Why isn't it running good?

[SAYSteez 10]

I have Arma 2 OA and I tried to run the game at 1920x1080 on normal settings but I was only getting 20-30 FPS so it didn't work... Than I used 1680x1050 and I had about 30-35+ FPS but the game looks pretty blurry... I just wanna know why this game doesn't run good on any other setting other than normal or lower... I have Windows 7 64bit ultimate with a 955 Black edition OC 3.65 with 4GB G.Skill DDR3 ram OC 8-8-8-24 1555Mhz with an EVGA 9800GTX+ 1GB SSC (I know it's old) But this game only uses 517mb of VRAM max at 1080p and 1680x1050 Is the FPS normal or is something wrong?

[maddogx 13]

Take a look at your advanced video settings. What is antialiasing, postprocessing, shadows etc. set to? A screenshot of the whole advanced video settings screen would be helpful.

Arma2 settings need some tweaking to get the most bang for your buck. Some settings are also counter-intuitive, meaning that setting them to high instead of normal can improve performance.

Just post a screeny and I can assure you a bunch of peeps will step in to help you tweak them. ;)

[killaalf 0]

9800GTX (=8800GT) + 1920x1080 don't mix, it does not matter that you have 1GB of VRAM, the GPU is just too old/slow to drive this resolution at good framerates.

[SAYSteez 10]

Take a look at your advanced video settings. What is antialiasing, postprocessing, shadows etc. set to? A screenshot of the whole advanced video settings screen would be helpful.

Arma2 settings need some tweaking to get the most bang for your buck. Some settings are also counter-intuitive, meaning that setting them to high instead of normal can improve performance.

Just post a screeny and I can assure you a bunch of peeps will step in to help you tweak them. ;)

Yea here you go http://img683.imageshack.us/i/arma2oa2011042804185723.jpg/

---------- Post added at 04:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:23 AM ----------

9800GTX (=8800GT) + 1920x1080 don't mix, it does not matter that you have 1GB of VRAM, the GPU is just too old/slow to drive this resolution at good framerates.

No the 9800GTX itself beats the 8800GT by 25-30% the 9800GTX+ SSC beats the 8800GT by atleast 40-50% and I have it overclocked a good amount.. Oh and I even tried running the game at 1680x1050 but still only 500mb of VRAM and not even 2GB of system memory was being used and only half of all 4 cores are being put to use...

Edited April 28, 2011 by SAYSteez

[zigzag 0]

You should set your shadows to high or more, then the cpu will do the work instead of the gpu.

[mosh 0]

I have Arma 2 OA and I tried to run the game at 1920x1080 on normal settings but I was only getting 20-30 FPS so it didn't work... Than I used 1680x1050 and I had about 30-35+ FPS but the game looks pretty blurry... I just wanna know why this game doesn't run good on any other setting other than normal or lower... I have Windows 7 64bit ultimate with a 955 Black edition OC 3.65 with 4GB G.Skill DDR3 ram OC 8-8-8-24 1555Mhz with an EVGA 9800GTX+ 1GB SSC (I know it's old) But this game only uses 517mb of VRAM max at 1080p and 1680x1050 Is the FPS normal or is something wrong?

You answered your own question.

[killaalf 0]

You should set your shadows to high or more, then the cpu will do the work instead of the gpu.

It's actually the other way around, shadows =/>high = GPU, shadows <high = CPU

Yea here you go http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/3208/arma2oa2011042804185723.jpg

No the 9800GTX itself beats the 8800GT by 25-30% the 9800GTX+ SSC beats the 8800GT by atleast 40-50% and I have it overclocked a good amount.. Oh and I even tried running the game at 1680x1050 but still only 500mb of VRAM and not even 2GB of system memory was being used and only half of all 4 cores are being put to use...

Ok, its still too old to expect great framerates at that resolution. Set both interface and 3D resolution to 1680x1050 - this will get rid of the blurryness and should run acceptable.

[SAYSteez 10]

It's actually the other way around, shadows =/>high = GPU, shadows <high = CPU

Ok, its still too old to expect great framerates at that resolution. Set both interface and 3D resolution to 1680x1050 - this will get rid of the blurryness and should run acceptable.

Ok I did that and even turned everything to very low and yet my fps was 37-45 max! not even a gig of system memory being used and CPU core 1 and 3 are 50% while 2 and 4 are 20% my GPU is 100% and only using 354mb of VRAM... I know for a fact this game has something wrong with it... I could be using all 4 cores at 100% and use more than 1GB of system ram and I bet I would be getting 40-50 FPS on normal atleast...

[domokun 515]

Sure the engine isn't as optimised as it could be but it also does WAY more than another out there. So try these settings:

Visibility: 1500m

Interface: 1920x1200

3D res: 1920x1200

Tex: normal

Vid mem: default

Anisotropic: normal

Antialiasing: disabled

Terrain: normal

Objects: normal

Shadows: high

Post-proc: disabled

That should provide you with half-decent framerates (30-40 fps) without compromising the image quality TOO much.

[SAYSteez 10]

Sure the engine isn't as optimised as it could be but it also does WAY more than another out there. So try these settings:

Visibility: 1500m

Interface: 1920x1200

3D res: 1920x1200

Tex: normal

Vid mem: default

Anisotropic: normal

Antialiasing: disabled

Terrain: normal

Objects: normal

Shadows: high

Post-proc: disabled

That should provide you with half-decent framerates (30-40 fps) without compromising the image quality TOO much.

With those settings I get 25-35 FPS... BTW heres screen of what my system is doing after I minimize the game http://img826.imageshack.us/img826/2295/arma2notusingcpuorram.png

[[frl]myke 14]

I know for a fact this game has something wrong with it...

I'm really curious to read more about those "facts"...care to ellaborate?

Personally i would like to see a screenshot of your actual video settings ingame.

[SAYSteez 10]

Myke;1907063']I'm really curious to read more about those "facts"...care to ellaborate?

Personally i would like to see a screenshot of your actual video settings ingame.

Please read the thread... You would of seen the link to it http://img683.imageshack.us/i/arma2oa2011042804185723.jpg/ and about that FACT! Yea the game uses so little CPU and RAM so easy enough.. That's my FACT on my computer..

[SWAT_BigBear 0]

Is your game patched to the latest?

There is a Vsync video option offered with the last two full patches.

[-DirTyDeeDs--Ziggy- 0]

ewww ! game shortcut spam on desktop ! :protest:

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y126/Bigtires79/Untitled2.jpg

Edited April 28, 2011 by [DirTyDeeDs]-Ziggy-

[SAYSteez 10]

Is your game patched to the latest?

There is a Vsync video option offered with the last two full patches.

It's 1.50 OA but seriously.. Unless they have a use 100% CPU and RAM button I don't see Vsync giving me the 20FPS I need :don 11: PS. I'm going to sleep so I might not reply for 12 hours :P

---------- Post added at 08:41 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:40 AM ----------

-Ziggy-;1907147']ewww ! game shortcut spam on desktop ! :protest:

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y126/Bigtires79/Untitled2.jpg

I have waaaaay to many tabs open at once to have my taskbar like that...

[NeMeSiS 11]

-Ziggy-;1907147']ewww ! game shortcut spam on desktop ! :protest:

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y126/Bigtires79/Untitled2.jpg

What is the point of a desktop if you dont use it? :rolleyes:

Also, there is absolutely no reason to not use the very latest version.

[[frl]myke 14]

Hmm...afaik as soon the game doesn't have the focus (alt + tab'ed out of it) the game halts and nothing is calculated anymore. At least at my side it does this. So starting the game and then alt + tab'in to the desktop shows exactly...nothing.

[ast65 10]

It's 1.50 OA but seriously..

Seriously...you can´t compare ver. 1.50 with 1.59, there´s a huge difference in performance;

so go patch and we´ll talk again :)

[SAYSteez 10]

Seriously...you can´t compare ver. 1.50 with 1.59, there´s a huge difference in performance;

so go patch and we´ll talk again :)

I did it and I only got about 1 FPS but I did take a screenshot after I minimized again and guess what I found!!! http://img69.imageshack.us/i/onecorearma2.png/ 1 core use!

[SAYSteez 10]

bump!

[Beagle 684]

delete graphics and user .cfg and restart with higher settings...higher settings often give better performance in ArmA.

[SAYSteez 10]

If you're talking about the CFG file in the documents arma2 folder than I only have one which is called ArmA2OA and than under that is a Lar.ArmaA2OAProfile file and than a Saved folder

---------- Post added at 09:59 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:58 PM ----------

Sorry I forgot to reply so you get the notification

[Beagle 684]

If you're talking about the CFG file in the documents arma2 folder than I only have one which is called ArmA2OA and than under that is a Lar.ArmaA2OAProfile file and than a Saved folder

I usually delete both after patches and let the game wrinte new ones. Lots of changes done since 1.59 so a new .cfg files can change a lot.

[SAYSteez 10]

I'll try it

---------- Post added at 10:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:08 PM ----------

I usually delete both after patches and let the game wrinte new ones. Lots of changes done since 1.59 so a new .cfg files can change a lot.

Ok I did that and I kinda felt like my FPS went down... but still now my CPU usage was 20% 40% 20% 20% with 1.82GB of ram being used for 10 minutes straight

[SWAT_BigBear 0]

I did it and I only got about 1 FPS but I did take a screenshot after I minimized again and guess what I found!!! http://img69.imageshack.us/i/onecorearma2.png/ 1 core use!

Set yout game up in windowed mode, leave task manager up, run a heavily populated AI mission, let us see those screenshots of your "cpu" usage. At this point memory usage doesn't matter, the game uses max available for 32bit!