Nearly no FPS Change in changing settings? Always ~ 22 FPS on a decent rig

[DrFire 10]

I've just gotten OA today in hopes that it brought better performance to my computer. Unfortunately, it didn't. I'm hovering around ~22 FPS in multiplayer, no matter what settings I'm at.

4 gigs RAM

Windows Vista Ultimate 32-bit

ATI 4870 512 MB

AMD 955 BE X4 overclocked to 3.5 ghz

What am I doing wrong?

Seriously - at very low at 800x600 resolution it's the exact same as very high at 1680x1050

Edited November 27, 2010 by DrFire

[larsiano 12]

It might be possible that if you overclock to much on the CPU or FSB this could reduce the communication cycle in between the GPU and CPU resulting in slower graphics performance. Do you have the same result without any overclock? What are your 3D mark scores? With the new OA patch i think its best to turn off Vsync in the options and post processing (there are lots of topics about performance enhancements) also. Maybe you could try some 3D tweaks for the ATI-GPU. I guess you have these bad FPS results while playing Multiplayer games? Then this framerate is not that bad sinds the server FPS influences the client sytem FPS quite a lot im afraid! Also maybe you have to get used to Arma2 and OA being quite a heavy gamecomputer killer :) Then again i would not give up if i where you ;) Have you tried the latest ati drivers? and reduced background programms and services? Disk defrag also helps if you have a rotating harddrive.

[DrFire 10]

Same performance without overclock, yes. Not sure about my 3d mark scores, never bothered with those. I've turned off both Vsync and Post Processing. I have not tried the latest ATI drivers, nor have I defragged in a while. I will try those, thanks!

[larsiano 12]

Not to forget also some missions have quite a high viewdistance > this always gives me bad framerate! (above 4000m = nogo)

[DrFire 10]

If I do upgrade in the future, would an investment towards a better graphics card be worth it?

[Nutlink 10]

A 4870 is no slouch in this game. You would probably want a faster CPU, but even the one you have is really good. About the only thing I can say is that it's Vista. When I had Vista this was the only game that had absolutely horrible performance. It works best under XP, but it works pretty decent under Win7 as well. My performance issues went away (for the most part) when I went from Vista 64 to Win7 64.

[Dwarden 1124]

any NVIDIA GTX480 and 580 will do great

any AMD HD5870 or 6870 will do great

NVIDIA 460 and AMD 5770 should be considered a minimum for good gameplay

ofcourse it works on slower cards this is just my suggestion what to look for

[spork 10]

What about i5 760 vs i7 950? is the performance of the i7 over the i5 worth the %50 increase in price?

I'm currently running E8500 and gtx 260, I'm eventually going to upgrade to gtx 460 and one of the above CPUs.

[-=seany=- 5]

Was it coop multiplayer?

The reason is that when the server is being under heavy load from lots of AI and cant handle it, it drags all the clients down with it.

[DrFire 10]

Yes, it was co-op multiplayer, but it's like this in any multiplayer game, even if it's just me and another friend (without AI).

I will consider getting a 5850 in the near future. Should those do fine?

[NeMeSiS 11]

I've just gotten OA today in hopes that it brought better performance to my computer. Unfortunately, it didn't. I'm hovering around ~22 FPS in multiplayer, no matter what settings I'm at.

4 gigs RAM

Windows Vista Ultimate 32-bit

ATI 4870 512 MB

AMD 955 BE X4 overclocked to 3.5 ghz

What am I doing wrong?

Seriously - at very low at 800x600 resolution it's the exact same as very high at 1680x1050

I have almost the exact same specs, can i ask you what FPS you get in Benchmark 2?

[hellfire257 3]

any NVIDIA GTX480 and 580 will do great

any AMD HD5870 or 6870 will do great

NVIDIA 460 and AMD 5770 should be considered a minimum for good gameplay

ofcourse it works on slower cards this is just my suggestion what to look for

lol, and here is me with my HD3870. Its a damn miracle it runs ARMA at all, never mind on normal settings!

[DaveP 66]

If changing any of the graphics settings still yields the same FPS it's probably a CPU thing to the order of processing AI and all that

[Dwarden 1124]

lol, and here is me with my HD3870. Its a damn miracle it runs ARMA at all, never mind on normal settings!

i know miracles happen but i don't want to give false hope :)

if the PC is excelently set it will ofcourse overdo the issues

for our engine tons of things play role

be it FSB, memory speed(transfers and latency), CPU>GPU and GPU<CPU (if it's unstable or way too slow it will cause issues), DPC spikes(Deffered Procedure Calls), bad fragmentations of data, low I/O on HDD and so on ...

tons of possible weaknesses which might hamper even 'by paper' faster computer

[stun 5]

any NVIDIA GTX480 and 580 will do great

any AMD HD5870 or 6870 will do great

NVIDIA 460 and AMD 5770 should be considered a minimum for good gameplay

ofcourse it works on slower cards this is just my suggestion what to look for

Dwarden, that's classic, I just about spat my coffee on my screen laughing - you just named the four fastest single core cards on the market in order to have great game play. It does explain why bit-tech.net have started using A2:OA as a benchmarking app, I quote from their website: "Speaking of engines, Operation Arrowhead is still a massive challenge for any PC to play smoothly".

I have an I7 @ 4ghz with a 5870 and it struggles at times with some of the campaign missions. I can't help but think the steep hardware requirements for A2:OA are doing BI out of a lot of sales - essentially everyone with a low-mid range gaming rig.

Can I ask what your current dev rigs are?

Edited November 27, 2010 by stun

[DrFire 10]

Setting my priorities in task manager to realtime helped increase FPS alot. Is there anything else I can do? Can I push my graphics card somehow?

[Sabbath 10]

I have a 4870 512mb, quad core 9450 clocked to 3.4 on air and 4 gig of ram running windows 7 ultimate 64 bit. In the benchmarks I get between 52 and 55 FPS.

IMO it doesn't matter whether you have the latest and greatest GFX card or CPU. Looking at all the threads since the inception of ARMA 2 you are either lucky or you are unlucky. Nobody has any idea as to why this runs on some systems and not others.

Running 1680 x 1050 res, everything on normal apart from video memory = very high, annistropic filtering = off, quality preference = very high, post processing = low, shadow detail = high, v.sync = off, visibility around 3,000.

Edited November 28, 2010 by Sabbath