it's unplayable on my notebook

Hi,

I bought ArmaII some months ago and tried it 1st on my Windows 7 but I got poor results. Today I tried on a clean XP hoping that's a bit better but it is still almost unplayable. I have around 10-15 fps with everything set to low and a 1024 resolution/rendering.

my specs

arma 1.03

Core Duo 2 2.56 Ghz

nVidia 9600m 512 VRAM

4 GB RAM

Windows XP 32

It is really frustrating because the optimal requirements are:

http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/ArmA_2#Optimal_PC_Requirements

Optimal PC Requirements

* CPU: Intel Core 2.8 GHz / AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+ or faster

* RAM: 2 GB

* Video Card: NVIDIA GeForce 8800GT / ATI Radeon 4850 with Shader Model 3 and 512 MB VRAM or faster

* OS: Windows XP or Vista

But when I run the game it looks like I don't have the minimal requirements :mad:

Its your graphic card - no surprise it doesn't play well.

Don't expect to play ArmA 2 on a notebook like yours, just like it won't play Crysis either..

Its your graphic card - no surprise it doesn't play well.

Don't expect to play ArmA 2 on a notebook like yours, just like it won't play Crysis either..

It does play Crysis quite well.

Ok, I also forgot to set the textures from normal to low. I got a bit more FPS now.

Edited August 22, 2009 by Tex-Twil

i dont get why peeps play games on the lappie its totaly not made for gaming except the gaming laptops but those dont run games good too

and i dont see Bvidia 9600M on the back of the game

Edited August 22, 2009 by Richieb0y

It does play Crysis quite well.

quite well at what? your laptop rez, with out AA and the viewdistance in Crysis is not whats in ARMA, but your vidcard is a mobile "9600m" which is = to a 7600gts i believe in performance, but has some dx10 ability?... A 8800gt is much more than your 9600m...

so you need to set your in game settings to normal with disabled AA and disabled shadows. Make sure your fill rate is 100% or less. Lower your VD to 500. And turn off any AA or AF in your nvida 3d settings in your control panel.

I see that the 9600m is barley playable in most benchmarks i found in Google.

And was ok at 1064/768 at low settings in Crysis?

quite well at what? your laptop rez, with out AA and the viewdistance in Crysis is not whats in ARMA, but your vidcard is a mobile "9600m" which is = to a 7600gts i believe in performance, but has some dx10 ability?... A 8800gt is much more than your 9600m...

so you need to set your in game settings to normal with disabled AA and disabled shadows. Make sure your fill rate is 100% or less. Lower your VD to 500. And turn off any AA or AF in your nvida 3d settings in your control panel.

I see that the 9600m is barley playable in most benchmarks i found in Google.

And was ok at 1064/768 at low settings in Crysis?

ok I will try that.

Yes, I was playing Crysis 1200x800 with AA and mid settings and had around 30 fps.

In all likelyhood it could be your CPU. Arma 2 is very CPU dependant and your CPU is below optimal specs.

damn :(

I think I have to wait a couple of years. Maybe then I'll have a fast enough pc to play it.

I bet that with LOW textures your bottleneck is actually the CPU, maybe also the RAM, if you have less than 4gb.

Here's a crazy little idea: make the resolution 800x600 (with accompanying fillrate). No, really. It helps. That's the only way I can play, at least :) (3800+ AMD Athlon X2, 8600 GT 512MB). By keeping some AA on and normal/low on most other settings, it actually doesn't look all that bad!

Regards,

Wolfrug

Also try out the various mods that are designed to increase FPS

it runs well on my acer 5530g, amd turion x2 dual core 2 ghz,4 gigs ram, hd 3470 hybrid x2...i play with 1280*720, text and mem high, low terrain,low/normal object,high AF, AA and post disabled,shadows high..

To the OP: I'm afraid it's hopeless. My notebook specs:

X9100@3.4ghz | GTX260m@600/1500/799 | X-25m SSDm + 320GB 7200rpm

And (at playable settings) the games looks pretty terrible. The best I can manage is about 1280x800 with everything on Low or Off. Pretty sad-looking (and very similar to games of yesteryear). It basically looks a bit better than Operation Flashpoint (although much less sharp/practical) at those settings.

Hi,

I bought ArmaII some months ago and tried it 1st on my Windows 7 but I got poor results. Today I tried on a clean XP hoping that's a bit better but it is still almost unplayable. I have around 10-15 fps with everything set to low and a 1024 resolution/rendering.

my specs

It is really frustrating because the optimal requirements are:

http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/ArmA_2#Optimal_PC_Requirements

But when I run the game it looks like I don't have the minimal requirements :mad:

While your 9600GT might be a good notebook card, its still a notebook (mobile) card. Our cyberpower notebook is pretty fast and came with a 9600GT but I wouldnt expect it to run games like ARMA 2. Its just not made for it.