GUIDE: Getting the 100% out of your CPU - Automation with Process Lasso

[bullhorn 18]

Hi, everyone. From my own testing, I managed to raise my game's performance by making sure my CPU is giving its 100% while playing ARMA3.

By default, running arma3.exe in Normal priority and Windows Power Profile set to Balanced. With these settings, your CPU cores might be parked for power savings and only unparked once the game is demanding more processing power. This means your CPU has to react to the request and then raise its clockspeed. To give it a real-world example, it's like having a race car sit on the Start-line with its engine turned off, waiting for the light to change and start it immediately as the light turns green. It works, but wouldn't you rather be sitting there, revving the engine in anticipation, already?

So to solve this, I set arma3.exe process to High priority and whenever arma3.exe is running, I set the windows Power Profile to High Performance. This setting unparks all your cores and sets the CPU frequency to it's maximum possible. What Process Lasso does is just AUTOMATE THE PROCESS, so you don't have to do it manually every time.

It's done automatically on my system with Process Lasso by Bitsum and what's even better - is that the software changes those settings back off once arma3.exe process is terminated.

The software has a 30-days free trial but these features are going to remain available even after the time runs out

Here's a guide on what you need to set:

Load ARMA and then alt+tab to access Process Lasso

Right click arma3.exe and make sure you 'Classify as a game' and set the Priority class -> Always -> High

http://i.gyazo.com/dbb46621be91dcfdc23a58db9631cddb.png (131 kB)

Make sure your 3 Gaming mode settings are enabled

You can also add arma3.exe to a list of application power profiles

That's it, you're done. Verify you've done correctly by making sure Process Lasso changes to Bitsum Highest Performance while ARMA is running and back to Balanced when it's not. If you actually follow through, let me know if you saw a performance improvement or not.

Edited March 12, 2015 by BullHorn

[jumbobreakfast 13]

Thanks for taking the time to post this. I followed your steps but found that it was slightly easier to set the power profile by right-clicking the arma3 process and selecting Application Power profile-->Bitsum Highest performance

I'll give it a go and see if it makes any difference but I already like the way it reverts to normal automatically when arma is closed

[Fushko 60]

So many people have suggested this but have never showed the benefits. Give me some before -> after benchmarks. Until then, this is useless.

Here's a nice benchmark: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=375092418

[bullhorn 18]

You don't need to install this software or do anything if you don't want to. You can try setting your Windows Power Profile to High Performance and arma3.exe process to High priority manually for the same effect.

All that this software does it automate the process for you.

[jumpinghubert 48]

Why you don´t make before and after tests like suggested in the posting ABOVE yours?

[bullhorn 18]

Because

From my own testing, I managed to raise my game's performance by making sure my CPU is giving its 100% while playing ARMA3

This guide doesn't suddenly turn your CPU into a magical beast that gives 150% power. It makes sure your CPU is available to give its 100%, 100% of the time. Most modern CPUs are idle around 800MHz and clock up to 3.4GHz-5GHz when the process demands it. The time it takes to clock from idle to full speed is the one that might cause the most impact on performance.

I did before and after tests 3 months ago when I first got it. My game runs better now which is why I decided that this is worth posting. Feel free to move along.

[DGeorge85 10]

I'm missing the point here as to how this will increase performance. Modern chips are constantly changing clock speed across cores independently in a time scale which may as well be called "instant". Even then, setting your power profile and priority does not keep it from doing so. If you want to ensure your chip runs at peak frequency at all times you must go through some BIOS/UEFI settings to disable C-states/EIST, raise or remove power and current limiters and have proper cooling to keep the chip form throttling itself.

Whether the difference in Arma performance is noticeable or not by changing power profiles and priority in Windows is mainly besides the point here because it doesn't even achieve what you are after. Also, if anyone cares to know, I have all C-states and EIST enabled (CPU idles @ 800mhz) and the instant I run Arma it clocks to max and stays there. 8-10 watts power draw while dicking around on the desktop, and instant full speed during load...seems the best of both worlds. The power delivery/regulation of todays motherboards and CPUs is so dynamic and sophisticated that forcing a machine to run full tilt 24/7 would simply be out of paranoia and a waste a whole lot of power in the meantime.

[bullhorn 18]

You're right, that's how your system should react - but with ARMA/BI, you never know. How can C-states/EIST regulate CPU clock speeds when your Windows setting forces your CPU to constantly run at max speed? I would like to hear that explanation.

A properly built and set-up system will have no problems running the CPU at max speed 24/7 for 5 years. If you're having issues running CPU at max speed, it will happen during heavy load, regardless of you forcing it to max speed constantly or not.

From a power consumption point of view, I actually did the test once. 2 months of Balanced profile vs. 2 months of High Performance profile resulted in a $5 difference in electricity bill. So even if you play 100 hours of ARMA3 a month, it will have little effect.

[Rydygier 1302]

So I tried (i7 3.40) with my own simply FPS test mission for two situations: static scene of me staning still in the middle of Kavala, and 64 vs 64 at a time firefight on the Almyra lake with me as a spectator. For both I tested with default settings and high performance with 100% of CPU power forced and high A3 thread priority. Basically no visible change to me. Kavala - stable 37. Almyra - average 14, but varying widely from 4 to 30.

Additionally tried 32 vs 32. Here could be 1-2 FPS of difference.

Edited March 12, 2015 by Rydygier

[DGeorge85 10]

You're right, that's how your system should react - but with ARMA/BI, you never know. How can C-states/EIST regulate CPU clock speeds when your Windows setting forces your CPU to constantly run at max speed? I would like to hear that explanation.

A properly built and set-up system will have no problems running the CPU at max speed 24/7 for 5 years. If you're having issues running CPU at max speed, it will happen during heavy load, regardless of you forcing it to max speed constantly or not.

From a power consumption point of view, I actually did the test once. 2 months of Balanced profile vs. 2 months of High Performance profile resulted in a $5 difference in electricity bill. So even if you play 100 hours of ARMA3 a month, it will have little effect.

We are talking about chip and motherboard settings which, I'd like to think, take precedent over Windows settings, and on my system they do. Regardless of power profile my system idles down to 800mhz and lowers voltage, then clocks up to my OC frequency under load. Windows would basically have to apply a constant load to keep my chip clocked up unless I disabled EIST/C-states.

My question to you is why force something 24/7 (which isn't even accomplished by doing what you suggest) when the hardware can properly configure itself to only clock up when needed, saving power, and for OC junkies improve the lifespan? Technology affords us the ability to only use the power when needed, and save energy everywhere else, so why not take advantage? The only realistic answer I see is out of paranoia. If your game is running better then I suggest looking at your system setup, as there was likely something else poorly configured and a this power profile+priority setting is just bypassing it. Otherwise, "GUIDES" like these with capitalization, a bunch of links and bold text are a dime a dozen on the internet where someone is insisting something useless worked like magic for them.

Some old-school guys have trouble moving along with and trusting technology, I get that. There was a time when I would have forced max frequency 24/7 as well out of peace of mind, but at some point, as these power saving features are refined and embedded in the hardware itself, there comes a time where you can simply trust that they are doing their job correctly and move on with your life. I mean, come on...You expect me to believe you isolated your CPU power draw from the rest of your system and house and then measured it for 4 months for validation before posting this?

And AFTER ALL THAT, the point remains that your argument is based on forcing max clock 24/7, yet whether on "Balanced" or "High Performance" a chip should be idling down and clocking up only when needed. If you want to force max frequency 24/7 it's time to look elsewhere.

Altis Benchmark v.60

Balanced + Normal: 84FPS

High Performance + High: 85FPS

My Windows doesn't care about the difference in priority or power profile. Either I'm not blessed by the Windows gods, or my system is set up properly and performing as expected...you choose.

[jumpinghubert 48]

Because

This guide doesn't suddenly turn your CPU into a magical beast that gives 150% power. It makes sure your CPU is available to give its 100%, 100% of the time. Most modern CPUs are idle around 800MHz and clock up to 3.4GHz-5GHz when the process demands it. The time it takes to clock from idle to full speed is the one that might cause the most impact on performance.

I did before and after tests 3 months ago when I first got it. My game runs better now which is why I decided that this is worth posting. Feel free to move along.

I don´t see any argument to do NOT a before-after-test with a benchmark so you have FACTS instead of impressions. Do you understand? There is a difference between: it seems to be smoother now and a statement like: before 32fps, after 37fps. I hope you understand this difference. If not I cant help you :p

@DGeorge85

Thanks for the bench. It seems to be a placebo. Now we can all move along :p

Edited March 13, 2015 by JumpingHubert

[doveman 7]

My i5-4670k certainly idles at 800mhz in Balanced but sticks at 4.8ghz in High Performance. I'm pretty sure I have EIST and C-States enabled, although maybe I had to disable some to over clock but I wouldn't have thought it would down clock to 800mhz in Balanced if they were disabled.

I wouldn't count on BIOS settings taking precedence over Windows either, as the drivers can probably override them and there's motherboard utils that let you adjust over clocking settings from Windows.

Having said that, I can't imagine the CPU ever gets to idle when ARMA is running, although it might down clock a bit from Max clocks at certain times so perhaps that could introduce some stutters but not a noticeable fps difference.

Far more important in my experience though is eliminating any latency problems. I had bad stuuters in various games due to high latency (with my old Phenom II X4 955 system) just because my mouse was connected to a USB hub, which was fixed by connecting it directly to the motherboard.

[bullhorn 18]

Having said that, I can't imagine the CPU ever gets to idle when ARMA is running, although it might down clock a bit from Max clocks at certain times so perhaps that could introduce some stutters but not a noticeable fps difference.

Exactly my experience. I don't know how to measure and provide numbers for more/less stutters, but my game runs smoother. Deal with it.

[nikiforos 450]

Placebo, but thanks for your effort!

[St. Jimmy 272]

There are people whose CPU clocks itself up and down with some hundredd MHz difference even if gaming so this could give some improvement for those. Though that should be able to get rid of from MB's settings.

[chrisb 196]

Take two brand new systems, exactly the same. Bench them, they will bench similar. Then give the two systems to two players, let them have these systems for their own personal use for 6-9mths, using them as they would their own system.

Bench again after that 6-9mth and the two will likely bench very differently. Players say its placebo (not having a go at anyone) that they can't get the same performance. But it isn't placebo just because your system is the same or better than someone else's, but they're getting better performance. Its because their system is probably tweaked slightly differently or more to the point, your system is full of crap that you think, isn't crap.

That's the way it goes with pc gaming, keep things as lean and clean as you can, if you don't, someone will always have the same system as yours or indeed a lower spec system, but theirs will be doing much better than yours performance wise. Look at your system and what's on there and think, do I really need all that crap, but by then of course, the damage is usually done..;) sorry.:(

[jumpinghubert 48]

Stuttering caused by jumping clockspeeds will result in different benchresults/fps in arma3. Arma3 uses more or less CONSTANTLY the same percentage of your cpu. IF clockspeed goes down in gameplay, there will be as an result lower cpu power (55% of 4GHZ is more than 55% of 1,8GHZ). So a simple benchmark will make a difference IF there is real downclocking. IF there is no difference in benchresults THEN there is no downclocking in gameplay. Simple logic.

[zemstafreda 0]

Standard High Performance Plan doesn't fully unpark cores. Frequency scaling is disabled but most cores could still be parked. To fully disable this you have to edit the registry which is not the smartest thing you can do to your PC, laptop especially. I use ParkControl from Bitsum to easily adjust that when I need it, it's free and makes a big diffrence on my laptop in few games. I don't know if Process Lasso with ProBalance and Gaming Mode enabled and with high priority on game process will add much but it seems that it's also free now.

[sammael 366]

Very strange things happened. 

When I run stress test to use 100% all my 8 cores everything is ok. they all 100% used

then I launch arma3 and every core get only 15-20% despite the fact that stress test use a 100% my CPU

 

it seems arma3 engine has a full control and prioritet over my CPU when runing  and make what it want. Cut and don`t use  80% of all 8 cores 

 

   how it possible?)

[domokun 515]

I think that there's a simple explanation.

Say your CPU has 4 cores and you're look at CPU load then it's prolly taking the average across all 4 cores.

Since Arma 3's engine (RV4) doesn't multi-thread very well, most of the processes are run on CPU0.

This means that the other CPUs, CPU1, CPU2 & CPU3 are practically twiddling their thumbs (idling).

Therefore while CPU0 can be at 80-100%, the others could be at 0-10%.

This gives an average of 20-30%

[zemstafreda 0]

I think he was talking about "every core".

 

...but it seems that it's also free now

I was wrong, it's 30 day trial.

[ViperAleks 7]

The shame is that most recent games are start-and-play but ARMA2 and ARMA3 games are constantly need shaman dances around PC and game settings to be playable. BIS definitely needs the new game engine to utilize all CPU cores and all available memory for their games. 

[n07ear 0]

<_<

[Chas Reed 0]

 Quoting myself in the Avsim forums, "Speaking of Game optimization, I was one of the more impetuous investors in Process Lasso and I wonder if anybody can demonstrably prove that PR was a good P3D investment… I have not, to my own satisfaction, been able to do so; my initial placebo effect driven review notwithstanding"

 

 

http://www.avsim.com/topic/501897-windows-10s-game-mode-feedback-with-prepar3d/#entry3550287

 

Chas

Edited January 16, 2017 by Chas Reed

[fruity_rudy 16]

On 5.10.2016 at 1:54 AM, ViperAleks said:

The shame is that most recent games are start-and-play but ARMA2 and ARMA3 games are constantly need shaman dances around PC and game settings to be playable. BIS definitely needs the new game engine to utilize all CPU cores and all available memory for their games. 

 

Dude, still got tears in my eyes.. I imagine you with some facepaint and a torch, dancing around your desk :D