Arma 2 AMAZING disk read speed and IOs - 813MB/sec & 3000 IOPS

[wasserkool 1]

UPDATE:

The initial test was done on an AMD FX8150 system with the 990FX chipset. Now I've upgraded my system into Sandy Bridge-E with the following spec:

Core i7-3960K | Asus P9X79-WS | 32 GB G.Skill RipJaws | AMD Radeon HD 6970 CrossFire | OCZ Vertex 3 MaxIOPS 240 GB OS Drive | OCZ Vertex 3 MaxIOPS 120GB X 2 RAID 0 App Drive | LSI SAS 6 Gbps | NEC PA301W X2 Dual Monitor | Fractal Define XL | Koolance CPU-370 | Laing DDC Dual Pump | Mora 2 Pro Radiator

Due to increased PCIE bandwidth my read speed went up to about 950MB/sec, which is the theoretical max of two Vertex 3 Max IOPS SSDs in RAID 0.

Running ARMA 2 in 2560X1600 with everything set the "high" and FXAA i am able to maintain 50 fps in most situations.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

I've been an Operation Flashpoint and Arma fan since the inception and we all know how demanding this game is! I started playing operation flashpoint when I was a broke high school student on a SLOT A athlon K7 with nvidia RIVA TNT 2 lol.

I recently purchased two OCZ Vertex 3 MAX IOPS 120GB SSDs and configured them in RAID 0 to run ARMA 2 and ARMA 2 CO and did some performance analysis.

As you can see, this game nearly saturated the bandwidth of my 2 SSDs in RAID 0, hooked up to a SAS 2.0 controller running off a PCIE 8X slot. I used the custom map Firing Range with projectile camera turned on. I fired several rounds of javelin and the camera automatically tracks the projectile flight and due to the high speed it requires rapid loading of all the objects on the map. I believe another user here did a much more thorough analysis on the 4KB block size IO analysis and my simple test further reiterated his result!

Edited January 9, 2012 by wasserkool

[Leon86 13]

Why is the write speed so low?

[wasserkool 1]

Why is the write speed so low?

This is perfectly normal when you are playing the game because the system is reading the data off the drives to load the textures and objects etc.

[Dwarden 1124]

ARMA - the ultimate hardware tester :)

[purepassion 22]

hehe yeah

'most fun benchmarking tool in the world' :p

@op impressive data there!

[bars91 956]

Nice! Hope you will do same with 1.60 when it is released=)))

[wasserkool 1]

Nice! Hope you will do same with 1.60 when it is released=)))

This game almost saturates the bandwidth of 2 SSD in RAID 0 what else can we expect lol! Maybe only RAM drive will satisfy the raw IO requirements of the game lol..

But I must admit Arma 2 is one of the few games out there that stresses both the CPU and GPU to the max!

[froggyluv 2130]

Hehe, just ordered another 8gigs to make 16gb - which will allow me a hefty 12 gb RamDisk. Arma on RamDisk is just at a whole new sexy level ;)

[DancZer 65]

Where did you make the benchmark(map, position)?

Could you make a video, please? I really want to see how smooth is it.

Something like this:

Edited November 28, 2011 by danczer

[cjph 0]

I use a 12Gb RAMDisk and it is still not enough to hold the game addons once you factor in mods like ACE, though I am sure it makes for a smoother game.

cj

[froggyluv 2130]

Thats odd as:

Arma2 Addons = 8.3gb

Ace = 393mb

AceX = 1.5gb

...which is a little over 10 Gbs. Of course if you go mod crazy it won't all fit but from experience even with a 4GB RamDisk -having the primary Arma2 addons there made for a much smoother experience - especially when flying.

[stk2008 14]

You missed

ACE_RU

ACE_NAVY

ACE_SM

ACE_PLA

[Dwarden 1124]

You also forgot OA + A2 content in A2: CO mode

[MissionCreep 12]

This game almost saturates the bandwidth of 2 SSD in RAID 0 what else can we expect lol! Maybe only RAM drive will satisfy the raw IO requirements of the game lol..

But I must admit Arma 2 is one of the few games out there that stresses both the CPU and GPU to the max!

The real genius of Arma2 is that it can also run acceptably well on a PoS machine if you tweak the settings properly. I happily run Arma2 CO on a Dell Optiplex GX620 Duo Core 2.8 GHz, 4 Gb RAM, ATI Radeon HD 5570, WinXP-32 SP3, 500 Gb SATA HD, a machine many people wouldn't take away for free.

Edited November 28, 2011 by MissionCreep

[cjph 0]

You also forgot OA + A2 content in A2: CO mode

^^^ This :)

12GB soon gets eaten up, though being selective on what is RAMdisk and what goes into SSD or HD helps. For example BAF is 500MB and PMC is around 900MB (from memory).

cj

[wasserkool 1]

The real genius of Arma2 is that it can also run acceptably well on a PoS machine if you tweak the settings properly. I happily run Arma2 CO on a Dell Optiplex GX620 Duo Core 2.8 GHz, 4 Gb RAM, ATI Radeon HD 5570, WinXP-32 SP3, 500 Gb SATA HD, a machine many people wouldn't take away for free.

Yeah but that is hard to do on a 30 inch monitor running at native res and I also want to enjoy this beautiful game in its full glory!

[stk2008 14]

The real genius of Arma2 is that it can also run acceptably well on a PoS machine if you tweak the settings properly. I happily run Arma2 CO on a Dell Optiplex GX620 Duo Core 2.8 GHz, 4 Gb RAM, ATI Radeon HD 5570, WinXP-32 SP3, 500 Gb SATA HD, a machine many people wouldn't take away for free.

I will take it away where ya live........:P

Hahahaha.

[Dwarden 1124]

^^^ This :)

12GB soon gets eaten up, though being selective on what is RAMdisk and what goes into SSD or HD helps. For example BAF is 500MB and PMC is around 900MB (from memory).

cj

right silly me i forgot the full DLC content ;)

[Gedis 0]

1) running arma in not maxed settings is not acceptable, that's where the more $ you invest in your PC, the better and enjoyable it gets.

2) other, not that much popular way, is just to lower the quality details.

P.S. yet, guys will just ignore or won't see option 2) , because mind blocks it.

as for me? I'm stuck with old maschine, playing with 500m visibility, 800x600 (100% res size too), memory/terrain = low, objects/textures = very low, shadows and all others = disabled, except hrd at normal.

and still getting ATI/AMD artifacts :(

Edited November 28, 2011 by Gedis

[froggyluv 2130]

Blast all you's Debbie Downers you'll not ruin my victory parade!!

:cryy::811::icon_razz:

[cjph 0]

Blast all you's Debbie Downers you'll not ruin my victory parade!!

:cryy::811::icon_razz:

Not a Downer - go for it ! I'm a big advocate of RAMdisks (have tried everything from memory sticks to iRAMs) and would not play without it. But note you can't cram everything in 12GB if you need all the ACE and DLC included.

cj

[no use for a name 0]

^^^ This :)

12GB soon gets eaten up, though being selective on what is RAMdisk and what goes into SSD or HD helps. For example BAF is 500MB and PMC is around 900MB (from memory).

cj

I only use a 6GB RAMdisk and just load islands, vegetation, and a few other things. Still, it makes the game tons smoother and stutterless

[froggyluv 2130]

Not a Downer - go for it ! I'm a big advocate of RAMdisks (have tried everything from memory sticks to iRAMs) and would not play without it. But note you can't cram everything in 12GB if you need all the ACE and DLC included.

cj

Hehe, yep I'm fine with just cramming in the "troublesome" pbos :)

You know this got me thinking, out of all the many games I've bought the last 2 years, only Arma makes me want or feel the need to upgrade -BF3 and Skyrim notwithstanding.

I don't know if this is the dreaded console-ization of gaming in general -but I think it's time Nvidia/Intel/Amd/ATI started thanking BI with kickbacks as it just doesn't seem as necessary to keep upgrading anymore as much as it used to.

[EasyC 10]

Yeah I think Arma 2 is a great SSD tester.....here's my results from just flying around Chernarus in an F-35

[frogblastvent 10]

The best use of ram is ram caching. My system has 24gig of ram, 8gig is in a ramdisk and set as the paging file under the virtual memory settings.

There is a new program called FancyCache which allows the use of ram for caching without the need of a ramdisk. Have not tried it yet but it looks interesting.