Yes, you can play it.
Yes, you can play it.
Fps in single-player (around 30) should be fine, but expect 5-10 fps in multiplayer depending on the CPU. The i7 will help a lot.
The 390 is a strong card, and you might be able to reach around 40 FPS with it. The issue is that Arma III is really optimized, so you won’t see extremely high frames. EDIT – For clarity, I’m not a player of Arma III, so I’m unfamiliar. My friend plays it and reports getting solid frames with his 4770k/GTX960 setup. You should expect smooth 50-60 FPS with those configurations.
No one can play this game at full speed, as no system can consistently provide a perfect 60. The problem lies in the game's design rather than your hardware. On Reddit, it's mostly a single discussion thread, and the complexity of simulation and rendering takes up most of the time and performance. Even a decent GPU can't compensate for a CPU that's not overclocked, especially when using extreme cooling methods. It's not your machine—it's the game itself.
Achieving steady 60 fps in Arma 3 is extremely challenging, even with powerful hardware like three Titan Xs. It's not feasible.
That's incorrect. My brother, who owns an A8 5600K, can play Arma 3 in multiplayer perfectly. I've seen too many exaggerated claims about Arma 3's performance. Sure, the game isn't perfect, but it's not that bad. The main issues with lag on servers are the mission design, server speed, and many scripts running simultaneously. Multiplayer is always the most CPU-intensive. AI processing happens on the server in multiplayer, while your PC manages the AI in singleplayer.