TOPIC: Need Some Help

Ok so recently i have started playing some new games such as arma3 and im struggling to get good frames on medium settings (around 15-20). So i need some of your guys help to find a affordable (£120 budget) graphics card that will improve my frames in bigger games i currently have a AMD A8-6500 APU with Radeon HD Graphics. So if possible could you help me find a better Graphics card that will run better. Thanks

MSI GTX 750 Twin Frozr OC Edition.

My friend has this graphics card, bearing in mind his CPU is average as well, he can run Arma 3 w/medium setting at 30fps.

If you only have issues with Arma 3 you might not need to upgrade and just set Arma 3 right.
Try to check viewing distance and ambient occlusion (or however it's called in english). There are a lot of guides on the internet to tell you how to set up your Arma 3 so you won't lag.

Also, if you're playing on modded Arma you might want to play on very low as it's rly hard to optimize it.
But yeah, you're playing on an APU, even tho they're great it's maybe not the best for Arma 3.
If you only have an APU I guess you might have a rly little case and not a really powerful power supply so it might be more than just a GPU that you'd need.
But if you just wanna play Arma 3 I guess a R9 285/280 or even a 270X would be enough to have a decent framerate with good settings.

EDIT: Just saw Stratiic's reply. A GTX750 is a good idea too, it doesn't cost much and does the job. You can find some really small models and it doesn't consumes much.

sorry i cant help i got helped from my friend with arma3 graphics

Go xxmasterxx

Yea i have all of the settings on low and textures on medium the textures doesn't affect my fps.

I was looking at this one yesterday night it looks good. But a little to close to my budget.

Personally, the best you will get is the 750, arma is horribly optimized, especially number 3, if you had a higher budget, you could atleast run it at 60 and above fps on high. But for 120, i would get the GTX 750.

$Dallas$ wrote: Wow, it's far from being horribly optimized. Mods are but Arma isn't. Arma has just a big ass engine and so much settings that it just eats the perfs of your computer.

And if a 750 is still too close for your budget I guess there's no rly other option as a 750 is still a very low and cheap card, going lower would just be useless.

Super Carla Runi Party wrote:
Number 2 was, number 3 to me was just as bad and as buggy.

$Dallas$ wrote:
Well, there's a difference between facts and what you think. Arma 2 was horribly optimized but they did a lot of great work on Arma 3. It's optimized, it's just hard to set up well and it's normal if most configs can't run it. It's not because it's not well optimized it's because it's a big game.