Bellum 10 Posted August 28, 2009 I want this thread to serve the purpose of determining what Operating System you have and what type of performance you get from ArmA 2 on said OS. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mudkip 0 Posted August 28, 2009 Good and bad is subjective. I voted good because I haven't got any huge issues that others seem to have (namely those with a GTX 295) but 20 frames is horrible for a first-person shooter... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bellum 10 Posted August 28, 2009 Good and bad is subjective. I voted good because I haven't got any huge issues that others seem to have (namely those with a GTX 295) but 20 frames is horrible for a first-person shooter... Performance is related to framerates. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
C4PROOF 10 Posted August 28, 2009 The Good, The Bad and the damn frame hickups... I'm running acceptable performance with Vista Home Premium 64-bit. But this is so subjective that it's hard to have a conclusive result on this poll. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
xclusiv8 10 Posted August 28, 2009 so far the pull shows that there is no difference... Interesting. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VariousArtist 19 Posted August 28, 2009 I want this thread to serve the purpose of determining what Operating System you have and what type of performance you get from ArmA 2 on said OS. Sry, but useless poll - what exactly is "type of performance"? Without a rating this is merely based on "feeling" which makes this poll invalid and useless. There are so much variables unconcidered. You dont get anything from a "How do you feel with your OS"-Poll! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ginger mcale 11 Posted August 28, 2009 Full acknowledge @Zothen´s post. This poll is non-sense. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bulldogs 10 Posted August 28, 2009 I automatically related performance to fps, but maybe there should be a definition for those who misunderstand, or over analyze. Btw, running e7300 (@ 3.5ghz) and a 9800gt, my performance with 1.02 was higher in xp over vista and much higher in win 7. With patch 1.03 my performance is higher than vista in win xp and lower than vista in win 7 (only slightly) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeMeSiS 11 Posted August 28, 2009 Performance is related to framerates. Yeah but what is good? I am perfectly happy with 25 stable, other people want at least 40, 60 or 250. :p Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mad rabbit 0 Posted August 28, 2009 This poll wasn't thought through properly. If I have a 4XAGP graphics card and a single core CPU, the games performance problems can safely be said to NOT be due to my OS. Conversely, I can have the best hardware currently available to man which could make this game run great irrespective of my OS. A better poll is: Is ArmA2 performance on your computer: 1) Excellent 2) Good 3) Bad 4) Terrible Hopefully statistically these results would subdue any outliers such as: a) Users running this game on a computer below minimum specifications b) Users running this game on a computer with no problems ...however... ...given that I and a large majority of others have equal to and above recommended, NOT minimum, specifications and the game runs like crap... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kklownboy 43 Posted August 28, 2009 This poll wasn't thought through properly.If I have a 4XAGP graphics card and a single core CPU, the games performance problems can safely be said to NOT be due to my OS. Conversely, I can have the best hardware currently available to man which could make this game run great irrespective of my OS. A better poll is: Is ArmA2 performance on your computer: 1) Excellent 2) Good 3) Bad 4) Terrible Hopefully statistically these results would subdue any outliers such as: a) Users running this game on a computer below minimum specifications b) Users running this game on a computer with no problems ...however... ...given that I and a large majority of others have equal to and above recommended, NOT minimum, specifications and the game runs like crap... Start your own pole... My kit runs the game great. XP64 is still my best OS with my ATI cards. Vista64 is ok RC764... is ok (i dont even boot into anymore. tho i guess i will on the next Driver release by ATI.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bulldogs 10 Posted August 28, 2009 The purpose of this poll is to see how people's performance is on different operating systems. It's not very accurate, but perhapse a poll asking for people to supply their performance on different O/S's, but only if they've tested on more than 1. It should also ask to post hardware, which is going outside the scope of a poll. I think it'd be better suited to remove the poll and just ask people to post their specs and performance they got on each O/S they tested on. Asking only what their performance is has nothing to do with this thread as the aim of the thread is to compare performance on different operating systems. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
echo1 0 Posted August 28, 2009 (edited) Asking only what their performance is has nothing to do with this thread as the aim of the thread is to compare performance on different operating systems. Using the logic behind this poll, we could establish a correlation between the colour of people's underwear, and the performance of ArmA 2... I was going to describe why this poll makes no sense, but some people have already done an excellent job of that already, and it's kinda self-evident really. The best thing to do here would be to have a poll for the people who have tested it across all three (there are a few people who have done that) as really they are the only people who can answer this issue. Edited August 28, 2009 by echo1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
-=seany=- 5 Posted August 28, 2009 The best thing to do here would be to have a pole for the people who have tested it across all three (there are a few people who have done that) as really they are the only people who can answer this issue. Like me, but it is still useless because I can only make one choice. XP64>Vista & Win7, by about 10fps Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
echo1 0 Posted August 28, 2009 Well then, vote for XP64 with good performance I guess. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Iroquois Pliskin 0 Posted August 28, 2009 Where's Win 7 RTM 'Good Performance'? :D Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ViperNL 10 Posted August 28, 2009 Tests have proven that this game runs best under XP. Vista and Win7 perform about the same. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
connos 10 Posted August 29, 2009 Windows 7 RC 7100 64bit performs the best for me. I used to Have Vista 64bit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
volkov956 0 Posted August 29, 2009 I have tested the following Win XP 32bit Great Performance Win XP 64bit Stuttering Windows Vista 32bit Stuttering Windows Vista 64bit Low Performance Windows Server 2003 32bit Great Performance Windows Server 2003 64bit Lower Performance Windows 7 RTM 32bit Great Performance Windows 7 RTM 64bit Stuttering But with all tests I still random CTD no matter what and the higher the res I run on my GTX 280 the faster it CTD usually at 1600x1200 its 1.5hrs 1280x1024 its around 2hrs. All settings are at normal and the crashes usually end with out of memory or no error at all just the me staring at the desktop Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
echo1 0 Posted August 29, 2009 Sounds like I should get my copy of Win7 RTM onto my PC... Shame that there seems to be such a discrepancy between 32bit and 64bit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
