Will this laptop play this game at high fps?

[370Z91]

After watching videos of Arma 2 and DayZ on YouTube, I now want to play those games more than anything. Problem is I don't have a gaming computer or laptop. After looking into some options I feel like a laptop might be best for my needs, but my question is could a laptop run these games on high settings with still getting high fps and run smoothly? I barely know anything about computers so I could really use the help. I checked into some Alienware laptops, and was looking at the m17x. Would that be able to play this game with high fps?

 

[cliffordcooley]

This link may help. - NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660M Review

 

[Jad Chaar]

After watching videos of Arma 2 and DayZ on YouTube, I now want to play those games more than anything. Problem is I don't have a gaming computer or laptop. After looking into some options I feel like a laptop might be best for my needs, but my question is could a laptop run these games on high settings with still getting high fps and run smoothly? I barely know anything about computers so I could really use the help. I checked into some Alienware laptops, and was looking at the m17x. Would that be able to play this game with high fps?

while this will be fine, they are way too over priced... plus dells are crap imo. get a sager laptop, they are the best value for the price!! a 660M will play it fine. but for Arma 3, you may need a 680M to play on high. why cant you get a desktop? that is a better option for high fps. any particular reason you need a laptop?

 

[Dawn1113]

I'm unfamiliar with DayZ, but I am a big fan of Arma 2. It's quite demanding. I had to dial down the quality settings when I had two GTX 470s in SLI on my machine to get decent framerates from it. Arma 2 is also one of the few games I've seen that actually make ample use of all CPU cores. When I play Arma 2, all cores on my CPU run in full turbo around 75% of the time. You can imagine how that kicks up some heat after an hour or two -- and that kind of heat is trouble for any laptop.

I know a few people who run the game on laptops, but not with high framerates or the kind of quality settings that bring out the best of the graphics. Arma 2 isn't much to look at on low settings. That game is meant to make the best hardware sing -- everything set on high to very high at a minimum average of 55 to 60 FPS, in my opinion.

So I'm going to second UNKNOWN9122 and say go for a desktop. Or even better, build a desktop, if you don't really need mobility and aren't averse to doing some research. It doesn't have to be too expensive and, if you do it right, you're almost guaranteed a smoother-running, better-balanced machine. Nothing to it, really -- and you can get good help here.

Again, of course, it would all depend on your needs and preferences.

 

[Jad Chaar]

I'm unfamiliar with DayZ, but I am a big fan of Arma 2. It's quite demanding. I had to dial down the quality settings when I had two GTX 470s in SLI on my machine to get decent framerates from it. Arma 2 is also one of the few games I've seen that actually make ample use of all CPU cores. When I play Arma 2, all cores on my CPU run in full turbo around 75% of the time. You can imagine how that kicks up some heat after an hour or two -- and that kind of heat is trouble for any laptop.

I know a few people who run the game on laptops, but not with high framerates or the kind of quality settings that bring out the best of the graphics. Arma 2 isn't much to look at on low settings. That game is meant to make the best hardware sing -- everything set on high to very high at a minimum average of 55 to 60 FPS, in my opinion.

So I'm going to second UNKNOWN9122 and say go for a desktop. Or even better, build a desktop, if you don't really need mobility and aren't averse to doing some research. It doesn't have to be too expensive and, if you do it right, you're almost guaranteed a smoother-running, better-balanced machine. Nothing to it, really -- and you can get good help here.

Again, of course, it would all depend on your needs and preferences.

that is wierd!! I got 45 FPS on mainly High and I have a 5730... but with AA turned off

 

[Jad Chaar]

I'm unfamiliar with DayZ, but I am a big fan of Arma 2. It's quite demanding. I had to dial down the quality settings when I had two GTX 470s in SLI on my machine to get decent framerates from it. Arma 2 is also one of the few games I've seen that actually make ample use of all CPU cores. When I play Arma 2, all cores on my CPU run in full turbo around 75% of the time. You can imagine how that kicks up some heat after an hour or two -- and that kind of heat is trouble for any laptop.

I know a few people who run the game on laptops, but not with high framerates or the kind of quality settings that bring out the best of the graphics. Arma 2 isn't much to look at on low settings. That game is meant to make the best hardware sing -- everything set on high to very high at a minimum average of 55 to 60 FPS, in my opinion.

So I'm going to second UNKNOWN9122 and say go for a desktop. Or even better, build a desktop, if you don't really need mobility and aren't averse to doing some research. It doesn't have to be too expensive and, if you do it right, you're almost guaranteed a smoother-running, better-balanced machine. Nothing to it, really -- and you can get good help here.

Again, of course, it would all depend on your needs and preferences.

but not just this, but a GTX 660Ti on the desktop has 4x the power of a 660M, the lower clock speeds take a large hit.

 

[Dawn1113]

that is wierd!! I got 45 FPS on mainly High and I have a 5730... but with AA turned off

Yeah, I struggled with it for a while. Was stumped, really. With two 470s my framerates dropped to as low as 25 FPS in the middle of Zargabad. I couldn't turn without some absolutely awful stuttering on that map -- especially in the neighborhoods around the temple. This was especially true when there happened to be three or four attack helicopters overhead -- the Apaches, in particular. The Chinooks, too.

I tried everything that my friends over at the Arma website suggested: this and that driver, more RAM, no hyperthreading, install on an SSD, etc. Nothing worked. I gained a few FPS after the patch that included all the new memory allocators, though. My old rig got to as high as 80 FPS with the 470s and an i7 870, but the erratic framerates remained a constant source of frustration.

I'm sure you know how stunning the graphics on that game can be with AA, max or near max settings and smooth framerates -- almost photo-realistic at times. Once I experienced that game in its full, insane glory it became rather difficult for me to play on settings other than high to very high. So it was a bit of a let down when I had to lower settings on my previous setup. But, alas, I couldn't hit a consistent 60 or even 55 FPs -- and that was on a 1680x1050 monitor (75Hz, though). Perhaps the stock i7 870 was the bottleneck?

So you play that game? Always glad to bump into fellow Arma players outside of the Arma websites.

I haven't tried the DayZ mod yet. I should.

 

[Jad Chaar]

Yeah, I struggled with it for a while. Was stumped, really. With two 470s my framerates dropped to as low as 25 FPS in the middle of Zargabad. I couldn't turn without some absolutely awful stuttering on that map -- especially in the neighborhoods around the temple. This was especially true when there happened to be three or four attack helicopters overhead -- the Apaches, in particular. The Chinooks, too.

I tried everything that my friends over at the Arma website suggested: this and that driver, more RAM, no hyperthreading, install on an SSD, etc. Nothing worked. I gained a few FPS after the patch that included all the new memory allocators, though. My old rig got to as high as 80 FPS with the 470s and an i7 870, but the erratic framerates remained a constant source of frustration.

I'm sure you know how stunning the graphics on that game can be with AA, max or near max settings and smooth framerates -- almost photo-realistic at times. Once I experienced that game in its full, insane glory it became rather difficult for me to play on settings other than high to very high. So it was a bit of a let down when I had to lower settings on my previous setup. But, alas, I couldn't hit a consistent 60 or even 55 FPs -- and that was on a 1680x1050 monitor (75Hz, though). Perhaps the stock i7 870 was the bottleneck?

So you play that game? Always glad to bump into fellow Arma players outside of the Arma websites.

I haven't tried the DayZ mod yet. I should.

yeah haha, my clan bought it for me. I played arma 1 loved it, but arma 2 demo didnt really attract me, so my clan bought me arma 2 for dayz. no way the 870 is a bottleneck, I have a i7 740QM and I am fine