Performance Issue

[ODDDNAME]

Just got my copy of the czech version of this game and i noticed it looks absolutely stunning.
But when foilage comes into the view it has a tendency to decrease fps, then suddenly increase after some time, and this repeats all the time, even if running arund with the same foilage in view.

The game is Armed Assault =)

[Amalka]

Try to set 640x480 with no anti-aliasing and low details. You'll be then able to even move in the woods...

Sad to say that we all are experiencing the same problem. Maybe the game was intended to be published first in 2009?

http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif

[ODDDNAME]

Try to set 640x480 with no anti-aliasing and low details. You'll be then able to even move in the woods...

Sad to say that we all are experiencing the same problem. Maybe the game was intended to be published first in 2009?

http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif
Oddly enough it isnt constant =)
So it seems like the foilage might need some tweaking? =)

[Edge]

ODDNAME, please stick to the proper part of the forums. These parts are Czech-speaking, you'd have better chance to get a reply in English section.

Moving topic.

[Sickboy]

I guess i'm gonna make a standard post of this one:

Did you upgrade all drivers in your system of the vital components? (CPU, Chipset, VGA, Sound)
Did you do a check on virusses and spyware and are sure that you are 100% clean?
Did you try changing the Quality Preference Slider in all different modes??? AFAIK this setting is the same as ofp's: Quality & FPS Slider... Sertting this to high/very high will decrease fps while giving a better image quality (higher lod), while medium and lower will increase fps but costs image quality (lower lod).
Do you have too many background programs running that use cpu and or memory? (Don't mind those 0,0001% usage programs... but programs like norton antivirus are cpu and memory hog!&#33http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
Did you try fiddling with all settings, different resolutions, different quality settings? Try 1024x768
Did you defragment your harddrive(s) yet?
Does your system have the minimum requirements?
Do you have enough available Memory and Virtual Memory (It's not increasing the size while ur playing I hope?? Try to set it high, like 2048mb)



Try to set 640x480 with no anti-aliasing and low details. You'll be then able to even move in the woods...

Sad to say that we all are experiencing the same problem. Maybe the game was intended to be published first in 2009?I'm sorry, but I dont have this problem. My pc is even 2 years old, but it runs like a charm... Why? Because I carefully decide which hardware I put in and take proper hardware instead of the cheapest of the cheapest and expect that I can run everything super detail high high high.
Besides, most ppl that are having trouble, don't have their drivers up2date, should go to a PC docter and clean their pc, remove the 6000 tools they have installed to 'optimize' their pc and use some common sence http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif

Besides, this is Armed Assault, 1200meters of pretty nice countryside, towns, tanks, units, and so on and so on, just don't expect it to run on medium-high on a system that was already budget 2 years ago.. Ppl expect way too much, have no clue how such game can ask for much power etc. etc. But this is their wake up call; You can't drive 300 km/h with a standard lada, but you can with a proper BMW sports car...

Anyway...they gonna optimize the game along the way im sure of it, but don't expect to run it on your P133, 64mb ram, 8mb videocard http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif

ps; forget about anti-aliasing above 1024x768 with cards under Geforce 6800/Radeon X800  with at least 256mb http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif

[Ti0n3r]

I have this problem too. ArmA runs great in 640x480 with most settings on normal (shadows disabled), but if I get too close to trees or bushed the FPS will sink like a stone.

I don't think this is possible to avoid really http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/huh.gif

[Dudester]

Ok i am just wondering if Morphicon are sure they can fix the issues with the hotfix, and does anyone know where i will get this hotfix from once its out. I must say i am more then disappointed that the German version has these issues.

[Sgt_Eversmann]

I think you will find the hotfix on armedassault.info, here in the forums and on the morphicon forums once it's out.

http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif

[Placebo]

Moving to ArmA TS.

[Smiley_ie]

Try to set 640x480 with no anti-aliasing and low details. You'll be then able to even move in the woods...

Sad to say that we all are experiencing the same problem. Maybe the game was intended to be published first in 2009?

http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif
I think your right.
4600 x 2. 2 gig. X1950XTX and it runs like an Amiga 500.

[Sgt_Eversmann]

it's not the hardware,
it's the games engine which "sucks" performancewise.
ArmA is looking so nice but it kinda has big problems with textures and stuff...
wish it would run like HL˛...no don't complain, I don't compare the 2 games because you can't...but HL˛ graphics are very flexible and powerful. looks like BIS screwed sth up http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/sad_o.gif
hopefully they can improve performance and all in patches.
(and hopefully the morphiconhotfix will be available very fast http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif )

[SniperAndy]

Ok i am just wondering if Morphicon are sure they can fix the issues with the hotfix, and does anyone know where i will get this hotfix from once its out. I must say i am more then disappointed that the German version has these issues.
the fix was ready last night already. However, they found another minor bug and they are adding that at the moment. I was told that the fix should be available later today. You will find it also on ArmAmods.net (http://www.armamods.net) soon as it is ready.

[Sgt_Eversmann]

the fix was ready last night already. However, they found another minor bug and they are adding that at the moment. I was told that the fix should be available later today. You will find it also on ArmAmods.net (http://www.armamods.net) soon as it is ready.
hopefully they are fixing it, not adding a new bug http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
and hopefully we all will have more fps then!

[X AL]

Try to set 640x480 with no anti-aliasing and low details. You'll be then able to even move in the woods...

Sad to say that we all are experiencing the same problem. Maybe the game was intended to be published first in 2009?

http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif
OK...4x 3.0GHz Xeons with 4GB Ram, 7800GS and X-FI (and TrackIR3 pro).

At first start, it was running slower than OFP when it came out...very low frames, stuttering and laggy.

I figured out quite fast, what was causing that heavy frame drops.
1.) You NEED the newest drivers for your hardware!
2.) I forgot to switch my X-FI mode to games, which produced a huge hit to frames. So assure yourself to switch the mode to "games".
3.) I MAXED all settings to the highest possible setting...BUT...and now it comes...totally switched off AA (at first it was 4xAA).

I run Arma @<hidden> now...and it runs flawless. As I know that HDR and post-processes will switch off AA, at least on NVIDIA cards, automatically, I switched that AA option to disable. HUGE performance gain....it runs absolutely flawless now.

What I would like to see:
Of course a performance patch so i can enable AA again...I even would switch off PPE for that...dunno if the HDR will do AA on NVIDIA cards...probably not.
HDR switch "disable"
PPE switch including "disable"
ForceFeedback slider and switch to adjust strength.
AND HEY GUESS WHAT...iFEEL is implemented as well...although the effects are very weak...so I need a slider for the iFEEL effects as well   http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/whistle.gif

[stingfish74]

Moderator,

if i cant post this, let me know and i will edit it completely.

not sure if im allowed to post this, but here is a tool i use to shut of services when playing IL2. it should work the same w/ any game.


Info on the tool:

Link to the tool: note you will need to register.
http://www.flying-legends.net/php/downloads/download.php?id=613

FSAutoStart gives the user the ability to automatically shutdown services and programs to provide as much resources to running today&#39;s most demanding games and applications. It also provides the ability to launch selected programs after the selected application is launched. Lastly, it can automatically restart those programs and services previously shutdown, thus bringing the computer back to its original state. It also adds performance enhancing options like Defragment Memory. FSAutoStart was originally written for users of Microsoft Flight Simulator, but is flexible enough to handle any game or other demanding application that needs as much computer power as possible. For help and updates visit: http://www.kensalter.com/fsautostart/

[twisted]

[quote=Amalka,Nov. 29 2006,17:24]As I know that HDR and post-processes will switch off AA, at least on NVIDIA cards, automatically, I switched that AA option to disable. HUGE performance gain....it runs absolutely flawless now.
i did not know that... good tip - does it apply to all games or just ArmA.

[Daddl]

FSAA and postprocessing work on some cards (ATI X1xxx cards, the very latest Nvidias). Hint: Set your drivers FSAA and Anisotrophy settings to &#39;application managed&#39;, then set FSAA from within ArmA. Works fine using a ATI X1600 card. Just be aware that the performance hit can be quite noticable depending on your card.

[Lee_H._Oswald]

Just want to say, I have also extremly performance problems.

---
- Athlon 64 Socket 939 3800+ @<hidden>
- NForce3 Chipset
- NVidia Geforce 6800GT 256MB
- Creative Audigy 2ZS
- 2x 1024MB DDR1 PC400 Ram "Dualchannel"
- S-ATAII Harddisk Raid 0
- Samsung 205BW widescreen 1680x1050
(compare my hardware with the "recommended hardware" printed on the back of the arma&#39;s dvd cover)
---

Running ArmA with everything at "normal" settings, 1200m viewdistance.
Vsync = off
AA and AF = "application controlled" in the nvidia control panel.

Also tried the -maxmem=xxxx command.

Latest Bios, drivers, patches, updates, directX for everything installed. PC runs perfect.

---

- The games runs slower then OFP at high settings/viewdistance.

- Extremly slow loading of textures.

- LOD changes 2meters in front of you:

CLICK&#33; Look at the soldiers weapon. (14fps) (http://lee.plankton.ch/normal.jpg)

- Soundproblems like someone else said here. First shoot sounds like underwater.

---

What can I say. I did not expected my pc to run ArmA very fast. But seeing ArmA running like this makes me extremly disappointed.

There is something WRONG with the engine of this game.

Don&#39;t know if it&#39;s the copy protection, but it&#39;s not ok like it is now&#33;

---

What a shame, think about all the new customers never heard about OFP, installing this game and can&#39;t even get a touch of what it is capable of...

---

Hope there will be a patch out SOON that fixes this PERFORMANCE HELL.

MfG Lee ... (no smilie available for my feelings...)

[Sickboy]

I read nowhere if you updated to version 1.01 of the game?
If you have the German Release then you will notice that v1.01 solves 99,9% of all performance problems.


Your performance problem is probably your resolution 1680x1050...
As anything over 1024x768 seems to reduce fps a lot&#33;
(pretty shitty of coarse, since you have a widescreen tft, which doesn&#39;t like different resolution than 1680x1050 i guess http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/sad_o.gif)
Also turn down Anisotropic and Anti aliasing INGAME (advanced settings), what happens if you turn anti aliasing off completely (ingame)

[Lee_H._Oswald]

I pressed a whole day my F5 key to update the morphicon website to see if the patch is out.

The first thing I have done is to update ArmA to 1.01.

It did NOT help&#33;

I have turned everything to ultra-low-deluxe, does not help.

---

Turning down the resolution helps, yes.

But playable is ArmA only at 640x480. Looks great...

---

Here a screenshot with the lowest settings available:

Click me, I&#39;m running on 30fps&#33; (http://lee.plankton.ch/low.jpg)

---

I think, I know why it looks so bad.

You all know about OFP&#39;s feature located in the userinfo.cfg:

frameRate=25.000000;

Means: OFP try&#39;s to hold the fps stable at 25, using lower LODs and textures, etc.

If we say, there is something wrong with ArmA or the copy protection system used, so we allways have too low fps even with high end PC&#39;s.

So it looks to me, that ArmA try&#39;s to hold stable FPS, which is not possible with this bug present(if there is one hidden in the engine or the copy protection).

Result is bad lod&#39;s switching in front of you, slow texture loading, etc.

---

I can&#39;t and I will not believe that Morphicon, BIS, the Betatesters played ArmA this way and said:

"Horray, runs great, we have Gold Status&#33;"

---

MfG Lee http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/huh.gif

[Kevlar2007]

Hi all,
I have similar problems like Lee_H._Oswald,
I can&#39;t switch AA on if I do this then I get low FPS all the time.
If I switch off AA I can max out all other settings and I don&#39;t get any FPS drops.
I also have problems with sound like it was reported elsewhere on the Forum, I hear distant sounds too loud and such, doesent metter if I have Hardware Acceleration for Sound On or OFF same for EAX. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/sad_o.gif

I have ARMA German Version and I applied 1.01 patch, I have all latest drivers for my Hardware and system is clean and works perfectly.

My Specs:
Pentium4 3.2 GH HT,
2048 MB RAM
ATI Radeon 9800XT Graphic Card
SoundBlaster Audigy 2 ZS Soundcard

Now my opinion is that this what happens when AA is on must be some bug in the game engine same I think for the sound problems. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif

I wish that there should be more feedback from BIS on the Forum regarding this Problems, if they are addressed or not and about progress in fixing them, that would give me and outher customers some better feeling, but I know if they would write such things on the forum they would have less time to work on the game, some short periodic feedback would be appriciated alot.

Anyway I have experienced much problems with other games I bought in recent time, in comparission to them I must say Arma works verry well for the first release, I only hope all the problems will be solved quickly, from my experience with BIS in the past I am confident that this will be the case.

Best regards&#33;

[Odie3]

I wonder if anyone that has AA also has that new Nvidia Geforce 8800GTX. While its GPU is freaking fast, I am wondering about its memory too - which has 768MB of DDR3.

While my currently processor will not allow it to preform to it&#39;s fullest, I rather get it than a higher end GeForce 7 series.

[Dudester]

Can somone tell me whats the best visibility setting to have. I read somwhere that it said the higher the setting the less fps you would get. Well i have turned mine to full and there doesnt appear to be an fps loss. But can somone just tell me what is the best setting to have it at.

[Mr_Tea]

Look @<hidden> my settings (http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/Mr_Tea/Arma_settings.png), works great with my GeForce 7600GS 512MB.

[ramboofp]

Look @<hidden> my settings (http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/Mr_Tea/Arma_settings.png), works great with my GeForce 7600GS 512MB.
how many FPS?
30?
40?
how many of ram?
your processor?
what is your OS?
a 7600GS with 512MB can run correctly the game?

[Kroky]

I pressed a whole day my F5 key to update the morphicon website to see if the patch is out.

The first thing I have done is to update ArmA to 1.01.

It did NOT help&#33;

I have turned everything to ultra-low-deluxe, does not help.

---

Turning down the resolution helps, yes.

But playable is ArmA only at 640x480. Looks great...

---

Here a screenshot with the lowest settings available:

Click me, I&#39;m running on 30fps&#33; (http://lee.plankton.ch/low.jpg)

---

I think, I know why it looks so bad.

You all know about OFP&#39;s feature located in the userinfo.cfg:

frameRate=25.000000;

Means: OFP try&#39;s to hold the fps stable at 25, using lower LODs and textures, etc.

If we say, there is something wrong with ArmA or the copy protection system used, so we allways have too low fps even with high end PC&#39;s.

So it looks to me, that ArmA try&#39;s to hold stable FPS, which is not possible with this bug present(if there is one hidden in the engine or the copy protection).

Result is bad lod&#39;s switching in front of you, slow texture loading, etc.

---

I can&#39;t and I will not believe that Morphicon, BIS, the Betatesters played ArmA this way and said:

"Horray, runs great, we have Gold Status&#33;"

---

MfG Lee http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/huh.gif
I second that wholeheartedly.

I don&#39;t know who did the testing job of ArmA but I think I would do it better.

And there is definitely something wrong with the engine of this game. Lot of graphic/sound problems.

Can&#39;t believe BIS sold the game in this state....

[Stuntman]

The strange thing here is that most of you complain about low fps, right? but the vidoes of ingame in ArmA at YouTube have exellent fps&#33; even if it is fraps or hand holded cam&#33;

Just look at them and see how smooth they are&#33; off course they maybe are so smooth because of low units on the battlefield or maybe low graphics, but I dont think that&#39;s the main reason for the good fps. you see, one of my friends bought a copy of ArmA from Czech Republic, and I saw that with ONLY him on the map, the fps are at 15-10&#33;

His specs are: 1024mb RAM, 2.4Ghz and 256 MB Memory.

So the videos of players playing ArmA in YouTube have better fps, plus most the players are playing at game conventions and some of the videos are from BIS I think.

so why do the game convetions and developers videos at YouTube have higher FPS then the games which are bought? Note: the last video is from IGN.

here&#39;s the Links. Note how good fps the videos have. did you guys have so good fps?

Video from Russian Game Convention (http://youtube.com/watch?v=IrypezghRoc)
Ingame video showing some blowing of buses (Made by a Player, not a beta-tester etc.) (http://youtube.com/watch?v=KUmF5Sug9Yg&mode=related&search=)
VIdeo by BIS, showing battles and some units Note: may take some time for users with low bandwith: its stream download (http://media.pc.ign.com/media/748/748793/vid_1752633.html)

[Mr_Tea]

Look @<hidden> my settings (http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/Mr_Tea/Arma_settings.png), works great with my GeForce 7600GS 512MB.
how many FPS?
30?
40?
how many of ram?
your processor?
what is your OS?
a 7600GS with 512MB can run correctly the game?
FPS: ~30 (I don`t use a framecounter)
Ram:2x512MB PC3200 @<hidden>
CPU:AthlonXP 3200+ (Barton with 400Mhz FSB)
OS :Win2K Prof. with SP3
Why should the 7600GS with 512MB vram have problems with ArmA? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/huh.gif

[twisted]

let me get on the bandwagon here.

I play ArmA and enjoy great perfomance.

settings are 1300 view distance. Ainsotrophic filtering low. AA off. terrain normal. every other setting high.

according to fraps i average 30+ FPS. sometime higher. it plays smooth and responsive.

my computer is
AMD 64 3200+
2GB RAM
Nvidia 7800 GTX
shitty sound card


in fact the only probelm i have found is on the secure the airport mission where the sound gets screwed up and i had to change to software for commands to be spoken (and if commands are not spoken they are not followed and are stuck in a queue.)

[NSX]

@<hidden>

Surely, mate, it&#39;s just because of your 7800 GTX. 30 fps isn&#39;t too much for ArmA if it had normally programmed engine.

My specs are:

AMD Athlon 3200+ (hardly overclocked upm to smt like 4000+)
4*512 mb Kingston dual channeled
6800 GS 512 mb (overclocked from 425/1000 to 500/1250)

Well, don&#39;t have any problems with sound, but my performance sucks. You can surely run game without any lags only when everything is low. Well, I&#39;m not thinking my system is top-notch, but it&#39;s still good enought to run for example SC:DA on maxed "Next generation" options, while ArmA pretends to be the laggiest coffin to my computer.  http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/goodnight.gif

Don&#39;t know what BIS were thinking, but I&#39;m not going to buy old videos without Dx10 support. I&#39;m planning to get my GF 8800 a few months later, but...that&#39;s just... "incredible" performance for game we&#39;ve been awaiting for 5.5 years (however, Armed Assault was in developement for 1.5 years).

[Lee_H._Oswald]

So we can say:

CPU: ~3000+
RAM: ~1024MB

+
GeForce 6XXX = Bad Performance.

or +
GeForce 7XXX = Good Performance.

---

Very good, my pc has AGP...

So I can buy a MSI 512MB NX7600GS, which isn&#39;t that expensive and has passive cooling. But performance can&#39;t be THAT great, DDR2 vram as far as I know.

Or the 512MB Gainward 7800GS+ GLH(goes like hell) which is too expensive for the "old" GF7 chip, looking at the new NVidia G80.

---

So my dear BIS programmer, hat do you recommend?

Buy the 7600GS?

Buy the 7800GS?

Buy a new PC?

Wait for new NVIDIA drivers?(Do they know about ArmA or only BF2142)

Or wait, cause you are working on a patch right now?

---

MfG Lee ...

[stisoas]

buy an 939 motherboard 55&#036http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
use your actual PC3200 ram ? free)
buy a cheap single core A64 and overclock it. 60&#036http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
buy a good copper thermal dissiper 25&#036http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
buy a X1900/1950 XT 256MB 220&#036http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif

play arma in good condition (no price)

http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/whistle.gif

edit: okay nevermind. i didnt see what was your cpu. your 6800GT is crushing your global arma performance. i got one , and i saw what a 6800GT can give on it . it&#39;s ....awefull http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/whistle.gif
so , 939 on AGP board ? simple like HELL godness&#33;

buy a PCIE 939 mobo .
buy a X1900XT(or 2) 256MB

crossfire would rocks.

[Lee_H._Oswald]

No way.

I have a Shuttle XPC SN95G5. (photo (http://de.shuttle.com/de/portaldata/1/Moduledata/484/sv_2511_2_1.jpg))
Athlon64 So939 3800+(2400MHz @<hidden> 2900MHz)
2x 1024MB DDR1
256MB GF6800GT AGP
Audigy 2ZS

There is NO chance that I will buy another Socket 939 board with a new heatsink(the shuttle has a fantatic heatpipe cooling system), a new powersupply, a new pc case and a graphics card like the ati.

It would be a waste of money because socket 939 is DEAD.

MfG Lee http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/icon_rolleyes.gif

[stisoas]

A64 2.9ghz is pretty fine for gaming cpu. so , 200 buck vicard and 50 buck mobo is a good deal i think .

now, if you want grab an 900 buck bundle ...

ps: dont forget i have 6800ultra, and a X1900XT . on 2 diff but quite similar computer. i know what i tell.

[Forrestal]

You can also take the Radeon X1950PRO AGP http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif

[stisoas]

You can also take the Radeon X1950PRO AGP http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
-20% perfs versus a X1900XT. i recommend a couple mobo/vid card. it&#39;s my last word .

http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif

[Xoanon]

I have a dog of a rig:

P4 3.06 HT
1GB RDRAM
Nvidia 6600GT 256mb AGP

Running patched German version with the language patch applied.

To start with the game was graphically glitching all over the shop, messy shadows and colour glitches etc. however...

I installed the latest Direct X (even though I was under the impression that I WAS running the latest)

Then I installed the latest OFFICIAL Nvidia drivers (I WAS running a teaked version)

Then I defragged my hard drive.

Now I can run everything on normal but with shadows and textures on high at 1024 res with no problem (although I may drop down the textures to normal if I get any slowdown when things get REALLY busy). I don&#39;t know the FPS because if the game isn&#39;t stumbling I don&#39;t care.

So if you have some performance issues give these steps a go:

Clean your system of all spy/malware and close down msn etc.
Defragment your hard drive
Install the latest DirectX from microsofts website (even if you think you HAVE it already)
Install the lastest OFFICIAL drivers for your card

Play  http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/pistols.gif

[Placebo]

It was mentioned elsewhere or in another thread, that an app which shuts down all running applications such as enditall (use google) is great to use, my wife uses it before running Gothic3 and she gets much better performance even than from a fresh reboot.

[MaximoPoder]

Athlon 64 3200+
PNY 1024MB DDR400
Samsung 512 DDR PC3200
PNY FX5900SE 128Mb
Creative Sound Blaster X-Gamer Live&#33; 5.1
Maxtor 80Gb 7200RPM
Seagate Barracuda 120Gb 8200RMP

GPU Settings:
Antialiasing Settings - Off
Anistropic Filtering - Off
Image Settings - High Performance
Vertucal Sync - Applicationg Controlled

ArmA Settings:
Res: 800x600
Terrain Visibility: Minimum
All Configs: Low

Result:
Good Frames (Except near or in the bushes)
Bad Graphics

[Lee_H._Oswald]

Clean your system of all spy/malware and close down msn etc.
Defragment your hard drive
Install the latest DirectX from microsofts website (even if you think you HAVE it already)
Install the lastest OFFICIAL drivers for your card
I&#39;m working in the IT, those things are the first I have done.

Also my gaming PC is cleaner then "virgin maria".

---

I have some other hardware here I borrowed from work.

Let&#39;s see if things are better with a GF 7600GT.

MfG Lee

[Lee_H._Oswald]

Just another testing with the 6800GT to show that something is wrong with: ArmA or My PC or Me or the rest of the world. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif

---

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">
Sehr Hoch=Very High
Sehr Niedrig=Very Low
Niedrig=Low
[/QUOTE]

---

- Same location.
- Looking north and south.
- 1200m viewdistance
- 50m viewdistance

Settings used:

1.) High -> Very High
-> Click for settings <- (http://lee.plankton.ch/ArmA_Q.jpg)

Result:

-> Click for Screen (3360x2100) <- (http://lee.plankton.ch/ArmA_4S.jpg)

---

Settings used:

2.) Ultra Low
-> Click for settings <- (http://lee.plankton.ch/ArmA_Q2.jpg)

Result:

-> Click for Screen (3360x2100) <- (http://lee.plankton.ch/ArmA_4S2.jpg)

---

Any idea why there is:

- Close to NO boost in fps by changing the viewdistance from 1200m to 50m? (doesn&#39;t matter if High or Low Settings)

- Only a boost from 11fps to 33fps changing from Very High to Very Low? (doesn&#39;t matter if using 1200m or 50m viewdistance)

---

Thanks for listening.

MfG Lee http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif

[Evil Weasel]

Lee_H_Oswald, you were spot on regarding the difference between the Nvidia 6xxx and 7xxx series.

With a AMD 3800+ dual core rig, 2 gigs of ram and an AGP 6600GT 128mb card, the best I could get was bare minimum fps with all settings on low, no anti-aliasing, a view distance of 1200 and resolution of 800x600. Even then too much foliage or too many buildings gave that lovely slide show effect.

I&#39;ve just splashed Ł130 on a pci-express 512mb 7900GS ( I&#39;ve got a dual motherboard). Everything else is exactly the same.
I&#39;m now thoroughly enjoying all settings on normal, a view distance of 2000m and resolution of 1024x768 with "normal" anti-aliasing to avoid the jaggies. It looks fantastic and so far I&#39;m getting lovely smooth frame rates anywhere on the Island.

If you can afford it get a new graphics card, you&#39;ll be amazed by the difference. One of the best Ł130&#39;s I&#39;ve ever spent.

[Lee_H._Oswald]

If you can afford it get a new graphics card, you&#39;ll be amazed by the difference. One of the best Ł130&#39;s I&#39;ve ever spent.
Buying something new isn&#39;t the problem.

I can order everything to build a nice Core 2 Duo with GF8800GTS tomorrow, build it myself the day after, overclock it like hell and start playing.

But is that the solution for all the ppl having performance problems with their 3GHz, GF6XXX PC&#39;s?

And why do I have to throw away my nice and fast PC like it was a hundret years old piece of crap.

I would like to know what&#39;s the reason for the sometimes very strange behavior of the ArmA engine.

Maybe I will find out, maybe I will not.

But I can discuss it on a german ArmA forum instead here, if you like.


MfG Lee http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif

[Marines]

I just picked up on that this morning. While playtesting in the editor, I placed myself along with 10 infantry squads (5 OPFOR/5 IFOR) in an urban enviornment. I left the graphics settings at normal with a resolution of 1024 x 768. A hellacious firefight ensued, and I experienced no frame rate issues what so ever. I tried it again, with the same resolution, and all graphics options set to high. Again, I experienced no frame rate issues at all.

So this got me thinking. I cleared the map of any units, and place myself in an area with dense foliage. MY FPS dropped considerably while moving on foot after doing this.

Well, I spose my ArmA experience will be limited to the editor.

[stisoas]

Clean your system of all spy/malware and close down msn etc.
Defragment your hard drive
Install the latest DirectX from microsofts website (even if you think you HAVE it already)
Install the lastest OFFICIAL drivers for your card
I&#39;m working in the IT, those things are the first I have done.

Also my gaming PC is cleaner then "virgin maria".

---

I have some other hardware here I borrowed from work.

Let&#39;s see if things are better with a GF 7600GT.

MfG Lee
DONT &#33;

it&#39;s useless. 7600GT perfs will be common , or even low .
all these forest area will make your 7600G even GT&#39;s one cry ...

buy something bigger.

[rev]

Intel Pentium 4 - HT, 3200 MHz (3.2) (16 x 200)
Gigabyte GA-8I848PM (3 PCI, 1 AGP, 2 DDR DIMM, Audio, LAN)
Microsoft XP Windows Home Edition SP2
1024 MB (PC2700 DDR SDRAM)
Intel 82801EB ICH5 - AC&#39;97 Audio Controller [A-2/A-3]
ST3160021A (160 GB, 7200 RPM, Ultra-ATA/100)
NEC DVD_RW ND-3500AG (DVD+R9:4x, DVD+RW:16x/4x, DVD-RW:16x/4x, DVD-ROM:16x, CD:48x/24x/48x DVD+RW/DVD-RW)
nVIDIA Gainward GeForce 6600 GT AGP 128mb

i get the problems, and i can only play with 15 fps on everything very low. Not very happy http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/banghead.gif

[kickback98]

FYI

My system:

AMD64 3800+
2Gb RAM
2 x 7800GTX in SLi

Settings:

1920 x 1200 resolution
Visibility: 1200m
Terrain details: Normal
Object details: Low
Texture details: Very Low
Shading details: Normal
Postprocess effects: Low
Anisotropic Filtering: Very High
Shadow detail: Disabled
Antialiasing: Disabled
Blood: High

Performance (fraps):

Average 50fps, in build up areas and forest: 25-40fps

Comments:

I have found that switching of shadows and antialiasing and keeping texture details very low, you can boost performance a lot.

[Lee_H._Oswald]

Some news.

After installing several new drivers...

Defragmented my hard disk...

Tried another thousand things... with no changing to the performance....

I tried following:

Put the cpu clock back from overclocked 2900mhz to it&#39;s default 2400mhz.

RESULT: nothing... Not 1 Frame more or less.

---

Ok, let the cpu work at 2400mhz and take out one of the 1024MB ram modules.

So we now have 500mhz cpu power AND 1024megabyte ram less.

RESULT: nothing... Not 1 Frame more or less&#33;&#33; http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif  http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif

---

Thank you BIS for let me getting INSANE&#33;

MfG Lee http://lee.plankton.ch/pillepalle.gif

Edit:

http://lee.plankton.ch/ArmA_UD.jpg (http://www.bistudio.com/games.html)

[stisoas]

Some news.

After installing several new drivers...

Defragmented my hard disk...

Tried another thousand things... with no changing to the performance....

I tried following:

Put the cpu clock back from overclocked 2900mhz to it&#39;s default 2400mhz.

RESULT: nothing... Not 1 Frame more or less.

---

Ok, let the cpu work at 2400mhz and take out one of the 1024MB ram modules.

So we now have 500mhz cpu power AND 1024megabyte ram less.

RESULT: nothing... Not 1 Frame more or less&#33;&#33; http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif

---

Thank you BIS for let me getting INSANE&#33;

MfG Lee http://lee.plankton.ch/pillepalle.gif

Edit:

[im]http://lee.plankton.ch/ArmA_UD.jpg[/img] (http://www.bistudio.com/games.html)
GPU limited .

[Bunkers]

Oh my.. I&#39;ve now spent roughly &#036;700 on upgrading my machine and the performance increase is quite good. BUT, I just cant get enough of the ArmA eye-candy. I&#39;m getting addicted to higher and higher graphic settings and now I&#39;m thinking of buying a whole new system anyway  http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/confused_o.gif  which would enable me to run ArmA super-smooth on über-settings, but that would mean I&#39;ve wasted alot of money..  http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/banghead.gif

Edit: Oh yeah.. I&#39;ve already bought ArmA twice. Once on disc from Germany and then the download (because then I had not received the discs yet). So now Placebo can put my picture on his desk http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif j/k

[Speckfire]

I&#39;m not happy with my system either.

I can play AA on 1024x768 with low graphics but I want more.

My system specs are the following

AMD Athlon X2 4600 (dual core)
1GB DDR 400MHZ Ram
250GB SATA 2 drive
Nvidia GeForce 6800 (AGP)

What do you guys recommend?

Upgrade or new system?

[Bunkers]

What do you guys recommend?
IMO you only need a better graphics card. It will make a HUGE difference for you to play on high settings.

[Speckfire]

Thanks Bunkers.. I guess I&#39;ll change the Mobo to go PCI-E and get a good Video card. Adding Ram should help in the long run too.

[killerwhale]

Hey, it looks like the grass is only generated within 50-70 meters around the player, Is there anyway to improve this? get a good CPU, Increase Memory? something to do to improve this, or ar we stuck?

[CHKilroy]

I get terrible frames no matter what resolution.

AMD Athlon 64 Processor 3200+ ~2.1GHz
(Two SLi&#39;d) nVidia GeForce 6600GTs 128Mb (Driver Version: 6.14.0010.9371)
Onboard Realtek AC97 (Driver Version: 5.10.000.5750)
2Gbs of RAM (Two 1Gb sticks)
German 1.01 Armed Assault
DirectX 9.0c

[Dudester]

I just wish somone somwhere would post a good FPS and then list there specs. i get 15 to 30 FPS wich i think is crap thats with AA switched off, Anti alias switched off, shadows low, the rest on medium. I only bought this computer last year and thought it would run most games for atleast 2 to 3 years. I can&#39;t see this game doing that well at in multiplayer. Not eveyone has the money to upgrade there machines and whos of to upgrade to a computer that this game requires to run smooth. Its bad enough that you cannot up the Resolution let alone the settings to high on the system i have.

2 gig ram
Geforce 7800
msi diamond motherboard
AMD 3500
Audigy 2 soundblaster card

[JackHorner]

I just wish somone somwhere would post a good FPS and then list there specs. i get 15 to 30 FPS wich i think is crap thats with AA switched off, Anti alias switched off, shadows low, the rest on medium. I only bought this computer last year and thought it would run most games for atleast 2 to 3 years. I can&#39;t see this game doing that well at in multiplayer. Not eveyone has the money to upgrade there machines and whos of to upgrade to a computer that this game requires to run smooth. Its bad enough that you cannot up the Resolution let alone the settings to high on the system i have.

2 gig ram
Geforce 7800
msi diamond motherboard
AMD 3500
Audigy 2 soundblaster card
Yo I was in the same boat as you man. I have a nice computer and could only play at 30fps max, and that was rare to see. I wrote out a tweak in this thread that pretty much works for everyone. It will almost double your fps, I went from 30 to 60 in lower settings. Before doing this tweak I had to run almost everything at normal to low, after the tweak I have been able to turn on AA, AF, Post Processing to high and textures to high and get a pretty stable 35 to 45 fps. Try it out man, it freakin works.

http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin....74;st=0 (http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard311/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=68;t=55474;st=0)

Goto my post a few up from the bottom, the big post.

NOTE: I have since changed my settings to 150000, you will understand when you read the post. Good luck http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif

[Lee_H._Oswald]

It will almost double your fps&#33;
Tried it, and I got 0 frames more. (german version)

Edit:
And I&#39;m going mad seeing again getting EXACTLY 30fps, which is the half of the 60Hz my TFT is running at&#33;

http://lee.plankton.ch/ArmA_30fps.jpg

MfG Lee http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/banghead.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/banghead.gif

[JackHorner]

It will almost double your fps&#33;
Tried it, and I got 0 frames more. (german version)

Edit:
And I&#39;m going mad seeing again getting EXACTLY 30fps, which is the half of the 60Hz my TFT is running at&#33;

http://lee.plankton.ch/ArmA_30fps.jpg

MfG Lee http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/banghead.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/banghead.gif
hmm that is odd, the tweak works because it reduces the polygons on screen by alot. That would give any gfx card a boost. Im betting that you have some other setting that are getting in the way. Im inclined to think its something to do with triple buffering being unchecked and vsync being disabled but thats just a guess.

Are you sure you changed the profile file in your "other arma profiles" folder and not in the default arma folder?

It could be something to do with the German version though as I have the Czech version.

[Lee_H._Oswald]

I&#39;m sure at everything I have done for a whole week now.

The list is ENDLESS&#33;

I can do what I want, there is no way to get ArmA playable without setting everything to ultra low AND change the resolution to 640x480 which looks HORROR on a widescreen tft.

This is the worst performace problems in a game I have everseen.

And it&#39;s not only this one pc, we tested on 6 differrent computers, laptops with different graphic cards. from GF6600 up to GF7900GT. Low fps whatever you configure.

MfG Lee

[Sgt_Eversmann]

have you disabled vertical sync?

http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/confused_o.gif

I feel kinda sorry for you...because I know how it feels if you cannot play a game very well that you like http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/sad_o.gif
And you have a better Hardware then me...

[JackHorner]

I&#39;m sure at everything I have done for a whole week now.

The list is ENDLESS&#33;

I can do what I want, there is no way to get ArmA playable without setting everything to ultra low AND change the resolution to 640x480 which looks HORROR on a widescreen tft.

This is the worst performace problems in a game I have everseen.

And it&#39;s not only this one pc, we tested on 6 differrent computers, laptops with different graphic cards. from GF6600 up to GF7900GT. Low fps whatever you configure.

MfG Lee
Man im really sorry to hear that, I know how much of a headache these things are. I don&#39;t know what to say, this tweak has worked for four of my friends so far.

Maybe we could get someone else with the German version to try it out and see if its a problem with that version.

[maxqubit]

@<hidden>

I&#39;m sorry to hear that.

I have P4 2.8, 1GB ram, AGP 7600GT, clean windows, -memsize=768, 1024x768x32

And it runs like ... errm fine on normal settings (i&#39;m no fps junkie but it is reasonable fluid)

I have the german online version running from hdd (no disks)
I have tweaked some minor things to the XFX 7600GT 256MB

So, seeing your specs a 7600GT AGP should do the trick. I think the 128, 256, 512 GPU VRAM makes a big difference (perhaps a 7600GS 512 isn&#39;t that bad, but my 7600GT is nice)

To buy a new rig out of frustration???

[Lee_H._Oswald]

I preordered a GF8800GTS which will arrive next week with a bit luck. Then I will test that thing in my other pc(HTPC).

Note: I will have to put my cpu, ram, audigy from one pc in the other one and make a clean windows install, optimize windows, overclock the cpu to have the best base for ArmA.

A LOT of work no one pays me for...

---

Btw, here is a list of things I tried so far(I&#39;m sure I forgot something, will add later):


Quote[/b] ]
- 4x different chipset driver
- 3x different vga driver (older, latest, latest beta)
- 1x new sounddriver for the audigy
- 1x new OpenAL software installed
- disabled "turbo mode" of the audigy
- 2x checkdisk for partition c: and d:
- 3x defragmentation
- checked that "compress files" is disabled
- checked my RAID 0
- checked drive speed
- checked that enough drive space is available on c: and d:
- 1x complete fresh install of Windows on another harddrive -> ArmA runs slower
- disabled all not needed windows services
- disabled all not needed startup programs
- 2x scanned for virus -> nothing found
- 3x scanned for spyware -> nothing found
- checked for new bios
- tried bios settings like "agp aperture size" 32/64/128/256/512
- installed latest directX
- changed the pagefile(virtual memory) disabled/50MB/1024MB/2048MB
- checked the temperatur of: cpu, gpu, motherboard, power supply, ram, hard drives and my head
- installed another power supply
- over- and underclocked my cpu
- over- and underclocked my gpu
- tested with 2048MB dualchannel mode
- tested with 1024MB singlechannel mode
- checked if "amd cool and quite" is disabled
- tried 3x different dvd-rom drives
- installed arma 4x
- installed arma on partition c:
- installed arma on partition d:
- installed arma "special edition"
- installed arma "normal edition" (yes, I own both)
- installed arma on my htpc (home theater pc)
 -> AMD 3200+(939), 1024MB, GF6600GT, GF7600GT also tested
- installed arma on a pc at work
 -> AMD 3500+(AM2), 2048MB, GF7600GS
- installed arma on a friends brand new notebook
 -> core 2 duo, 1024MB, GF7600 GO
- 3 other friends installed it on their pc&#39;s (one has oc&#39;d amd OPTERON cpu and GF7900GT)
- started arma with version 1.00 and 1.01 -> last one is a tiny bit faster
- started arma with and without virus protection enabled
- started arma with the "audigy"
- started arma with "onboard sound"
- started arma with "sound hardware acceleration" on/off
- started arma with "vsync" on/off
- started arma with "triple buffer" on/off
- started arma with "aa" on/off
- started arma with "af" on/off
- started arma with "max. rendered frames ahead" 0/1/2/3/4/5
- started arma with all 4 different nvidia "image quality settings"
- started arma with desktop resolution lower then ingame
- started arma with 16/32bit color depth
- started arma with a "dvi" cable connected to my tft
- started arma with a "normal vga" cable connected to my tft
- started arma with my widescreen tft
- started arma with my "normal" 19inch tft
- started arma with my lcd beamer (1024x768)
- started arma with -maxmem=512/-maxmem=640/-maxmem=768/-maxmem=1024/-maxmem=1536/


MfG Lee http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/icon_rolleyes.gif

[Sgt_Eversmann]

poor dude.
hopefully you can enjoy arma soon http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/sad_o.gif

[Chris Death]

I must say that i see lot of ppl expecting too much from
their systems, especially when it comes to viewdistance.

I remember in OFP a viewdistance of 900 meters has always been good for playing on average systems, but in ArmA the
discussion always starts at 1200 and above.

With our current systems we should imho be around the 900m
viewdistance or maybe less, since it&#39;s the first hardware
generation to run ArmA.

I also see some ppl complaining to have waisted their 42-50
bucks for that game, while i rather may have waisted my 999
euros in october for a new pc (bought for ArmA in first case)
but i should have been waiting a little longer to see what
i will really need. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/sad_o.gif

I understand the frustration if there&#39;s a new favourite game
comming out and you can&#39;t play it and i remember having
had this very often in days before OFP e.g: NHL Hockey series. In OFP i started with a 700ghz pc and and afterwards
i never experienced the probs with buying newer generation
hardware not running games like they should.

Now ArmA sets a new standard of hardware requirement and
i think it&#39;ll take a while until we all can enjoy into it like we should or want.

p.s: i also feel sorry for you Lee Harvey, that you can&#39;t play it
like you want now.

~S~ CD

[maxqubit]

@<hidden>

Weird, the only thing all these &#39;tries&#39; have in common is your ArmA copie(s) ...

I have the online version and run from hdd (no disks involved) ... I&#39;m not saying you should try that, but it is a thought.

[dmitri]

My performance issues are almost entirely related to foliage.

I run Rivatuner&#39;s monitoring app (sorta like fraps, but it gives you a realtime graph of FPS) on my second monitor. Place my unit in a sparse region near a bush (only bush for at least 100 meters). I get 55fps 10 meters from the bush, I run towards it and as I enter it - drop down to 18fps, the second I run out of the bush - back upto 55fps. Slowdown only occurs very close to or in foliage.

My fix has been to drop shading detail to low (OFP level foliage http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif ). Still see a FPS drop though. The other settings had little affect on this specific problem.

I&#39;m running the German version, patch to 1.1 on an AMD 4200 @<hidden> 2500mhz, 7900, 2gig RAM, X-fi.

The game does look beautiful though - even with reduced settings. Love Monte Liberacion (HJ45) at sunrise.

[Norsu]

I run Rivatuner&#39;s monitoring app (sorta like fraps, but it gives you a realtime graph of FPS) on my second monitor. Place my unit in a sparse region near a bush (only bush for at least 100 meters). I get 55fps 10 meters from the bush, I run towards it and as I enter it - drop down to 18fps, the second I run out of the bush - back upto 55fps. Slowdown only occurs very close to or in foliage.
I&#39;m running the German version, patch to 1.1 on an AMD 4200 @<hidden> 2500mhz, 7900, 2gig RAM, X-fi.
Yep, those bushes are really fps killers http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/sad_o.gif. I tried to edit to give them smaller textures but that didn&#39;t help much (1-2fps). Perhaps there is something wrong with their models? If they are simply too high poly, BIS could make an option for next patch to install lower quality bushes.

Oblivion had similar problems with its grass. Someone released a grass model with lower polycount and it helped greatly while still keeping quality high.

[Lee_H._Oswald]

Screens are resized from 1680x1050 to 800x500.

Config changes:

sceneComplexity=1 <- Yes, ONE.
(highest value is 1000000 btw)

Placed myself here(my testing place for fps and texture loading):

http://lee.plankton.ch/ArmA_SC1ME.jpg

Because of sceneComplexity=1 nothing can be seen:

http://lee.plankton.ch/ArmA_SC1IG.jpg

Great FPS for seeing nothing.

MfG Lee http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif

[Goldenwings2002]

My performance issues are almost entirely related to foliage.

I run Rivatuner&#39;s monitoring app (sorta like fraps, but it gives you a realtime graph of FPS) on my second monitor. Place my unit in a sparse region near a bush (only bush for at least 100 meters). I get 55fps 10 meters from the bush, I run towards it and as I enter it - drop down to 18fps, the second I run out of the bush - back upto 55fps. Slowdown only occurs very close to or in foliage.

My fix has been to drop shading detail to low (OFP level foliage http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif ). Still see a FPS drop though. The other settings had little affect on this specific problem.

I&#39;m running the German version, patch to 1.1 on an AMD 4200 @<hidden> 2500mhz, 7900, 2gig RAM, X-fi.

The game does look beautiful though - even with reduced settings. Love Monte Liberacion (HJ45) at sunrise.
This is exactly my problem. I am running the game at 1280x1024...

Problem for me is I get a fricking slide show when running through just a few bushes or trees. I do not have any crappy video card or system so this is uncalled for.

[Vänskä]

System:

ASUS S775 IP965 DDR2 SATA2
CORSAIR DDR2 KIT 2X1GB 800MHZ HEAT SPREADER
2 x SEAGATE BARRACUDA 7200.10 320GB SATA
INTEL CORE 2 E6600 2.4GHZ 1066/4M S775
GeForce 7900GTX 512MB GDDR-3 650MHz (NVidia ForceWare version 91.31)

The game runs really sweet for me. I play it on 1280x1024 resolution and everything on high (except postprosessing since I don´t like how it looks) and I have a viewdistance of 3500m.

I can run the game also everything on very high including 10 000 viewdistance. The game runs fine, though I get some LOD issues and random crashes by that memorything.

Here some of my experience. Viewdistance does effect my FPS (it being somewhere around 40-60 usually) very little. But there´s little point to keep it much over 3000 because the objects won´t still be drawn.

Changing resolution has some effect but I don´t need better FPS and my monitor doesn´t support higher resolutions.

Texture settings is the probably the one what causes my some problems if I set very high. I will eventually run out video memory. This has also some effect on the FPS.

Postprocessing has also some (quite a lot) effect on the FPS.

Object detail is somewhat the same as texture detail. Slight effect on FPS.

Shading doesn´t seem to have any effect on my FPS.

So in my experience biggest factors are resolution, objects, postprocessing and antialiasing.

And yes my FPS goes down like everyone elses when going into dense forest, bushes or such. Grass can be a problem if you use scopes or binoculars (specially when lying on the ground) FPS can drop from 40 to 10 instantly, but this not such a big or a common problem.

Practically all the issues I´ve have are MP related but that´s a different story and it´s a no short list.

[Guggy]

AMD Athlon 64 3800 (2 of &#39;em)
Nvidia Geforce 6100 GPU
2 gigs ram

Now I&#39;m pretty confident MY video card shouldnt even -WORK- for ArmA, yet it somehow manages to. I can get maybe 20-30 fps with view distance set to 500.

640x480 resolution, lowest all settings.

It was still enough to play the campaign all the way through, but I&#39;m certainly looking forward to the Geforce 7950 I&#39;m picking up tomorrow. I&#39;ll run ArmA at 800x600 (crap monitor http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/confused_o.gif) , but hopefully the fps will be over 30, maybe even 40.

[Mr_Tea]

AMD Athlon 64 3800 (2 of &#39;em)
Nvidia Geforce 6100 GPU
2 gigs ram
What videocard is that?
Onboard or AGP, and how much memory does it have?

[Goldenwings2002]

These are my system specs:

Intel Core 2 DUO e6700 2.67GHZ w/ Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro &#124; 2x 1GB Corsair 6400C4 &#124; eVGA nForce 680i SLI (122-CK-NF68) &#124; XFX GeForce 8800GTX (PV-T80F-SHF9) &#124; Creative SoundBlaster X-FI XtremeMusic &#124; Thermaltake ToughPower 850W &#124; 2x Seagate Barracuda 320GB SATA II in RAID 0&#124; Dell 2405FPW &#124; Antec Nine Hundred w/ Modification of 4x Arctic Cooling 120mm Fans (AC12)&#124; Samsung SH-S182M DVD-Writer 18X &#124;

I can barely play this game @<hidden> 1280x1024 near any foliage. It runs great if I am not near any foliage, but the moment I put myself near or even think about looking at a few trees/bushes the fps drops to slideshow FPS. Everything is on Very High but now I have been changing a lot of things and still am getting the fps hit @<hidden> 1024x768 near foliage. This is just sad as it was funny trying to kill someone in multiplayer in a fogged up forest. They couldn&#39;t hit me and I couldn&#39;t hit them LOL. 1 FPS...

[SuddenDeathMatch]

I&#39;ve got the same problems on an AIW x800XT

[im]http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/4746/fortheglitchvd6.png[/img]>100kb

[jack_oneill]

Well, the game ran pretty crappy for me and my gf 6600gt, even with everything set to low and only running it at 800x600. If I set the resolution any higher, it was pretty choppy, impossible to aim/shoot.

Upon installing these "z-tweaked" 91.47 nvidia drivers, it runs pretty smoothly at 1280x1024 with everything still set to "low". I might be able to turn some of the stuff up even, but I havent tried it yet.

I also replaced "32" with "16" in arma.cfg, and that seemed to help even more, but I could be imagining it.

[Chris Death]

Well, yesterday i bought a Raden X 1900XT but that darn
thing didn&#39;t fit due to space into my pc http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif

OK, on monday i shall bring both pc and g-card to the shop
(bought both there) and we will find a solution (so this guy
at tel-service told me) - even if this means i get a totally
new system, since i said there i want a pc for gaming but
perfect gaming especially for ArmA, and they didn&#39;t handle
me that thingy in first instance:

Microstar Pentium D 3,4ghz
2 gb ram
Nvidia Geforce 7500 LE (that means Low End i heard yesterday) with 512mb

The new g-card had a price of 400 euros and only 256mb
but has 48 pixel shaders and a lot more to offer.

We will see where my performance goes on monday (or tuesday).

~S~ CD

[Maatz]

yea, I also ordered a Radeon X1900XT or probably 1950, can&#39;t remember. i hope it works with that then...

[450R]

Guys, don&#39;t get desperate and buy new hardware right away. Yes, ArmA is resource-intensive but the performance shouldn&#39;t be totally absymal. There are some serious issues with ArmA at the moment that need fixing (i.e. patching) and until then, I&#39;d stick with the &#39;wait and see&#39; approach.

[Lee_H._Oswald]

There are some serious issues with ArmA at the moment that need fixing
Do we have an official statement on this?

Maybe it&#39;s everything ok with ArmA and we are all idiots or something?

Fact is, there are a lot of ppl with unnormal performance problems. You can look at forums around the world, there is at least one forum thread talking about low performance on good pc&#39;s.

MfG Lee

[Chris Death]

Well, i think i didn&#39;t do anything wrong with buying that
new graphics card except that it doesn&#39;t fit into pc http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rofl.gif

I mean i can use this one for sure for other new games too http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif

~S~ CD

[450R]

Do we have an official statement on this?

Maybe it&#39;s everything ok with ArmA and we are all idiots or something?
No official statement, but we really don&#39;t need one.

There&#39;s no way BI didn&#39;t know about this before release ... it&#39;s not like they have magical hardware that&#39;s immune to poorly optimized software. They were obviously on a tight schedule and deadlines had to be met. I just hope the next patch isn&#39;t far off ... Armed Assault&#39;s reputation can&#39;t be in good shape right now.

[FantasticDamage]

Id have to agree with possible performance issues in the software itself. Will BIS fix this? Most definitly. But anyways I am running an AMD 3500+
2 GB RAM
and a BFG 7800 GTXOC

and my other computer a
AMD 3400+
1GB RAM
and 6800 Ultra could run the game at higher settings.

After applying Marines fix to the installed copy on my stronger computer I was able to run everything maxed out at 1280 res. Seems like a couple pieces of code are a little too demanding on even today&#39;s top PC&#39;s. I totally reccomend applying Marines fix. Search for "A Fix" and if running Nvidia based cards make sure they are set to Application Controlled outside of the game.

But yeah going from barely able to running at low settings to running 20-30 FPS on maxed out totally changes the whole atmosphere of the game http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif

[ade_mcc]

To be honnest, I having a great time trying to get my slightly under powered system to work to its best. By forcing me check that my drivers are up to date, that the graphics card settings are reasonable and that everything else is working correctly (cooling, etc), not only is ArmA performing better, but so is other demanding games such as FEAR etc.
Surely its better to get the best out of your current system, rather than spending money on a poorly optimised setup? Of course, if needs be though, then I can see an upgrade in the near future.

[Bunkers]

I totally reccomend applying Marines fix. Search for "A Fix"
What exactly is this Marines fix? And where is it?

[FantasticDamage]

Marines is the name of the guy who discovered this fix

http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin....t=55529 (http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard311/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=68;t=55529)

All credit goes towards him

[Chris Death]

Well i went to shop today and got the Radeon X1900XT replaced by a GeForce 7950 GT KO (512mb) and it&#39;s running
like a charm now. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif

80/85 fps normal
in town 45/55 fps
in bushes or with binoc&#39;s looking at dense foliage it never
goes below 25 fps.

I can live with that performance since everything&#39;s reacting
smooth and in right time - no delay.

OK, sometimes you see with binoc&#39;s that lods are switching
from low to higher but thats so quick that it doesn&#39;t disturbe.

~S~ CD

[Lee_H._Oswald]

And here we go.

I build a half new PC by using following parts out of my old Shuttle XPC:

- CPU AMD Athlon 64 So939 3800+ (2400MHz@<hidden>)
- 2x Ram DDR1 PC400 1024MB
- 2x 80GB SATA2 harddisk running as ~160GB Raid 0
- 1x DVD-Rom
- 1x Soundblaster Audigy2

I bought new:

- 1x Midi Case
- 2x 120mm fan @<hidden> 5v
- 1x Mainboard ASUS A8N32-SLI Deluxe (Socket 939 = OLD)
- 1x CPU Heatpipe Cooler Arctic
- 1x 420W power supply
- 1x GeForce 8800GTS

---

NOW, ArmA runs like it should&#33; Even on very high settings&#33;

The GF8800 has extrem performance, unbelievable&#33;

ArmA FEELS completly different now&#33;&#33;

But, there are Bugs in the ArmA Engine, as said thousand times before.

Moving very close to bushes and look at them, drops your frames from ~90 to ~35.

Loading of textures on "Very high textures" isn&#39;t ok also.

---

What can I say... I now can seriously begin with playing arma.

It cost me money, time and nerves&#33;

I really hope that BIS is going to fix the engine or whatever is broken with this game, so that ppl that DON&#39;T can afford new hardware or have problems with their high-end pc&#39;s can play ArmA like it should be&#33;

MfG Lee

[van Nistelrooy]

Glad to see that someone can play ArmA with good graphics http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/confused_o.gif... I think that I&#39;ll buy a 8800 card too. I bought a 7950GX2 two weeks ago &#39;cause I thought it would be enough powerfull...

Almost 1000€ to play one game. I think that&#39;s a bit expensive. And the game is not released yet in my country. Tssss...

[WhiskeyBullets]

Heres something for the people to understand about FPS.

Your brain’s image sample rate caps out around 60Hz, or 60 frames per second.

If 60Hz is the fastest frame rate the human eye can actually “see,” why complain about not getting anything over that. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif

[JackHorner]

Heres something for the people to understand about FPS.

Your brain’s image sample rate caps out around 60Hz, or 60 frames per second.

If 60Hz is the fastest frame rate the human eye can actually “see,” why complain about not getting anything over that. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
You know, Ive heard this more times than I can remember.

Heres why we want 60 fps. When the scene gets bogged down your frame rates will drop, we want the highest fps possible to compensate for the drop. If you get 30 fps in the desert then walk into a firefight in a town and your fps drop to 10 to 15 that sucks. Having higher frame rates give you a buffer so that your performance will be fine everywhere.

Also I know people say this is bs but I can tell the difference between seeing 30 and 60fps. Im pretty sure the human eye thing and frame rates is a myth.

Someone needs to call mythbusters.

[stisoas]

Heres something for the people to understand about FPS.

Your brain’s image sample rate caps out around 60Hz, or 60 frames per second.

If 60Hz is the fastest frame rate the human eye can actually “see,” why complain about not getting anything over that. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
because brain don&#39;t see a picture serie of 60 piece per second. but the real world ... smooth as butter.

for limit this strobe sensation , brain need an high frequency serie of picture.
then the regularity of these picture displaying is the moste important factor.

you can get 3 frame in 500Ms then 57 frame in the last 500ms of this second. in this case, it&#39;s not smooth either http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/whistle.gif

[AUS_Twisted]

Heres something for the people to understand about FPS.

Your brain’s image sample rate caps out around 60Hz, or 60 frames per second.

If 60Hz is the fastest frame rate the human eye can actually “see,” why complain about not getting anything over that. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
And that statement is also a load of crap, ever wonder why monitors come with faster refresh rates then 60Hz? some people can detect refresh rates well over 60Hz, I know I can as 60Hz to me flickers far to much compared to 85Hz that I run.

[Lee_H._Oswald]

I now play arma with over 60fps in most locations.

I can say you this:

ArmA is two games in one -> A really bad one when you have to play with fps lower than ~30. And a fantastic one with fps over ~30.

No wonder so much ppl complain about vehicle steering and other handling problems in Arma. With low frames it&#39;s close to impossible to drive a car. With high fps it&#39;s easy as hell.

MfG Lee

[Marines]

I now play arma with over 60fps in most locations.

I can say you this:

ArmA is two games in one -> A really bad one when you have to play with fps lower than ~30. And a fantastic one with fps over ~30.

No wonder so much ppl complain about vehicle steering and other handling problems in Arma. With low frames it&#39;s close to impossible to drive a car. With high fps it&#39;s easy as hell.

MfG Lee
Okay Lee...

What made the greatest improvement? Your new Gfx card?

[Lee_H._Oswald]

Yes, the GF8800GTS.

The Shuttle XPC i used had an nforce3 chipset, the new mainboard has an nforce4. That will not bring that many fps.

CPU, RAM, HDD, Soundcard, etc. is same as before.

I tested with Oblivion and Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter at highest settings also, very nice fps boost.

Perfect card if you want to play in higher resolutions(if you have a good cpu).

MfG Lee

[NeMeSiS]

I now play arma with over 60fps in most locations.

I can say you this:

ArmA is two games in one -> A really bad one when you have to play with fps lower than ~30. And a fantastic one with fps over ~30.

No wonder so much ppl complain about vehicle steering and other handling problems in Arma. With low frames it&#39;s close to impossible to drive a car. With high fps it&#39;s easy as hell.

MfG Lee
See my sig to be able to play with <30 FPS, it fixed it in my case. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/icon_rolleyes.gif

[1nsane]

i have frustated with this game, i have high end DX9 pc but i some zones the game r unplayable, i cant alow high settins and SLI dont work properly.

I cant beliave to run this game properly i need DX10 hardware, this game its write for DX9, if dont work fine in DX9 sistems definitively the game have serious problems.

sry my poor english, thanks.

[malik22]

Hi guys im gonna order a 1950pro will i be able to put everything on high or very high at 1024 768 i dont care about view distance i leave that at default 1200.

[Evil Weasel]

ArmA is two games in one -> A really bad one when you have to play with fps lower than ~30. And a fantastic one with fps over ~30.

No wonder so much ppl complain about vehicle steering and other handling problems in Arma. With low frames it&#39;s close to impossible to drive a car. With high fps it&#39;s easy as hell.

MfG Lee[/QUOTE]

You&#39;ve got it spot on Lee-H_Oswald. I tried running Arma with an Nvidia 6600GT and it was highly frustrating, even with everything on low. I spent Ł130 on a 7900GS and it nows runs fantastically smoothly with everything on medium/ high. I&#39;ve been slightly baffled ever since by the level of complaints on the forum about Arma. Yes, there are some bugs, but overall playing Arma is an amazing experience. Despite my love for OFP, going back to it feels like a return to the dark ages.

I&#39;m afraid that the unpalletable truth is that the minimum graphic card spec for ENJOYABLE play is a 7xxxx series card ( sorry, I don&#39;t know the ATI equivalent). If you have an older card and can afford to upgrade, do so. You will be stunned by the difference it makes.

[van Nistelrooy]

The thing I can&#39;t understand is why my config can run perfectly all over games (Oblivion included) in very high settings with all filters on.

For sure there is a very big problem with bushes and grass, &#39;cause ArmA runs fine if there&#39;s no vegetation in the screen.

[Lee_H._Oswald]

ArmA was on german television last night.

...

They had to install ArmA on different PC&#39;s, the fastest one was half way able to run the game.

The freedom and very nice graphics was presented very well, but when it comes to play some missions everything went bad.

The performance was pure horror, he wasn&#39;t able to play smooth because of the low fps and the constant frame drop.

They tried on very high, low, very low but the performance was crap. I wonder they didn&#39;t call it UNPLAYABLE.

It&#39;s so sad seeing "our" game presented that way.

BIS, I beg you&#33; Make a performance patch for ArmA or this game will never be a "big player" on the market&#33;

MfG Lee http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif

[khayes]

i bought the german version on internet, and when i tested it, i couldn&#39;t even play in its lower resolution.
i have an ASUS A78NX-E, AMD 2400+, 1G RAM, and a nvidia 6600 AGP8x 256.
i found this webpage (http://www.tweakguides.com/NVFORCE_11.html) and now i really have a better FPS.

I forced desactivate Vsync and triple-buffering. i also set to &#39;controlled by application&#39; the other parameters. now i tune arma in its own video config.

the difference is impressive. maybe that could help you too

[Mr_Tea]

They`ve presented ARMA out of the Box, not patched.

No wonder that they had massive problems.

[Lee_H._Oswald]

They`ve presented ARMA out of the Box, not patched.

No wonder that they had massive problems.
And that is exactly what a "normal" user does.

MfG Lee

[Sickboy]

They`ve presented ARMA out of the Box, not patched.

No wonder that they had massive problems.
It&#39;s unbelievable how such noobs can get into a tv serie showing computer games, really... it&#39;s a shame, and it is exactly the reason why I would never let myself being guided by usual reviews, not on tv, neither in books actually... they are supposed to be professional reviewers, but if their systems suck in configuration, their games unpatched while ArmA had a pretty huge performance bug in v1.0 .. then i&#39;m sorry, but they are nothing more than idiots...


And that is exactly what a "normal" user does.
LeeSo everyone just have to take into account for all the ppl in the world that either:
Don&#39;t use their brain
Don&#39;t seek proper support on products that they buy
Don&#39;t take the responsebility of having a properly configured and installed computer?

I&#39;m sorry, but I think when we wen&#39;t over the 18+ years mark there were certain responsebilities that we learned to live with. If you don&#39;t have a drivers license, then don&#39;t drive until you have...  If you don&#39;t know how to use a drill, you better first test it or get a teacher, before you try to drill holes...
It&#39;s always nice and easy to put the blame on other&#39;s shoulders... many ppl forget self responsebility, but that&#39;s simply their problem..... and not somebody elses

[Lee_H._Oswald]

So you buy a car and there is something wrong with the engine and it&#39;s ok?

But hey, you are over 18 it must be ok. Just use your brain.

Don&#39;t let us get to far away from the discussion, but the performance problems cost BIS money and I believe that is not their main plan.

MfG Lee http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif

[Sickboy]

So you buy a car and there is something wrong with the engine and it&#39;s ok?

But hey, you are over 18 it must be ok. Just use your brain.

Don&#39;t let us get to far away from the discussion, but the performance problems cost BIS money and I believe that is not their main plan.

MfG Lee http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
The car is a very good example.... Thanks for bringing it up:
When you buy a new car and when there is something wrong with it... you just push the car on the side of the road, go stand outside, shouting "Stupid car", you walk the rest home, and you will never buy this "brand" car anymore.

No, you use your brain, common sence if you want to call it that, and you go back to the dealer, and demand a fixed or new car (probably just fixed, patched, version v1.01) ...

That&#39;s how things work.. To pull the example to your words about that "normal" users would only play version 1.0 and not v1.01, then those users are simply stupid, as in the example of a car that is not working properly... they wouldn&#39;t return it.. just never buy the same brand again...

I&#39;m wondering why this is off topic, as it&#39;s just another view, another opinion, on the topic and your view...


I agree that the bad performance is a bad seller, and I hope BIS can come up with some patches that can adress the issues that ppl are having... But testing version 1.0 and complaining about low fps, while it&#39;s a known bug and already fixed from release day 1 in patch v1.01, then sorry... but what are we talking about? Besides, most complainers can have a descent FPS with properly configured systems, clean and healthy driver installations, and especially don&#39;t think that a system that was "top notch" 2 years ago, while the graphics card back then was already budget or middle class, will perform well on high settings. Altough you are right, that even ppl with proper/moderate systems do have performance issues aswell...

Many compare ArmA to other games aswell:
"ArmA runs shit, but Doom III and Quake 4 on highest graphics settings run just fully smooth"...
yeah well, arma is showing you 1200m of viewdistance, with many objects, units, etc in view, while a doom or quake shows a couple of square meters, usually...

Anyway, again, I agree that there can probably be done a lot in the engine, with future patches and probably even future driver updates, but the fact remains that most ppl try to put the responsebilities elsewhere, and simply expect something that they can&#39;t really expect...

[Stag]

MfG LeeSo everyone just have to take into account for all the ppl in the world that either:
Don&#39;t use their brain
Don&#39;t seek proper support on products that they buy
Don&#39;t take the responsebility of having a properly configured and installed computer?

I&#39;m sorry, but I think when we wen&#39;t over the 18+ years mark there were certain responsebilities that we learned to live with. If you don&#39;t have a drivers license, then don&#39;t drive until you have... If you don&#39;t know how to use a drill, you better first test it or get a teacher, before you try to drill holes...
It&#39;s always nice and easy to put the blame on other&#39;s shoulders... many ppl forget self responsebility, but that&#39;s simply their problem..... and not somebody elses

Not everyone, just the people who want to sell software to the blokes (who probably outnumber us 10 - 1) who just want to sit in front of their rig and shoot things. These people will plug a game in, play it for five minutes and then get on to every forum they can reach screaming how crap the game is, because they get their expectations of how something should run from playing with a Nintendo. Irritating? Yup, but they do have the money developers need to produce their next title, and they don&#39;t take kindly to being told to RTFM.

The fact is, enthusiasts are always in a minority. If they depended only on the members of this forum for their income, then even if we all bought a title when it came out BIS would soon be nothing more than a memory. That&#39;s the economics of
survival.

You can take comfort in your eliteism, but it&#39;s the plebs who will make this title succeed or fail.

I&#39;ll just go and duck now, &#39;cos people are always taking pot shots at the messenger. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/goodnight.gif

[Sickboy]

...
You are very right, but in your example, the ppl do start shouting on a forum, where they probably get pointed to a patch that will fix their problems anyway..

Lee&#39;s example was stating that the casual gamer would do exactly as the reviewer; install game, say it&#39;s crap, and that&#39;s that. And to that I made a reply..

And indeed, companies should concentrate on how the world works, and not on how it should work, as that would probably mean the end of the company...

[Lee_H._Oswald]

There is no discussion about "ppl should know about patches for games". Sad as it is, installing patches is normal today.

And as we all know, the patch 1.01 DID NOT fix the performance issue for everyone.

I only tell, this is bad for ArmA, it&#39;s community and BIS(and their money).

It&#39;s hard to show friends how fantastic ArmA is, when the performance is crap like it is now.

MfG Lee

[Stag]

I&#39;m also a fan of A game called "Battle of Britain 2; Wings of Victory" which when patched to 2.05 becomes the finest combat flight simulation available for WW2 (aside from the woeful lack of multiplay). Buy it, I heartily recommend it. But one Noob got the game and ran it unpatched. The next thing he did was put a scathing review on Amazon of how unplayable the title was. I wonder how much damage that did to the sales of the game?

BTW, one thing I&#39;ve noticed on this forum is that if people ask for something, they are more or less told to stop wasting everyone&#39;s time and use the search engine. To me that&#39;s even worse than RTFM, but that&#39;s just my observation.

[Stag]

There is no discussion about "ppl should know about patches for games". Sad as it is, installing patches is normal today.

And as we all know, the patch 1.01 DID NOT fix the performance issue for everyone.

I only tell, this is bad for ArmA, it&#39;s community and BIS(and their money).

It&#39;s hard to show friends how fantastic ArmA is, when the performance is crap like it is now.

MfG Lee
You get the FASAA fix? did it for me You can find it using the searc-DOH&#33;

Edit your ArmA config in My Documents&#92;Arma to FSAA=0

Then edit your profile to PostFX=0

Starts to look more like old OFP, but it works.

[Sickboy]

...
Version 1.0 German, the version that was tested in the review, had the securom bug that made even the fastest machines have problems...

Version 1.01 German - The "Major Frameratebug" got squashed, and as such, that&#39;s the version that should&#39;ve been tested, to make a real statement about the performance of ArmA. Simple..
Doesn&#39;t mean there still might remain other framerate bugs, or optimizations that still can be done, agreed.
Still, all ppl I play with daily and the different configurations I had my ArmA in and running on, ran with a usual fps of around 35, which to me sounds good enough http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif - As long as ppl had updated drivers, clean systems, not 1 million &#39;optimization-tools&#39; running, &#39;special settings&#39;, and I don&#39;t know what crap more http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif

ArmA can still be optimized, and many bugs still must be fixed.. agreed, but I remain with my point that ppl expect too much from usually "old" systems, and forget that the computer world doesn&#39;t sit still and that proper drivers and system maintainence is essential for proper performing of games ...


Quote[/b] ]I&#39;m also a fan of A game called "Battle of Britain 2; Wings of Victory" which when patched to 2.05 becomes the finest combat flight simulation available for WW2 (aside from the woeful lack of multiplay). Buy it, I heartily recommend it. But one Noob got the game and ran it unpatched. The next thing he did was put a scathing review on Amazon of how unplayable the title was. I wonder how much damage that did to the sales of the game?Agree that it&#39;s probably devestating to sales, if such review would be looked upon by a broad amount of players.


Quote[/b] ]BTW, one thing I&#39;ve noticed on this forum is that if people ask for something, they are more or less told to stop wasting everyone&#39;s time and use the search engine. To me that&#39;s even worse than RTFM, but that&#39;s just my observationWell, for me it&#39;s very simple thing... People tend to ask things way too easy, instead of taking responsebility and looking things up themselves, as it is "they" that need something, not "me", as such .. im personally pretty hard in these matters, but I don&#39;t know about others, I guess there are a lot of ppl that wish to spend their time only helping other ppl day in day out, but that aint me http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif

[Stag]

Ah. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif You&#39;ve hit a nail bang on the head&#33; When I first started simming, it was back in 1996. Bought a PC, Bought European Air War, and grumbled when I couldn&#39;t run it maxed. After that, so many titles that I couldn&#39;t run the way they looked in the magazines. I got used to it. Then all of a sudden, the kind of radical development we had back then stopped. IL2 and it&#39;s sequels, all basically running on the same old engine. Technology got a chance to catch up, then overtake.

Now, all of a sudden there&#39;s been a revolution, especially in the field of graphics, and the hardware necessary to play the games usually has a serious price tag attached. Just like the "Good Old Days". But people seem to have forgotten what it was like, or a new generation has come up which never had to deal with that frustration before.

Me, I can&#39;t wait for Oleg maddox&#39;s Battle of Britain Sim to appear; I expect to see a large lynch mob marching east with pitchforks and blazing torches when that sucker hits the vid-RAM. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rofl.gif

[Sickboy]

...
Yep, got a point there... The thing is, why do ppl don&#39;t think in the computer world, as they do with usual things they buy??

Ppl don&#39;t drive 250km per hour, with their lada 1.1 from 1989, but they might do it with their BMW which was built to manage those speeds...

Ppl don&#39;t run for hours on their € 2,50 bathing slippers, but on proper (professional) sport sneakers...

Why must it be so different for computers? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif

And indeed Lee, now ur right... this is offtopic http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif

[Lee_H._Oswald]

Back to topic.

-----

I was just playing a capture & hold mission. After some time driving with a car, the fps in a city were really bad.

Then I did this(watch the fps counter):

-

Low fps:
http://lee.plankton.ch/ArmA_P01.jpg

-

Going to the options menu. "Ahh, very high settings&#33; No one can play with settings like this&#33;"
http://lee.plankton.ch/ArmA_P04.jpg

-

Really? Let&#39;s disable shadows&#33; Oh, Nothing happen to fps.
http://lee.plankton.ch/ArmA_P05.jpg

-

Ok, let&#39;s put the shadows back to VERY HIGH(OFP reloads the scene):
http://lee.plankton.ch/ArmA_P06.jpg

---

http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wow_o.gif

---

Now you can drive to another city and you get the same bad fps. Just repeat the shadow thingy again and fps are high again.

Is it a now a shadow problem oder does the shadow switching "fix" just something else because of reloading the scene?

Edit: It&#39;s the reloading, not the shadows.

MfG Lee http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/huh.gif

[Stag]

My problem was that the framerate just got gradually worse until it became unplayable. Changing the settings in any way seemed to refresh the game, then it started to degrade again.

Sorted to (relative) satisfaction though.

[Goldenwings2002]

http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard311/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=68;t=55684;st=0

It&#39;s nice to see that you&#39;re experiencing the frame rate drop near trees/foliage too. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif And you thought everything worked http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/banghead.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wow_o.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/firefoxlover.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/whistle.gif

[RMK]

I have no idea what the hell is going on performance wise with my game, currently running 1.0.2 german version and its still got some very strange slowdowns, Sanhari is mostly unplayable in the north due to it.

While just playing around in a large forest, game runs at according to fraps 20fps with high settings (shadows on normal, aa on normal) turn off the shadows...no effect, turn off any of the other settings no effect, turn off AA AND shadows and i suddenly get 35fps rising to 60fps occasionally. The strange thing is when AA and Shadows are on, its holds at 30 excatly..no higher or lower, with them off it flucuates all over.

However, my system isnt excatly old...so i wish i knew WHY this happened. specs:

Intel Core II Duo E6300 (OC&#39;d to 2.4ghz)
Nvidia Geforce 7950GT 512mb
1.5gb DDR2 RAM 640mhz
Realtek HD
7200RPM Maxtor 320gb SATAII

The game runs at 60fps+ in the south of the island and on the other island, its just the trees that lag my game...I havent a clue why http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/sad_o.gif

[WhiskeyBullets]

I think i found a fix for the Dual core and or SLI user. I will Start a new thread with the info tonight. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif