GTX 295 on Q6600 performance

Hey guys,

I just got a GTX 295 and am getting awful performance in ArmA II.

Full specs:

Vista x64 Ultimate SP1

Q6600 GO @ 3.2Ghz

4 GB DDR2

Asus P5N-T Deluxe

Antec CP-850 PSU

Zotac GTX 295 (Single PCB)

190.38 drivers (was the same with 186.16 and ArmA 2 profile patch)

In the 3rd mission (the city) i get around 20fps with:

1680x1050 with 2xAA, 8xAF, Visability 1530

Texture normal, Video Memory Very High,

Terrain Normal, Objects Normal,

Shadow high, Postpross effects High

Am i right in saying that that is awful performancefrom my set up?? Im wondering if the card needs to be RMA'd!

Heres a GPU-Z for reference

Does the GPU-z readings look right?

Thanks

Tried the many fixes in the many NVIDIA threads around here?

I have the same CPU as you and maybe its the CPU and not the video card. Try changing to a very low resolution. If the FPS increase dramatically, then its not the CPU. If they stay the same, then its either the CPU or BIS needs to fix this game. If you suspect the GPU, make sure your nVidia profile is set up correctly and try some of the tweaks mentioned in the other threads until the next patch.

Postpross effects High... is too much. And it maybe your not getting both gpus rendering.

Also you cant realy alt-tab back and forth to see stuff in gpuz, its will go back down to default, you have to log to see the real speed ect..

190.38 are NOT good drivers for SLI (among other things).

I'm finding most drivers after 182.50 are problematic in one way or another (under Vista and Win 7).

Try rolling back to 182.50.

Eth

PS : If those temps were taken under load, your GPU isn't doing something right (or your PC is in the fridge).

PPS : Many people are having trouble with the GTX 295 and A2.

same here, i got a GTX295 and installed 190.38 i have a very average to poor performance (running the game at 1680x1050 all settings are normal/high)

that is on a E8600 oc'ed to 'just' 3.8ghz....

Win XP SP3

i dont know wtfs wrong with this game, compared to other bigfat 3d games such as GTAIV and Fallout3 which just runs smoothly.... looks like ARMAII had a shameful finish,, we are in 2009 and seeing this is very disappointing

190.38 are NOT good drivers for SLI (among other things).

Actually, they've been amazing drivers for me (2 x 8800GTX in SLI). I've had a major uplift from the 186 with evga SLI fix to these new beta drivers.

Great thread though - I'm also running the Q6600 (at 3.5GHz) and was toying with the idea of a GTX295. I'm not so sure it's a good idea after reading your thoughts.

If a GTX295 can't run this, it's going to be at least 2 years before hardware exists at an affordable price that can run this game smoothly.

There's a hundred+ posts telling how bad performance is with a 295, I should know I have one too. Only Arma2 is affected, all my other games are played at fps in the 100+ - 200+ range on high settings at 1900*1200 with high AA and AS enabled. Its nothing to do with nvidia drivers or all my other games would affected. Come and see L4D at insane fps at ultra settings or GRID or Fallout 3, Farcry 2 and so on and so on.....

Actually, they've been amazing drivers for me (2 x 8800GTX in SLI). I've had a major uplift from the 186 with evga SLI fix to these new beta drivers.

Great thread though - I'm also running the Q6600 (at 3.5GHz) and was toying with the idea of a GTX295. I'm not so sure it's a good idea after reading your thoughts.

If a GTX295 can't run this, it's going to be at least 2 years before hardware exists at an affordable price that can run this game smoothly.

Yah I think the problem lies in the 200 series cards because a lot of 88xx users are liking them.

The 295 seems to have specific problems because SLI and TRI SLI work fine for me. I've said it before, I really don't like those "2 in 1" cards. The 295's predecessor was a pain in the a$$ as well. When the 9800GX2 worked it was fine but with FC2, for instance, we waited 3 months for working drivers.

Eth

---------- Post added at 10:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:49 PM ----------

There's a hundred+ posts telling how bad performance is with a 295, I should know I have one too. Only Arma2 is affected, all my other games are played at fps in the 100+ - 200+ range on high settings at 1900*1200 with high AA and AS enabled. Its nothing to do with nvidia drivers or all my other games would affected. Come and see L4D at insane fps at ultra settings or GRID or Fallout 3, Farcry 2 and so on and so on.....

Wrong, it could well be the drivers (and I am by no means saying that it is 100% the drivers, but given my experiences with these "2 in 1" cards, it could just as easily be the drivers as it could be the engine).

As I said before, it was exactly the same story with FC2 and the 9800GX2.

NOT wrong when my post CLEARLY STATES I get high FPS in all other games but not Arma2. There is nothing wrong with the current Nvidia drivers. My 295gtx runs incredibly well in any other game I own. Get real!

To all those suffering low fps with high spec systems, Stop trying to tweak things like drivers and settings for graphics and memory. The only problem here lies in the ARma2 game code and all the tweaking and changing of settings and system settings wont alter that fact.

"I'll Continue to wait for the ARMA2.exe patch to fix my game"

I'd have to agree the best thing to do rather than keep messing with your system would be to wait for the patch.

People are trying allkinds, some people run it fine...good on them.

Alot are not though, you only have to see the poll results and various threads complaining about performance and stability. That shows that too few bases have been covered in testing.

Once you start to get the CTD's they start to happen more often, that's one thing I have noticed.

At first my game ran good, not performing the way it should but I was able to play multiplayer for hours without problems... now it's not worth bothering.

I have found myself a good stable overclock for ArmaII benchmark now and other games and I'll just keep it at that and wait for the patch(es).

I'm done tweaking for now.

NOT wrong when my post CLEARLY STATES I get high FPS in all other games but not Arma2. There is nothing wrong with the current Nvidia drivers. My 295gtx runs incredibly well in any other game I own. Get real!

To all those suffering low fps with high spec systems, Stop trying to tweak things like drivers and settings for graphics and memory. The only problem here lies in the ARma2 game code and all the tweaking and changing of settings and system settings wont alter that fact.

"I'll Continue to wait for the ARMA2.exe patch to fix my game"

Yes, wrong. Read my post again.

The 9800GX2 worked well with everything else EXCEPT FC2 (at the time). 3 months for drivers from Nvidia to fix the problem. Nothing to do with Ubisoft but rather a problem with the 9800GX2 and the way FC2 was communicating with it.

There are problems with A2, no argument there but the fact that SLI is fine on non "2 in 1" cards is definitely pointing to the 295 and the way it is talking to the game.

Changing settings etc has fixed problems for numerous people so probably best to keep your expertise (or distinct lack thereof) out of the problem solving equation.

Eth

i get 40 fps with my 295 gtx? amd 955 quad? minimum of 25 in towns ???

i get 40 fps with my 295 gtx? amd 955 quad? minimum of 25 in towns ???

Yep there is no hard and fast rule but the majority with the problem seem to have i7's as well, so that could be a factor.

Eth

Thanks guys good tips

I have sent the GTX 295 back regardless as the fan is making a clicking noise.

Whats quite telling is that i get about the same performance from the 8800 GTS 512 i have put back in while im waiting for a replacement!!

Changing settings for the most part has gained people on average a few fps with cards that should quite easily cope with this game.

Clearly your an expert too. I'll put this in caps so you can read it and understand it "MY 295 PERFORMS FLAWLESSLY IN ANY OTHER GAME APART FROM ARMA2 THEREFORE THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH MY NVIDIA DRIVER!" is that clear enough for you. Take your head out of the fanboy sand and just face the fact the coding of Arma2 is at fault.

Sit in the corner and have a little word with yourself about how things work in reality Ethene. I'll wait patiently for BIS to patch/optimise their game to work on new technology.

My original post stands, in my opinion based on the evidence from my FPS and performance across a wide spectrum of other modern games its not an driver error, its unoptimised coding in the Arma2 game code. Tell me I'm wrong.

Changing settings for the most part has gained people on average a few fps with cards that should quite easily cope with this game.

Clearly your an expert too. I'll put this in caps so you can read it and understand it "MY 295 PERFORMS FLAWLESSLY IN ANY OTHER GAME APART FROM ARMA2 THEREFORE THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH MY NVIDIA DRIVER!" is that clear enough for you. Take your head out of the fanboy sand and just face the fact the coding of Arma2 is at fault.

Sit in the corner and have a little word with yourself about how things work in reality Ethene. I'll wait patiently for BIS to patch/optimise their game to work on new technology.

My original post stands, in my opinion based on the evidence from my FPS and performance across a wide spectrum of other modern games its not an driver error, its unoptimised coding in the Arma2 game code. Tell me I'm wrong.

Your original post doesn't stand and I'm far from a fanboy. I've been plenty critical of BIS, now and in the past.

The game works perfectly well for many people (myself included) and you seem to have problems with reading comprehension so there is little point in trying to help you understand why it may well be a driver issue. At the risk of repeating myself (for a 3rd time) I'll say it again for the cheap seats (I've highlighted it in red so even YOU cannot miss it this time).

My 2 9800GX2's worked well with every game I owned (at the time), but when FC2 came out it ran like a pig and it took NVIDIA 3 months to address the problem. So yes, it could be a problem with the card/driver software no matter how many FPS you are getting in Crysis.

I don't know why this concept is so hard for you to deal with. It happens, and regardless of whose fault it is, it will get fixed. Go play something else until it is, since according to you, no amount of tweaking/troubleshooting will help.

Just because something didn't work for you, doesn't mean it won't help someone else.

I try to help as many people here as I can but these "Don't listen to anyone, I know best" posts from people who quite clearly don't are extremely unhelpful. I really hope you resolve your problem (or that the patch does) but that doesn't excuse you for being disruptive.

Good day,

Eth

my game doesn'y work either interox but I'd still side with eth on this one, he isn't saying anything at fault is down to you. Just saying it's a hardware/driver/game clash.

Yes BIS have got work to do, I agree with you there...but so have Nvidia.

I think this to be more of a game engine issue I have SLi'd GTX 275's and a machine running 8800gts 512 sli and a machine running a ati 4870x2 all are having similar performance, could this be coincidence? I think not.

I am a fanboy of BIS also I have played since flashpoint release and I have a feeling that this is a marketing ploy. I will bet these issues will be fixed in the new expansion that you have to pay for. As I have yet to see BIS step in on any of these threads other than to say that they have it working fine on there machines. What a joke! Or to ban members from the forum. Get a clue guys at least put up a thread to communicate what is being done to fix the issues, lock the thread even just show us that you care.

you are just reminding me to never go out and buy a nividia 200 series card and stick with my 8800gts 512mb card for another year or 2. Apoc_reg has also cleared up something for me and answered a question i had. That was would upgrading my Graphic card give me better performance in Arma 2 , answer NO, until next generation of hardware, cpu , gpu comes out combined with loads of patches. Im sure after a years time we will all be running this game sweet as,lol.:):):)

Go try the editor everyone for anyone that hasnt already tried the editor, its the CREME of Arma 2.

similar in what way, in a SP mission out of the box? The campaign? Well then yes there are allot of lower FPS/"performance with Sli and CF, but TriSli and Quad/CFX its a different story. My game runs perrty nice with CFX, but i DONT use 19xx/1xxx rez, not if i want better frames/performance and the full fillters.

Though some poster talk about running 19/1x with only one card and not much cpu... As for the 295, its not running its Sli with current drivers, or it seems any 190.xx versions. Need the -winxp and a rename like Crysis..? Had to do that with my 4870x2's, untill the 9.7 drivers and 1.03 patch... so i say IT IS NVDA drivers and the current arma2.exe borking sli for the 295. Sell the 295s and get the newest ATI cards in mid October, cost less and be faster...

Amazing how many of these threads so quickly deteriorate..wow!

Quick question: How many folks understand that a PCI-E 2.0 card (eg all 2xx) running in a system that only supports PCI-E 1.0 will operate but at a much lower performance rate? As far as I know a P5 mobo does not support PCI-E 2.0 nor do any other 680/780 etc platform. So if folks don't understand this basic interface requirement what else might they not understand?

As far as drivers goes this was stated earlier. Yes a driver can significantly impact the performance of one title. I'm a glutton for punishment and use a GTX 295 and previously a 9800GX2 fully understanding that nVidia will address these issues but as any corporation they will work from the highest population down toward the least. Same with 9800GX2 as it took a bit for the drivers to get the attention they needed as they represented a lower population of cards. When the drivers gel these cards are top flight performers but it's necessary to understand where they lie in terms of overall population.

In the meantime I'm having a grand time with this game (deaf AI in 1.03 aside) and will calmy wait as the drivers evolve. I'll be playing this game next week, next month and next year as it continues to evolve into the grand milsim that it is.

Another quick question: How many folks with driver (or suspected driver) related issues are flaming up the nVidia forums like they are here? Your emotion is not based on facts but only perception and that is twisted to fit into the warmth the near instant feedback this forum provides. Turn it down a notch and try talking some sense as speaking for myself as soon as I see capital letters (wtf? like that's louder or something lmao), chest beating, ultimatums and other flame tactics I'm out.

BTW our servers are full every day with people enjoying this game so something is not adding up..

.

.

This post is not directed toward anyone in particular..

.

.

.

.

Amazing how many of these threads so quickly deteriorate..wow!

Quick question: How many folks understand that a PCI-E 2.0 card (eg all 2xx) running in a system that only supports PCI-E 1.0 will operate but at a much lower performance rate? As far as I know a P5 mobo does not support PCI-E 2.0 nor do any other 680/780 etc platform. So if folks don't understand this basic interface requirement what else might they not understand?

As far as drivers goes this was stated earlier. Yes a driver can significantly impact the performance of one title. I'm a glutton for punishment and use a GTX 295 and previously a 9800GX2 fully understanding that nVidia will address these issues but as any corporation they will work from the highest population down toward the least. Same with 9800GX2 as it took a bit for the drivers to get the attention they needed as they represented a lower population of cards. When the drivers gel these cards are top flight performers but it's necessary to understand where they lie in terms of overall population.

In the meantime I'm having a grand time with this game (deaf AI in 1.03 aside) and will calmy wait as the drivers evolve. I'll be playing this game next week, next month and next year as it continues to evolve into the grand milsim that it is.

Another quick question: How many folks with driver (or suspected driver) related issues are flaming up the nVidia forums like they are here? Your emotion is not based on facts but only perception and that is twisted to fit into the warmth the near instant feedback this forum provides. Turn it down a notch and try talking some sense as speaking for myself as soon as I see capital letters (wtf? like that's louder or something lmao), chest beating, ultimatums and other flame tactics I'm out.

BTW our servers are full every day with people enjoying this game so something is not adding up..

.

.

This post is not directed toward anyone in particular..

.

.

.

.

You sir are a man of honor and respect. I could not agree more with you.

Yep there is no hard and fast rule but the majority with the problem seem to have i7's as well, so that could be a factor.

I'm running:

295 GTX

i7 950

The only operating system I've had decent performance with is WinXP64 (not tried 32 yet). The best driver is 185.85 (not tried anything before).

All drivers after that made the game run worse. Never got comparable performance with Windows 7, or Vista. The card is certainly under used, but it runs Arma with most settings on very high, looks amazing and always plays smooth.

yeah right if you say the game is running smooth you mean it's running above 60 FPS isn't it?

mine doesn't. BIS gotta fix this crap.

Hope itgonna be fixed before it takes 2 years like arma 1 cause operation flashpoint is getting out october.

FLashpoint 2 rocks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

arma 2 sucks !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

not optimized for high end pc only crap can run this game smoothly.

WE ARE NOT NEANTHERTHALERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!