brit~XR 0 Posted September 5, 2010 Maybe the 5850 doesnt like arma some reason. Someone i know has same card and gets worst proformance then me and im using just a gtx 275 at 1920 x 1200 res Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
H.A.W.K 10 Posted September 5, 2010 Maybe the 5850 doesnt like arma some reason. Someone i know has same card and gets worst proformance then me and im using just a gtx 275 at 1920 x 1200 res Friend of mine got 5870 and he is running it with no problem :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marc15yo 0 Posted September 6, 2010 OMFG!!!! WAIT I FIGURED IT OUT!!!! :eek: i just gained like 5-10 FPS and absolutely no irregular drops or stutters in fps!!! okay this might not work, but it worked for me. Remember how i said the problem was gone after switching from my samsung spinpoint f3 windows installation to my maxtor windows installation? Well, i was completely wrong :j: after i defragmented my maxtor the problem seemed to come back. Now the problem is not with the hard drives or fragmentation. Then i booted up, task manager, performance, resource monitor. And i ignored the cpu for a second and looked at the memory part. Where it displays the Hard Faults per second i realized that arma 2 had a pretty high number. So i went online found out that hard faul'ts is basically the amount of times a program will read/write or access the page file system in windows. I realized why would arma 2 be doing that so much? it was like 55 at one point :O now i dont know if thats neccessarily the problem but heres what this discovery encouraged me to do... I went to my computer, system properties, advenced system settings, performance section, settings, advanced, page file section, change What i did is made windows not use any page file system on this drive local disk C (my maxtor) and made it instead do 4096MB of page file on my Disk D which (my samsung). Of course windows told me there was already a page file on this drive (because i have have windows 7 installed on my samsung too) and i told windows to overwrite. Then i booted to my samsung OS and did the exact same thing and vice versa. (removed the pagefile on C and made windows use D for my new page file of 4096MB) When i booted arma 2 on my samsung behold, 53FPS on default settings, turned the settings up to high view distance to 2000m, 48 FPS !!! Hope this helped, i know i'm not very good at explaining myself when i'm excited so if you guys need me to give out a more organized and detailed instructions i'll rewrite it and upload some pics too. :bounce3: Anyways yeah no stutters at all, the lod trashing is almost instant, i mean it still switches lods but dosn't lnger or drop my fps while doing so. Its amazing :p Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EDcase 87 Posted September 6, 2010 HDD has no effect on fps directly. LoD and texture lags are due to slow HDD. For ATI users: To force VSync OFF In TrayTools make a profile and link it to ARMA2OA executable. Set all options to force VSync off and save the profile. When you run ARMA2 it will automatically use that profile. Of course it won't have a huge impact of fps if your average is below 60fps anyway but it helps with menus and map. (I get 700fps when I zoom in on the map [on my laptop!]) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marc15yo 0 Posted September 6, 2010 (edited) Yeah i know, but everytime the game would load certain a lods, or textures, my fps would go from 40's all the way down to 8-10 fps and then backup. Without these drops, the avg (mean) fps went up a few in the benchmark. But the most important effect is that the stutters had ceased, no more hiccups or drops whenever a lods or textures were loaded. We all know arma 2 is hard drive hungry, but when the game seems to access the page file the overall performance stutters and then goes back to normal. I'm not suggesting that fps is related at all to the HD i'm saying the hiccups are. When the hiccups occur FPS goes down to 0-10 as it loads w.e. its looking for in the page file. So switching the page file to another hard drive seemed to do the trick ;) for me at least, unless everybody else problem is related to gfx card and cpu rendering low frame rates.... but it doesn't appear to be so from what most of the guys have been describing on this thread. Edited September 6, 2010 by Marc15yo Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EDcase 87 Posted September 6, 2010 (edited) Sorry, I wasn't replying to your post but trying to clear up a bit of the confusion that some have. .. but yeah, what you said makes sense. Page file should be on a separate drive/partition to game installation (and game should be separate from OS install) Don't forget that some missions will have a lag spikes when scripts run and when AI are spawned... Edited September 6, 2010 by EDcase Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Iroquois Pliskin 0 Posted September 6, 2010 There's two things to say: Phenom II x4 955 BE and Phenom x6 T1090. Make a sensible choice and get an i7 930 next time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stk2008 14 Posted September 6, 2010 Hi there maybe that's why I had a little more speed than you as I all ways have my page file on a diff drive. Any ways I am on me laptop at the moment as I am now setting up RAID0 on me main pc I will report back and let you lot know if it helps at all. All so in the standard ATI control panel there is no option to disable Vsync is there or have I missed it?. thanks and watch this space :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
H.A.W.K 10 Posted September 6, 2010 There's two things to say: Phenom II x4 955 BE and Phenom x6 T1090.Make a sensible choice and get an i7 930 next time. lol, 955 BE is great in the perf/price ratio, better than Q9550...yup, i7 is much better but you know, not everybody have like 500$ for new DDR3, mobo and CPU ;) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stk2008 14 Posted September 6, 2010 lol, 955 BE is great in the perf/price ratio, better than Q9550...yup, i7 is much better but you know, not everybody have like 500$ for new DDR3, mobo and CPU ;) Money is no excuse tbh you should rob a bank or mug old ladies to get a PC for ARMA2 :P. Nah I know how you feel as it took me ages to save up for my Q6700 and its only the last few days I have managed to get me a decent GPU all be it a little dated now all ready but best I could afford. I will keep ya posted any ways. Damn its slow 39% been going for ages but then it is formatting two hard drives not the one now. The extra heat the PSU is producing for running two HD`s at the same time plus the drives them self are producing more heat all so im sweating here. Yes yes I am under the bloody stairs ffs :( ---------- Post added at 05:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:58 PM ---------- well I am a noob fisrt time setting up raid i chose wrong type I chose mirror thats RAID1 I needed RAID 0 thats striping. Oh well would explain 1 why it takes so long to format still aint done 2 why I had no option to set cluster size BTW what should I set cluster size to what is the average cluster size of arma2 files?. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
S-M 10 Posted September 6, 2010 Q6700 is still pretty good if you run it around 3.5ghz, should take a good few more years before its what i would consider "toooooo slow" Most PC games for the next few years will probably be console ports anyway, so a quad @ 3.5ghz is overkill IMHO I can remember doing tests with Arma 2 when i first got it, and i was getting the same FPS weather i ran the chip at stock speeds, or overclocked LOL! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lee_h._oswald 0 Posted September 6, 2010 I upgraded from AMD X2 6000+ (2x3000MHz) to AMD X4 945 (4x 3000MHz). GFX Card is GTX 275. Not 1 fps more. Don't try to find the bottleneck inside your hardware. Bottleneck IS the game itself. MfG Lee ;) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ahmedjbh 0 Posted September 6, 2010 I have 955 BE, with a 4890. I run everything high and vd of 6k. I had exactly the same problem. My motherboard drivers were not working, and the temps and voltages were all wrong, and even though it said it was running at 3.2ghz, it clearly wasnt. I returned my mobo, got a different one, and the difference was obvious. Firstly the fan was now near silent, and temps were around 34 idle, 45 max. Gameplay was smooth, I would say my average fps is around 40. I had this setup when the 955 and am3 was just out, and there was a lot of problems. Now it may just be a matter of installing the drivers correctly. You should be able to run the game on high without bother. I can make a video if you want to show you how my game runs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
H.A.W.K 10 Posted September 7, 2010 anyway, I managed to sold my HDD (Green Caviar) for 25€ and gonna get that Samsung Spinpoint F3 for something about 34€...hope that will work :) If not, at least I'll have a faster HDD for 9€ :D Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stk2008 14 Posted September 7, 2010 Hi when ya get your new drives please report back on what they have done for you. Well my raid 0 configuration I cant see any improvement really I see more speed in HDtune but not really any in OA but then the drives really are crap. Depending on your results OP I may get some better hard drives. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
H.A.W.K 10 Posted September 13, 2010 (edited) Hello guys once again Got that new lovely Samsung Spinpoint F3, pity it changed FPS only like +2 or so... now the only reason i see is 1. Something wrong with mobo 2. Windows 7 blargh, I want to play that game finally :/ EDIT: At least, no more stutter :) Edited September 13, 2010 by H.A.W.K Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Iroquois Pliskin 0 Posted September 13, 2010 (edited) O/C the CPU, or buy an i7. Another suggestion is to get a "24+ LCD with 1080p resolution. You're playing at 1280x1024, might as well put a Voodoo 2 3000 GPU in there, seeing as there's a CPU bottleneck problem. :cc: Edited September 13, 2010 by Iroquois Pliskin Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
H.A.W.K 10 Posted September 14, 2010 (edited) O/C the CPU, or buy an i7.Another suggestion is to get a "24+ LCD with 1080p resolution. You're playing at 1280x1024, might as well put a Voodoo 2 3000 GPU in there, seeing as there's a CPU bottleneck problem. :cc: I won't say it over and over again. Stop being fanboys, first generations of Phenoms were really bunch of slow processors. But AMD was able to make new strong (and cheap!) processors such as Phenoms II. I don't say they can beat i7 or even i5. But they're cca like Q9550, which is pretty enough for ArmA (well, enough for at least 30 FPS). My HW should be enough for ArmA, there must be bottleneck somewhere else. ;) EDIT: Enabled Super A.I., its running somehow better now. Well, now its more playable :) Edited September 14, 2010 by H.A.W.K Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stk2008 14 Posted September 14, 2010 Really its made things better? will have to try this :). I wish people would stop lieing to them self. I am as big a fan boy than the next but even I can see the engine needs fine tuning to make use of the hardware its not optimized yet and lets stop shitting it needs more work. Now before any one moans I understand NO other game does this I love ARMA a lot more than some but even I can see the faults and I am sure BIS will fix them in time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Iroquois Pliskin 0 Posted September 14, 2010 I won't say it over and over again. Stop being fanboys, first generations of Phenoms were really bunch of slow processors. But AMD was able to make new strong (and cheap!) processors such as Phenoms II. I don't say they can beat i7 or even i5. But they're cca like Q9550, which is pretty enough for ArmA (well, enough for at least 30 FPS). My HW should be enough for ArmA, there must be bottleneck somewhere else. ;)EDIT: Enabled Super A.I., its running somehow better now. Well, now its more playable :) I have a Phenom II. And you have a CPU bottleneck at that resolution, suggestions posted above. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Psycho78 10 Posted September 14, 2010 I had the opportunity to upgrade from a dual core AMD to a tri-core AMD (minor upgrade but it was cheap), made little difference. I think the number of cores doesn't matter, from everything I've read it's CPU clock speed, hard drive, and video card. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Crunchie 10 Posted September 14, 2010 How about upgrading sound card so that you're not using onboard sound? Strange to say this has been a problem for me with other graphically intense games. Also sound drivers are sometimes an issue and it can make a surprising difference to games as bottlenecks here can occur. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stun 5 Posted September 14, 2010 As far as I know the Arma 2 engine doesn't make use of hardware acceleration of sound rendering so getting a sound card would only improve sound quality and not performance. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
H.A.W.K 10 Posted September 15, 2010 Wow, I just discovered that game dont use my 4th core! Well, it shows it working most of all cores but switching afinnity only to first 3 cores is getting me the same FPS! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Crunchie 10 Posted September 15, 2010 As far as I know the Arma 2 engine doesn't make use of hardware acceleration of sound rendering so getting a sound card would only improve sound quality and not performance. That really depends what sound system he has on board now. It may be that the codecs he's using are struggling and THAT would have an impact on overall performance of the game especially if he's using an AC97 or similar. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites