Arma 3 vs High end laptop

[ctrlaltelite 10]

Hey folks

 

I have decided to go back to Arma after a long time of not playing. In this time I replaced my old desktop (i5 3570k + 2x670) with a new laptop last year, with my old PC which has specs very much below my laptop I could run Arma easily at 30-50fps with high settings if I remember right, even on multiplayer however since using this laptop I am struggling to break 20fps online and it is pretty much unplayable with spikes down to 7-9fps.

 

Spec is:

CPU: Intel i7 5700hq @ 2.7Ghz Turbo up to 3.5Ghz
RAM: 8GB
GPU: Nvidia 980m

 

Playing at 1920x1080. My GPU utilization sits at 10-30% with CPU utilization at 50-60% so I know something isnt right also the graphic setting of the game doesnt seem to make any difference between low and very high (ultra lowers fps somewhat). I have tried changing some startup settings in the launcher, I have inputed 6gb as my max memory and 8gb for my VRAM. Also set cpucount to 4 and ticked hyperthreading (Also tried setting cpucount to 8 but made no difference). None of these changes seem to make any difference. I am begining to think it might be to do with the inheirent lower clock speeds found in laptops as my old i5 3570k was running at 4.4GHz. I will attach a DxDiag bellow if that may help but any suggestions to increase performance would be appreciated.

 

DxDiag: https://gist.github.com/anonymous/d670633c37c39251491f5df9efdc3c75

[domokun 515]

I reckon that your suspicions about the important of CPU speed are correct.

This is because Arma 3's RV4 engine support for multicore CPUs is fairly poor compared to modern engines (Frostbite, UE4,  Cryengine, Unity, etc.). Consequantly to get good frames in A3 your PC need the highest possible IPC. That means 2 things, high clocks speeds (preferably 4+, ideally 4.3+) and preferably Intel. The problem is that the faster a CPU runs, the hotter they become. Sadly AMD CPUs run twice as hot as Intel with, e.g. TDP of AMD's FX-9590 is 220W vs i7-6700k's 91W. Dissipating heat in a laptop is very difficult due to the confined space. Here's an old but good article that underlines the importance of CPU speed (rather than multicore) on performance in Arma:

http://www.techspot.com/review/712-arma-3-benchmarks/page5.html

This is supported by a more recent article:

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/940-15/cpu-jeux-3d-crysis-3-arma-iii.html

However GPUs also have an important part to play as demonstrated here:

https://youtu.be/UISTSZ-fx_8?t=6m47s

So in short, if you want to play Arma on a laptop, get the fastest Intel processor that you can afford (currently this the i7-6820HK which runs at 2.7 GHz but clocks up to 3.3-3.6 GHz under load. It also has an unlocked multiplier (very rare on a laptop) for overclocking!) along with the fastest GPU (currently NVidia's GTX 1060, 1070 & 1080 seem to be king).

The GT72VR 6RE from MSI seems to be fairly cost-effective solution (i7-6700HQ, GTX 1070, 17,3" , 8 Go RAM, 1 TB HDD, 128 Go SSD) @ €1700.

[ctrlaltelite 10]

So in short, if you want to play Arma on a laptop, get the fastest Intel processor that you can afford (currently this the i7-6820HK which runs at 2.7 GHz but clocks up to 3.3-3.6 GHz under load. It also has an unlocked multiplier (very rare on a laptop) for overclocking!) along with the fastest GPU (currently NVidia's GTX 1060, 1070 & 1080 seem to be king).

The GT72VR 6RE from MSI seems to be fairly cost-effective solution (i7-6700HQ, GTX 1070, 17,3" , 8 Go RAM, 1 TB HDD, 128 Go SSD) @ €1700.

 

Alright. So yeah it is essentially impossible to play competitivly(i.e with playable FPS) online on a laptop CPU unless it is a specialised overclockable unit I doubt the i7-6700hq is going to be a strong performer based on my experience with my 5700hq as there is very little performance delta between these chips.

 

Thats a shame.

[digitalgeo 21]

Hi, I play Arma 3 on a laptop, so I'd like to share my insight.

I can easily achieve 40 fps with my specs.

My laptop is a Clevo W230SD:

 

CPU - i7 4910mq 

GPU - 960m 2GB

RAM - 8GB

Screen size - 13.3 inches

 

Although my GPU is worse than yours, my CPU is much better.

It can do a max of 3.9Ghz but, due to thermal throttling, I limit it to 2.7 Ghz for stable frames.

So even though I lowered my Ghz and cannot overclock, I still get reasonable frames.

 

In towns like Kavala, I get 30-40 fps.

In the countryside, I get 40-60 fps.

 

I am happy with 40 fps, and that's what I get all the time. Even better, I don't run on the lowest settings so Arma 3 looks fantastic.

So you do not necessarily need to overclock, or get the highest end cpu. 

 

[domokun 515]

Alright. So yeah it is essentially impossible to play competitivly(i.e with playable FPS) online on a laptop CPU unless it is a specialised overclockable unit I doubt the i7-6700hq is going to be a strong performer based on my experience with my 5700hq as there is very little performance delta between these chips.

 

Thats a shame.

I think that's a unfair statement.

You certainly can play online, even with only 30-40 fps.

Arma isn't a twitch game like CS-Go, where reactions measure in mille-seconds are the difference between life and death.

Think of Arma as CS crossed with chess or thinking man's FPS.

Being in the right place, in the right stance, with the right weapon, with the right people is often way more important than a split-second reaction.

With the rare exception (Asus ROG GX800), laptops never come close to desktops in terms of performance.

The gulf in performance in only made bigger by Arma's antiquated engine.

So either:

a. tweak your in-game settings: try the Very High preset and lower your View Distance

b. bring realism to your expectations (no laptop is ever going to compete with an overclocked desktop)

c. try another game and/or return for Arma 4