exThreads

[alef]

There is a little table (http://dev-heaven.net/projects/cis/wiki/1_06_BETA) at A2CIT that should help understand this new parameter introduced since 70256: Geo and Tex require File to work, this has been explained by Suma somewhere here. File just enables the multithreaded operations on file, that is required by the other two.
+---+---+---+----+
| N |Geo|Tex|File|
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 5 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 7 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
+---+---+---+----+
Are Geo and Tex additional threads scheduled on different cores outside the main rendering loop?
This would mean that while rendering in the main threads, a Geo or Tex thread can read or reallocate resources. It's an "offload" from the main loop, which in turn run faster.
Sometimes you probably see a gray wall, but in the meantime, the Tex thread loads the wall texture.
How all this fits in the hybrid approach (http://www.bistudio.com/developers-blog/real-virtuality-going-multicore_en.html) for multithreaded rendering?
How arma2server.exe is affected?
What really does File used alone (-exThreads=1)?

[Suma]

Are Geo and Tex additional threads scheduled on different cores outside the main rendering loop?

When multiple threads are running at the same time, OS is scheduling them on different cores. As Geo and Tex loading (both done by the same thread) is running at the same time with the main rendering loop, the answer is yes, they are.


How all this fits in the hybrid approach for multithreaded rendering?

There is one more thread which is sometimes doing a work now, therefore additional cores get more work to do.


How arma2server.exe is affected?

Geo and Tex loading is not done on the dedicated server at all. Dedicated thread for file operations may cause a difference, but the difference can be positive or negative depending on a particular situation.


What really does File used alone (-exThreads=1)?

All file operations go though a dedicated thread. This offloads some processing from the main thread, however it adds some overhead at the same time. The reason why threaded file ops were implemented was to serve as a basement for other threads ops. Again, when used alone, there can be a difference, but it can be for good or bad depending on situation.

[ViperMaul]

As the server handles a lot of processing like AI and other things for example, a COOP mission against 200 - 250 AI using DAC 3.0 or even conventional means, I would hope some of these excellent client side performance improvements would make there way to the server side eventually someday.

[mr.g-c]

As the server handles a lot of processing like AI and other things for example, a COOP mission against 200 - 250 AI using DAC 3.0 or even conventional means, I would hope some of these excellent client side performance improvements would make there way to the server side eventually someday.
I support this idea very much.... if multi threading could be optimized for Dedicated-Servers too, this would be even more awesome :) ;)

[DBGB]

Hi

Could it be possible to thread the AI even more such that each faction (incl. civilian / wildlife) get's it's own 'local' thread that only interacts with the other threads when some interaction between the agents is required.

I am imagining that clustering of AI like this could be done (down to a single 'agent' (solder/animal/vehichle etc.)) could be distributed onto real physical cpu cores that was idle or underutilized.

For example when playing the Warfare MP mission in SP mode I have no interaction with the enemy faction untill we clash, which can take a long while if we start far apart.

Instead both factions are fighting the 'local' village patriots. If I had 4 unused physcial cores, those could be used to 'battle it' out without interfering with other game threads untill AI agent's involved, they get so 'close' as to require 'computation' of actions.

Maybe this is clustering of AI is already 'happening'

I have a dual Opteron setup and most of the times I total a maximum of 33 % total CPU time = maxing 2 out of 8 physical cores.

[megagoth1702]

Guys I am new to all this and wonder.

I still dont quiet understand how all this works...
I have a Quadcore and now I have the possibility to put different tasks on different cores instead of one?

I would love any explanation since I want to understand this...

Thank you a lot in advance!

[Dwarden]

Guys I am new to all this and wonder.

I still dont quiet understand how all this works...
I have a Quadcore and now I have the possibility to put different tasks on different cores instead of one?

I would love any explanation since I want to understand this...

Thank you a lot in advance!


You don't need to do anything since last beta build(s)

when game detect your quadcore it automatically uses -cpuCount=4 and -exThreads=7

so unless You have some technical issues and want to lower these values there is no point to bother

[megagoth1702]

Thank you very much!

So it uses exThreads=7 even without having it in the end of the shortcut? Internally?

I read about setting -cpuCount=4 manually because of detection problems, since then I have it in my shortcut. Can I remove it now? Or can I just let it stay?

[otreblA_SNAKE_[ITA]]

You don't need to do anything since last beta build(s)

when game detect your quadcore it automatically uses -cpuCount=4 and -exThreads=7

so unless You have some technical issues and want to lower these values there is no point to bother

What about dual core processors?

[OrdeaL]

;1654477']What about dual core processors?

Default exThreads=0 and -cpuCount=2 for Duel Cores.

[otreblA_SNAKE_[ITA]]

ok thanks

[Turin Turambar]

I still think the default exThreads should be 3 for Dual Cores. At least in my machine (E6850) is better (2 fps more in avg, avg min, and 3 fps more in min).

[johncage]

i have a quad core with 8 virtual cores with hyper threading enabled. what ex thread setting should i use?

[bensdale]

since Patch 1.07 default is cpucount 4 and exthreads 7 (for quadcore CPU e.g. I7 CPU)

[johncage]

alright thanks

[Beagle]

I second the statement with exThreads=3 and better, more fluid performance with dual cores.

[Stilton]

What would be the best values for a triplecore?

And also, do we even need to change these values?
I mean this is a sticky thread but the first post seems to be all technical lingo and not much relevant information for your 'average user' who just wants to know...


What does this have to do with me/ How can i use this to improve performance.

[Leopardi]

What's default values for hexacores in 1.07?

[Dwarden]

What's default values for hexacores in 1.07?

they same as for quadcores so -cpuCount=4 and -exThreads=7
so i suggest You use -cpuCount=6

[1in1class]

Err i have know idea whats going on with the lag issue in SP and the editor. I have an Duo CPU 3.00GHz. By doing a cpuCount in OA this helps out the lag issue? Im not an CPU tech and i dont know alot about the CPU ways but, i know my OA is running very laggy in the SP game and the editor. ArmA 2 runs very good in SP and editor no lag issues like in OA. Im very confused about whats going on with OA and all this cpuCount stuff. Nothing is said about an Duo CPU, how would i fix the lag issue? Well its OA its self! BI needs to fix the big issue with the lag skipping in the game, hope this comes soon as for the game is unplayable.

[Shataan]

I have a 6 core 1090T BE, and am using -cpuCount=6 in the launch line. Do I need to add -exThreads=5? Thx.

[MavericK96]

I have a 6 core 1090T BE, and am using -cpuCount=6 in the launch line. Do I need to add -exThreads=5? Thx.

Default should automatically be exThreads=7 for you, and I would probably leave it at that.

[ArmedBoy]

Hi, i got a Q9650, should i set parameters like cpuCount or exThreads?

[bensdale]

only ArmA II:
-use ArmA II full patch 1.07 (auto detect exThreads and CpuCount)
http://www.arma2.com/support/updates/folder.html?lang=en

Arma II + OA (combined arms) or only OA
-use the last beta patch (auto detect exThreads and CpuCount)*
http://www.arma2.com/beta-patch.php


*since the first OA beta patch build 71900 is exThreads and CpuCount auto detect. however should take the newest version for more bug fixes and improfements ;)

[Rexxenexx]

Suma, is there any thread optimizations/switches slated for arma2server.exe?

[Mandrake5]

Suma, is there any thread optimizations/switches slated for arma2server.exe?

I'd like to know this as well. My single-core remote server keeps crashing during large Warfare missions (hundreds of AI), when I told my hosting company they assigned a second core to my server to try to help AI computations, but if arma2oaserver.exe can only utilise 1 core then I guess this was a waste of time?

[Zothen]

Ive never heard that the arma server can only utilise 1 core.... How did you get this idea??

[MadDogX]

Ive never heard that the arma server can only utilise 1 core.... How did you get this idea??
The server definitely uses multiple cores. Especially in the latest patches, the dedi server was optimized for quad cores, as mentioned in one of Maruks posts.

[zGuba]

My CPU is well below minimum requirements - 2GHz AMD Athlon 64 X2, just enough for Notepad++ and GIMP.

I have experienced an interesting issue while using -exThreads=7 (yes, I'm that stubborn). When many different models are present ingame, some of them always stay in lowest Resolution LODs. Oddly enough, empty RPG-7 model might be shown correctly, while loaded RPG-7 model that consists of proxy to the same model as previous and proxy to rocket grenade stays in lowest LoD and never gets loaded, no matter of ViewPilot and such extra LoDs.

I wouldn't have reported this if I witnessed this behaviour in ArmA2 1.07.

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/12296

[Dwarden]

that's because the engine overloads the cpu so threads stall ...
please try drop the value to 5 or 3

yet ofcourse it might be another issue

[prysk]

so in curent version of OA i dont need to put cpucount and exthread anymore?

thx

[@ST]

If you have a quad core no, otherwise use cpu count (i.e. 2, 3 or 6).

[Ripsaw5165]

Can there be added a new value that threads geometry and textures but not files, or must files always be threaded with either geo and/or tex due to a need in the coding?

[Spayker]

What is the max cpucount of arma 2? Does arma 2 can use 16 cpu's?

[Suma]

ArmA 2 can use up to 31 cores in theory, but experiments have shown that with most scenes the gain above 4 cores is small and above 8 cores unmeasurable.

The explanation is Amdahl's law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdahl's_law) - only parts of the application is using all cores. See Real Virtuality Going Multicore blog (http://www.bistudio.com/index.php/company/developers-blog/91-real-virtuality-going-multicore).

---------- Post added at 13:58 ---------- Previous post was at 13:54 ----------

In build 76122 and newer the default for dualcores will be changed to -exThreads=3 based on user feedback.

We have also changed the cpu core detection, therefore depending on how many logical cpus are present, default -cpuCount values will be as follows:

1 1
...
6 6
7 7
8 4
9 4
10 5
11 5
12 6
13 6
14 7
....

Some day hopefully we will find a time to provide a proper HT detection, but until then I think the above provides quite reasonable default settings.

[EricFr]

What has changed in the engine after 74630 beta, you've spent time in finding "a solution".
For me with a dualcore exthreads = 7 is the Best.

[Dwarden]

EricFR remember that default for dualcore was 0 until b76122 and now will be 3

yet there are several reasons why 5 or 7 might work for You and some others with dualcores

1. fast CPU (lot of ops / cycle) usually 3.6/4 GHz or more
2. lot of L1/L2/L3 cache compared to cheap dualcores
3. Fast system in overall (fast FSB, fast memory transfers, low latency memory, fast GPU-CPU and CPU-GPU ops etc)

all these will play reason why sometimes some dualcore is good or better than some slow / cheap quadcores ...

ofcourse no dualcore will match way faster and newer quadcore or better

[EricFr]

I know all this, but why until beta 74630 exthreads=0 or no sartup parameters worked fine and after 74630 i have to put exthreads=7, something has changed in the engine but nothing in my hardware

[vasmkd]

I have a dualcore E8400 @<hidden> stock speed of 3GHz (specs on signature)
What would u guyz recommend i have my exthreads on for starters since iv'e never played with this?
Is it best i just type -exThreads=? in config file? The ? ofcourse been 1,3,5,7 etc

[Old_Painless]

I've got an Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550. What would you recommend for exThreads setting? Most advice I come across relates to dual-core, not quads like mine.

Cheers,
OP

[Fruity_Rudy]

I've got an Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550. What would you recommend for exThreads setting? Most advice I come across relates to dual-core, not quads like mine.

Cheers,
OP

Default for quad should be =7 but you can try out what gives you best performance.
On the first page of this thread you see the table with the exThreads=n. There you can see which thread is doing what..

---------- Post added at 01:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:35 PM ----------



Is it best i just type -exThreads=? in config file? The ? ofcourse been 1,3,5,7 etc

Not in the config file, in the command line of the .exe of arma2, oa or combined operations. i don't know if you're using an arma-launcher, but you have to edit the command line to -exThreads=n (n=1,3,5,7)

Understood?

Dismissed...

[vasmkd]

Yes using ARMA II launcher. I'll just at it to the target line on the exe's for OA and ARMA2

[=[A*C]=NicO]

Here is what I posted about the latest beta patch :
Hi everyone,
I'm a member of the French team Air Commando =[A*C]=.

So let's talk about performance : since the release of the 1.55 patch, we've been really angry towards Bohemia since our client side part of the game has became quite unplayable, with many FPS drops and a real loss in reactivity). We've tried many tweaks, we lowered our graphic specs, deleted the CFG, but we couldn't get the smoothness of the 1.54. Until yesterday.

I own a core2duo 6400 and an ATI 4890 (not bleeding edge I admit, but powerfull enough for many things) as a lot of my teammates, and totally lost, I tried the -exThreads=7 option, as a last try before giving up. Although it is not recommanded on a dual core, that was my only remaining option. And guess what ? I was running the 1.55 on a 15 FPS basis with many drops, and know after a few tests, I can say that it is now twice the previous value : 25-30 FPS (with even 60 sometimes !!! and for the lowest 15-20 in a few zones). It is WAY MORE ACCEPTABLE THAN BEFORE. My game is now playable again!

What I understood after a few readings is that -exThreads=7 cannot be handled by some low end dual core, but the 6400 is powerfull enough to cope with that. Other people who tried it with me told me the same, huge gain in smoothness, and in some cases in FPS too.

Does any dual core owner can confirm this?

[Fruity_Rudy]

I can confirm, that it doesn't matter which exThreads i use, i don't have the performance like on 1.54..
and that makes me angry

fyi, i have E8500 and it was great on 1.54 ..since texture popping, things are only screwed up...

[vasmkd]

@<hidden> Rudy
What are ur full system specs?
And drivers for video card etc

Is ur HDR set to normal, high or highest in the video options?

[Suma]

I can confirm, that it doesn't matter which exThreads i use, i don't have the performance like on 1.54..
and that makes me angry

fyi, i have E8500 and it was great on 1.54 ..since texture popping, things are only screwed up...

I am sorry for this and I will do my best to identify the issue. That said, things like this are often hard to solve. Often a seemingly innocent chance causes unexpected results in rare situations. While 1.55 was definitely a lot worse than 1.54 on many systems, so far I was unable to reproduce this issue with 1.56, which makes solving it a lot harder.

[Fruity_Rudy]

It's ok, i will find a solution for myself..

[Tom1]

my 6x cpu (1090T) (AMD) is only letting me play wth all settings on normal on 1920x1080 res (100% 3d res), which is the same as before i upgraded from my dual core, here is an example of my command line: arma2OA.exe" -cpuCount=6 -mod=@<hidden>;@<hidden>;@<hidden>; (etc etc), what does 'exthreads=7' do and should i use it?

[Ripsaw5165]

exthreads = 7 sets threading accross 4 cores.

[DMarkwick]

exthreads = 7 sets threading accross 4 cores.

Isn't it the case that, with the recent patches, it's no longer necessary?

[NoBrainer]

correct, but do it anyway...

[3DArtist]

The funniest thing about arma is that , it doesn`t matter wich pc you`ve got i`ve build a very custom pc with 48gb ram on board 2x Xeon 5620e processors (16 threads in total) 2x gtx580`s in sli + gtx480 for physx. Btw all the specs you will find in my signature below.
Fraps is showing me a constant fps between 19-20 fps , on my beast machine and it really doesn`t matter on what specs you play i`ve tried to set the specs on very low and very high , fraps just keep on showing me fps between 19-20.
About ingame arma 2 benchmark i don`t even wanna talk , this benchmark is nuts in my opinion, it shows me an average of 2 fps .YES 2 fps WTF by the end of the test. Arma 2 mark gave me better results with a total score of 238,558 points.

Lets say there is no way to find out what fps you have in game , i use exThreads=7 and cpucount=16 , the geometry loads quicker and everything runs fine (all on very high settings) between view distances 1000-3500 soon as i go above 3500 meters game becomes unplayable.
Althought i can run a dedicated server on my machine and at the same time playing on it.
Conclusion arma 2 is a wierd game , i still can`t figure out what performance can deliver my pc in this game.Arma 2 is the first game that gave me same fps on verylow/veryhigh settings.

[JumpingHubert]

possibly too exotic rig :D

[Mr. Charles]

More like the threads wouldn't be spread evenly on all your cores:

http://www.bistudio.com/index.php/company/developers-blog/91-real-virtuality-going-multicore

[Parrotnut]

Lets say there is no way to find out what fps you have in game , i use exThreads=7 and cpucount=16 , the geometry loads quicker and everything runs fine (all on very high settings) between view distances 1000-3500 soon as i go above 3500 meters game becomes unplayable.
Althought i can run a dedicated server on my machine and at the same time playing on it.
Conclusion arma 2 is a wierd game , i still can`t figure out what performance can deliver my pc in this game.Arma 2 is the first game that gave me same fps on verylow/veryhigh settings.

Nice system you have there :omg:
I think 1 of your 16 Cores is running at 100% and the other 15 are waiting for the first core to finish his job.
That one Core is “only'” running at 2,4GHz, so I think it doesn’t matter how much cores you have if they all have to wait for the first core.
It would be ideal if you could overclock only one core, that would be awesome...
And with 2x 580GTX in SLI you can turn on all the eye candy, but for the rest they still have to wait for the first core to finish

[Ripsaw5165]

3DArtist, I hear NASA is looking to lease some machine power for planning a mission to Mars. You should contact them, you might make some money with that beast.
Nice system. Do the street lights in your neighborhood dim when you fire that thing up?... ;)

[Dwarden]

i see SLI in his signature ... ;)
anyway his machine while being approx 2+N times faster than mine
produce still 2+N times lower FPS than mine

life is irony i know :)

[Parrotnut]

@<hidden>

Maybe you can try to disable Hyper-threading in your BIOS, could help with a better work load balance of the 8 Cores.

[3DArtist]

i see SLI in his signature ... ;)
anyway his machine while being approx 2+N times faster than mine
produce still 2+N times lower FPS than mine

life is irony i know :)

It shows me 20 fps ,but the game self feels smooth, like 40 fps or more, the thing is i can`t figure out what fps i have on my machine.
And task manager shows me while playing arma that 12 of my threads are loaded, not fully but they are processing something between 20% and 100%.

[3DArtist]

3DArtist, I hear NASA is looking to lease some machine power for planning a mission to Mars. You should contact them, you might make some money with that beast.
Nice system. Do the street lights in your neighborhood dim when you fire that thing up?... ;)

Lol actually if i pull out stekker and plug it back abit later , my safety electricity switch shots down the electrycity in my flat , so have to switch it on manually :) My power supply need lot of power on cold boot , so i prefer warm booting :) Then everything starts smooth :)

[zapat]

Output of a system is defined by the weakest link.
Which is a 2.4Ghz CPU core, causing bottleneck.

A2 is not that Gpu hungry, but needs CPU speed with some missions: missions that calculate a lot iof AI in a single thread. Problem is IMHO that this calculation cannot use more than one thread.

So half of your machine is idle, core calculating geometry, and textures are on like some%, GFX is at some% load, and a single core wants more than 100%, if I know ARMA well enough.
What FPS do you get eg. in the editor?

[PuFu]

for an i7 970(6 core, 12 threads), recommended threads is...?

[strongbird]

and for an I7 870? quad core

[kklownboy]

for an i7 970(6 core, 12 threads), recommended threads is...?There can only be 7 threads used by the engine and the 5,6 and 7 threads are corner cases anyways. Running the extra 6 VCs maybe a hindrance with your graphic card while playing the game?

[NeMeSiS]

There can only be 7 threads used by the engine

The 'ex' in exThreads stands for 'extra' AFAIK. ;)

[PuFu]

i tried cpuCount=6 with exThreads 5, 6 and 7 with no difference whatsoever.
turning the hyperThreading from bios is not an option since it is used by most of the professional software and rendering engines i use.

the question was for ppl also running 6 cores i7/xeons with ht on

[Celery]

What's the default exThreads for a triple core?

[mrcash2009]

I have a dual core AMD 6000+ 3.1 gig chip (I know ... getting on a bit) and I notice since defaulting to exThreads=3 (XP 32 bit) my loading times were twice as long, taking sometimes 2 minuted to enter into a mission, after that all was well though.

I forced it back to exThread=0 to test and now things are back to what I pretty much have been used to since I got the game in terms of loading. Unsure why im effected so much with load times but it was ridiculously slow set to 3. I haven't with latest betas noticed much choppiness without it set to 3 so I will stick to that for now.

[kklownboy]

i tried cpuCount=6 with exThreads 5, 6 and 7 with no difference whatsoever.
turning the hyperThreading from bios is not an option since it is used by most of the professional software and rendering engines i use.

the question was for ppl also running 6 cores i7/xeons with ht on I figured as much with your work. I bet the engine defaults to what it needs no matter how many more cores you have after 4 real cores (max 7).

---------- Post added at 09:34 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:30 AM ----------


I have a dual core AMD 6000+ 3.1 gig chip (I know ... getting on a bit) and I notice since defaulting to exThreads=3 (XP 32 bit) my loading times were twice as long, taking sometimes 2 minuted to enter into a mission, after that all was well though.

I forced it back to exThread=0 to test and now things are back to what I pretty much have been used to since I got the game in terms of loading. Unsure why im effected so much with load times but it was ridiculously slow set to 3. I haven't with latest betas noticed much choppiness without it set to 3 so I will stick to that for now. is "exThread=0" even a value? It would be a default set up for 3 core if "0" wasn't.


Hmmm i guess it is a real value;http://forums.bistudio.com/showpost.php?p=1655138&postcount=10

First page.

[OrdeaL]

Yes but with one of the latest patchs it has been changed so that dual cores default at exThreads=3 now instead of 0. But some people with dual cores might find it running better by putting exThreads=0 instead :rolleyes:


In build 76122 and newer the default for dualcores will be changed to -exThreads=3 based on user feedback.

[NeMeSiS]

i tried cpuCount=6 with exThreads 5, 6 and 7 with no difference whatsoever.
turning the hyperThreading from bios is not an option since it is used by most of the professional software and rendering engines i use.

the question was for ppl also running 6 cores i7/xeons with ht on

There is no 6 (http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma2:_Startup_Parameters#exThreads). ;)

[mrcash2009]

Yes but with one of the latest patchs it has been changed so that dual cores default at exThreads=3 now instead of 0. But some people with dual cores might find it running better by putting exThreads=0 instead :rolleyes:

Indeed, and due to loading times (for me) I found that out recently. It was that post on the first page that gave me the answer I needed as I wasn't sure what pre =3 default patches were using previous to it by default.

I have set it to =0 and lowered my memory for graphics (GTX260 896) to "high" .. also had some general sluggishness in xp32 with Net framework 4.0 so I removed that back to 3.5, all things considered its back to accepted speed & feel and loading times.

Might as well note that ingame in not seeing much FPS difference =3 or =0 now, no micro stutter etc. But the loading times of missions and maps were double the time and more recently with =3 setting.

[NiKuTa]

What setting should i use with my i5 660 CPU?
He have 2 cores + 2 virtual cores.

[NiKuTa]

Any help ?

[MadDogX]

What setting should i use with my i5 660 CPU?
He have 2 cores + 2 virtual cores.

Try this:


-cpuCount=2 -exThreads=5

CPU count at two because Arma 2 doesn't like virtual cores.

Not sure about the exThreads value though. Some dual core users say 7 works fine, others go with something lower. Note that the values 0, 3, 5 and 7 are the only ones that really make any sense here. I would suggest trying all of them out and seeing which one works best for you.

[domiS]

Im unsure of how to set up my game aswell.
I also got a 970 6 cores with HT enabled, which i need to be on.
Any settings that is important that i have to change?

thx

[Suma]

Im unsure of how to set up my game aswell.
I also got a 970 6 cores with HT enabled, which i need to be on.
Any settings that is important that i have to change?


To anybody asking question like this: any general rules I could provide you with are already programmed in the game and the game will select the "general best" value for you.

In your case the default values will be:


-cpuCount=6 -exThreads=7
Those values are considered best for a configuration like yours, if they were not, we would change the rules so that different values are selected. The possibility to override is there to cover any possible unexpected configurations - in such cases it is best to try different values and see which runs best, which is something nobody can do without having access to your system. The other values you might want to try as possible reasonable alternatives could be various combinations of -cpuCount=4 or 6 or 8 and -exThreads=0 or 3 or 5 or 7.

[TeAcH]

Question, according to CPU-Z my QX6850 quad core has 4 threads. Why then does the game seem to run better on 7 threads then say 5? And I dont think there is a setting for 4 threads is there?

[.kju [PvPscene]]

BIKI: exThreads (http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma2:_Startup_Parameters#exThreads)

[xx-LSD-xx]

To anybody asking question like this: any general rules I could provide you with are already programmed in the game and the game will select the "general best" value for you.

In your case the default values will be:


-cpuCount=6 -exThreads=7
Those values are considered best for a configuration like yours, if they were not, we would change the rules so that different values are selected. The possibility to override is there to cover any possible unexpected configurations - in such cases it is best to try different values and see which runs best, which is something nobody can do without having access to your system. The other values you might want to try as possible reasonable alternatives could be various combinations of -cpuCount=4 or 6 or 8 and -exThreads=0 or 3 or 5 or 7.

I have mine set at -cpuCount=4 -exThreads=7 for my quad i7 . My game runs smooth as silk. No complaints

[Brute]

One of the most appealing features of ArmA II is the large scale warfare, which simply isn't reaching anywhere near it's potential because, for some reason, all AI related operations are restricted to one core. Can this please be changed? If AI operations were spread over multiple cores we might actually be able to see servers with 750+ AI on them with very little lag.

[Freakshow2112]

Quick question. I recently upgraded my system and I feel that I should be getting more performance out of this game than I am. I know it's bad optimization and stuff but would any of these fixes work for me or do I just need to upgrade...again. My rig;

Intel E5400 Quad core 2.3
Nvidia GeForce GTX 460
6 gigs ram

Any help would be appreciated. Thanks ^^

[MadDogX]

Quick question. I recently upgraded my system and I feel that I should be getting more performance out of this game than I am. I know it's bad optimization and stuff but would any of these fixes work for me or do I just need to upgrade...again. My rig;

Intel E5400 Quad core 2.3
Nvidia GeForce GTX 460
6 gigs ram

Any help would be appreciated. Thanks ^^
That Intel E5400 processor is bottlenecking your system. Btw. it's not a quad core, it's a dual core.

You definitely need a faster CPU.

[Freakshow2112]

Could you clarify about not being a quad? I'm looking at it now and I am seeing four cores. Not to mention I can max Bad Company 2 dx 11 at 1920x1080. I couldn't do that on my old dual 2.8 o.O

*edit* My bad man. I was thinking about my old cpu. I have a Q8200 right now. I thought something didn't sound right about that e5400 ha.

[MadDogX]

Could you clarify about not being a quad? I'm looking at it now and I am seeing four cores. Not to mention I can max Bad Company 2 dx 11 at 1920x1080. I couldn't do that on my old dual 2.8 o.O

*edit* My bad man. I was thinking about my old cpu. I have a Q8200 right now. I thought something didn't sound right about that e5400 ha.
Aha, okay that's cleared that up. :)

As for tweaking performance, exThreads should usually be autodetected and set to the best value for your system (normally 7). You could try lowering it, but I think it's unlikely that you'll see any major improvements.

You'll probably be better off playing with the graphics settings a bit. Post your advanced visual settings in this thread (http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=85124&page=120), and you will be helped with the tweaking. ;)

I would also recommend beta build 79600 for best performance.

[Freakshow2112]

Here are my current settings. I just don't understand it. I've come to a reasonable fps I can play at but still. I don't know what's making it slowdown. I see peoples videos on Youtube running great :(
Texture: High
Video: Default
AF: Normal
AA: Off
Terrain: Low
Objects: High
Shadows: High
Post Proc: Off
Both res at 1920x1080

[Black Russian]

I have Arma 2 Combined Operations and haven't played Vanilla Arma 2 since quite some time but because of the Free version I tried it and was impressed that unlike CO all cores were used and the cpu usage of every core was nearly the same around 40-60% and never reached 100%.

I have an i2500k with 4.6 GHz and if I play CO one core uses nearly 100% and all others are around 10%. This happens for nearly every mission I play.
I thought it was engine specific unless I have played Arma 2 Vanilla.

My operating system is Windows 7 64 and I have also tried the current Beta with the same result.

Can anybody confirm this behavior? Shouldn't the newer Arrowhead engine scale better?

[NoBrainer]

It's the same engine.
Sure you don't have write protection on you arma2oa.cfg or use some startup parameter that limits you??

[Black Russian]

I don't think so since both are run with admin rights.

A developer has mentioned in another thread that the engines are different. Arrowhead is more advance than Arma 2 Vanilla. For example the plants look better in OA, there are flares and so on.

So if you play CO all your cores have a similar cpu usage?

The difference between the "main thread" wasn't as severe when I had a Q6600 with 3 GHz. That's why I thought that the additional threads don't need so much calculation time but Arma 2 proved this theory wrong.

I would post some screenshots or more data if you tell me which one and how to post it.

I have also tried to use different exthreads and cpucount options with Arrowhead without success.

I will try to move my profile today to make sure that this wasn't the problem.

[NoBrainer]

Sorry Black...
My reading abilities that is way of....

But, my 4 cores don't use tha same amount, but they are somewhat similar.
No core goes to 100% and I turned HT off in the BIOS and no "turbo", just general OC.

But as I said, my reading abilities is not top notch...

:D

[takealready]

Amazing how I've been playing this game since 2009 and just now I find out about this.

On my Gateway p7805u FX gaming laptop p8400 2.26ghz dual core/ 9800m GTS (at stock speeds):

before using -exThreads=3 -cpucount=2
fps on bechmark 1 = 25


after using -exThreads=3 -cpucount=2
fps on bechmark 1 = 32

:yay::bounce3::eek::D

I've noticed that the missions I've created (especially my largest one, which is a beach landing assault) loads much faster. Their is also no stuttering or a long pause when I'm driving quickly through a map in a car.

I haven't tried this out on my gaming desktop (AMD 940 Black edition 3.0ghz + 8600 GTS SLI), :mad: it's still in storage.

anyway...thank you for this. I'm not feeling brave enough to test it out with other "-exThreads=" settings.

[Suma]

Amazing how I've been playing this game since 2009 and just now I find out about this.

On my Gateway p7805u FX gaming laptop p8400 2.26ghz dual core/ 9800m GTS (at stock speeds):

before using -exThreads=3 -cpucount=2
fps on bechmark 1 = 25


after using -exThreads=3 -cpucount=2
fps on bechmark 1 = 32


Thanks for sharing your experience. Still, what you write sound a bit strange, as -exThreads=3 -cpucount=2 should be the default for dual cores since build 76122. I would like to understand more about what is happening here. Are the results repeatable? What is the exact CPU model you have?

[takealready]

Thanks for sharing your experience. Still, what you write sound a bit strange, as -exThreads=3 -cpucount=2 should be the default for dual cores since build 76122. I would like to understand more about what is happening here. Are the results repeatable? What is the exact CPU model you have?

It's strange for me too. I have an Intel P8400
Link to spec sheet (http://ark.intel.com/products/35569/Intel-Core2-Duo-Processor-P8400-%283M-Cache-2_26-GHz-1066-MHz-FSB%29)
everything loads faster. I still haven't updated my nvidia drivers (I'm still using 275.33 for Win7 x64).

My gaming Laptop is a Gateway P-7805u (with the 1440x900 screen and a 9800m GTS GPU).

[MadDogX]

Is there any way to find out which cpuCount and exThreads values are actually set by default, if they're not specified in the command line? :)

Of course we know what they should be, but cases like this one would seem to indicate that the autodetection may not be flawless.

[kklownboy]

I would think that setting the cmd, has over taking the laptop's power-saving/C-state. Why the .exe doesnt do this is odd.

Realtemp, and Process Explorer can help you see the threads and states, even set them in windows.

[CHB68]

Okay, and what should be set on a dedicated Server to get max performance ? Tried so many different settings w/o any noticeable effects and unfortunately I'm totally confused now..... :confused: Server is powered by an I7 920@<hidden> and 8GB RAM.

Thank you very much... :)

[NoBrainer]

with the 920 you need to turn up the GHz....

[CHB68]

with the 920 you need to turn up the GHz....

...sure, but that was not the question. Thank you anyway. :)

[NoBrainer]

But you get more or less "best" from default.
You don't have to set anything if not to make sure then.

I have not used -exthreads and -cpuCount for a long time due to the performance with default settings.
I won't make any test before v1.60 ether, since the performance is ok right now.

Of course there are other options to set, but you asked for -exthreads, which I don't see any use of if you don't set -cpuCount.
Both or nothing was best for our servers and clients when we tested earlier this year.

Hyperthreading or multithreading is of course turned off. Not sure if 920 has that.