stuff.
Looks like the raising of the BS flag is quite common following a post by Fx1...
I have owned games from BIS since Operation Flashpoint -> ARMA -> ARMAII
That is your llimited view, not a fact.
You find another engine that does ALL the stuff that the ARMA engine does....and don't look like wireframes...I dare you!
Besides the what does that have to do with the CPU performance?
You are just barking now...did ARMA hurt your E-peen?
Compared to what it actually DOES....it's amazing.
And WFT is "clunky"? LOL
You try and do gymnastics in full combat gear...you don't jump aound in that.
Good thing they are going PhysX for ARMA III then...as a former veteran myself, I can tell you no other game comes even close to real life combat.
You have one option if you want realism...that is ARMA II.
BF and COD are just kiddie-shooters.
IT's hard to take you serious when you are obvious ignrant about the topic.
ARMAII is a home user vesion of VBS...used by armed forces...because it's the best mil-sim out there....do read up!
There is a reason why the commnuity consists of many former and current military servicemen...*sigh*
Again, you view conflicts with reality:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2009/08/10/arma_ii_gameplay_performance_image_quality/
Name a better mil-sim...come on...I dare you!
All you FUD is about how ARMA broke you E-peen and you cannot run it at max settings.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/04/23/intel-core-i7-3770k-review/7
Do you have anything relevant...like data, documentation ect. for any of your claims?
What?
No.
Didn't think so.
Mass effect 3 = consoleport....LOL
Skyrim @60 FPS on Q6600 = lie: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/skyrim-performance-benchmark,3074-9.html
I give up...you are going on ignore for lying.
Eh, he's entertaining. Besides, I wouldn't want some poor soul not knowing any better to get fooled by the lies. Be strong, its our duty to sift through the BS for the common good! lol
I have to agree. It's gone from asking and interjecting for help, to belligerent, thread capping know it all, no evidence, change of point, minutia arguing. Which is in the end not helpful to the original topic.Looks like the raising of the BS flag is quite common following a post by Fx1...
Have you seen ARMA 2? IT LOOKS LIKE CRAP.
I have to agree. It's gone from asking and interjecting for help, to belligerent, thread capping know it all, no evidence, change of point, minutia arguing. Which is in the end not helpful to the original topic.
An Older NV chipset , with a quad core is not a stellar performer nowadays, with DDr2. And the fact it will not O/C that well either. Long ago proven as fact. That should be what the OP took from this. A potential sale/upgrade could uncover some more gaming edge that he was looking for.
Remeber back in the day...when there was a heated deabte aboyt if quadcores ever would be needed for gaming?
Many people claimed their dualcore would do fine.
Now we have reached the point, where just a "quadcore" won't do the job.
Now you need a newer multicore CPU to max out the most demanding games.
I love progress.
Ahh yes... The E8400 vs Q6600 wars. The memories... (I went with the Q6600)
:awe:
I beg to differ. You just don't know how to get the best visuals out of a real PC game, or what's needed to make it run well it seems.
Couple screenies of ArmA2 I took a while back
(I know you will dislike them ofc, but posting for others benefit)
I have done my duty...can only stand so mcuh BS or lies before I shut off.
I think I lost the thread somewhere, but the OP has a Q9550 which can be clocked a mile past stock and is quite a bit more capable than a Q6600 on account of its higher efficiency 12 meg L2 cache (Core2's were always starved for cache because of their 2x2 configuration).
Overclocked Q9550's are still very capable processors that will give you raw FPS even if they don't give you the smoothest gameplay in the qualitative sense.
Did you miss the very first original post that read, a STOCK , clocked Q9550.
And was not comparing to past platforms, but possibly newer ones?
Did you miss the very first original post that read, a STOCK , clocked Q9550.
And was not comparing to past platforms, but possibly newer ones?
Some games are CPU limited and some games are GPU limited. That's the way it has always been. That's why it's important to have a CPU like my i5 2500K overclocked to 5GHz and 2 GTX 460 1GB overclocked to 870/1740/4200 so you're ready for both types of games.