HOME 
My point is im running at an FPS which I get when I run at normal on operation arrowhead.Originally Posted by Leon86
Arma 2 highest: 30 fps
arma 2 operation arrowhead medium: 30 fps
Dats what I ment
My point is im running at an FPS which I get when I run at normal on operation arrowhead.
Arma 2 highest: 30 fps
arma 2 operation arrowhead medium: 30 fps
Dats what I ment
Such a difference is hardly surprising as you cannot directly compare the settings in OA vs those in A2. OA includes several advances in its 3d engine that result in it being more resource-intensive. So how about lowering some of your settings slightly?
For example:
1680x1050
3d res = 100%
View distance 2500
Post processing = low
AA = low
Shadows high
Objects, terrain, textures normal
And try using Oktane's NoBlur mod (enables Post-processing but significantly reduces the performance hit).
Thanks for the answer domokun still got the weird performance issue. My rig is good enough to play ETW at highest settings likewise NTW and almost Shogun 2 total war. All these games are the equilivant or more CPU intense than Arma 2.
My settings ive used on Arma 2 OA is:
No post processing or AA what so ever.
All on normal.
1280x800 with 100% 3d.
SO I cant really lower anymore it will look to awfull.
Last edited by Antonoo; Mar 6 2011 at 12:15.
I run at:
1920x1080
2000 visibility
aa off
low objects detail
high shadow detail
post very low
rest on normal
get about 50-ish fps. on benchmark 1 and 08 mission. your system should be sortof on par with mine (I have q6600 on 3.3 and gtx260). On that res your performance should be better than mine.
Yeah its just that arma is so shitty optimized.
While the game could use more optimizing no doubt, there's also very few games with the scale, features and calibur of ARMA.. no suprise it beats up rigs
There might be some issues with your hardware/setup or faulty gear as ive got a lower spec system, mostly same settings @ 1920x1080 and besides the odd stutter in heavy combat she runs pretty nicely.. certainly playable
What kind of cooling you run Leon? was looking into clocking my q6600 soon
Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ 2.4 Ghz // 4 GB RAM // nVidia GTX 560 // Windows Vista 64-bit
Thank You Bohemia!!(video)
No its just shitty optimized.
My clan mate has got 4gb ddr3 ram, a intel dual core processor at 2,6ghz, a nvidia 9600GT and he runs operation arrowhead at max settings.
My system is THREE times better atleast and I run it at the lowest.
How can I make Arma 2 Combined Ops playable on this rig:
Intel Core2 Duo E7200 2.53 Ghz
3Gb Ram
Ati Radeon HD3600
Windows 7 32-bit
A scythe mugen. I can run my q6600 on 3.6 with it and keep temps under 70 degrees, but I prefer 3.3 on lower voltage so my fans dont have to run faster when watching a 1080p movie.
My q6600 isn't a very good one if you look at speed and required voltage but they're hard to killeven ran some benchmarks on 3.7Ghz @ 1.5V. Probably not very stable but you dont really want to do extensive stresstesting with those kind of voltages anyway.
when running on 2.8 Ghz I can run my q6600 on 1.15V (on load) vcore, I guess you could even cool that with the stockcooler.
---------- Post added at 01:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:55 PM ----------
He probably has a higher tolerance for low fps.
---------- Post added at 01:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:56 PM ----------
A better gpu will go a long way. Even a 50eu secondhand ati 4850 will improve performance a lot.
Last edited by Leon86; Mar 13 2011 at 12:00.
Definatelly. I cant run maxed and enjoy it. Im running most of the time 1600x900 with most to high and some to normal.He probably has a higher tolerance for low fps.
But 11 fps for Antonoo does not sound right. Will have to get back to you on that and see what is wrong. The game is not that badly optimized.
Reply With Quote
