Radeon 7970 released - ARMA 2 Performance Gains

[Leon86 13]

I doubt there's going to be a performance boost in going from pci-e 2 to 3, especially if you're already at x16 lanes. In a month or so the driver will just enable it without a dirty hack, so I wouldnt bother.

[rangerpl 13]

PCI-E 3.0 x16 is (If I remember correctly) twice the speed of PCI-E 2.0 x16. Presently, you'd need something like two high-end graphics cards (installed in a PCI-E 2.0) to begin seeing a performance hit. Therefore, if you are running one card (as most people are), PCI-E 3.0 won't have an effect on you. It'll become more relevant a few years down the road.

[icebreakr 3100]

Just bought 6870 to replace my 4890.

[grillob3 11]

2-3 fps more with pci-e 3.0 in bench 1 and e8, bench 2 the same! I arma 2 every fps counts!lol And its something that you paid for if you have a x79+gtx680.

Plus smoother gameplay!Less hiccups and microstuttering!Dont ask me why! But was very noticeable!

Edited April 21, 2012 by Grillob3

[Dwarden 1124]

580 has more ROPS than 680 ... that might be why

[denco 16]

How much performance increase can I expect in arma If I buy another 7970? I dont care about benchmarks the gameplay performance is the one that matters to me.

Edited April 22, 2012 by Denco

[Dwarden 1124]

considering SLI / Crossfire aren't industry standards and fully rely on benevolence and support in drivers and profiles (company/user defined)

then i would say 'unknown gains'

[grillob3 11]

580 has more ROPS than 680 ... that might be why

ROPs (rip off prices)lol jk

But why the 580 is as good or better than the 680 ONLY in arma 2?in bf3, batman AC and skyrim 680 is 20-30% better!But not in arma 2!I have not tested the 680 (downclocked) at 580 speeds...that would make the 680 a terrible card on arma 2!

Denco

I had the 7970 cf but i rma to get the 680 (way better). But i got one 7970 and i was not that happy with performance!Then i order another one and its way better!Do it if you have the money!Makes gameplay smoother because you cap your fps at 60!with your settings.On a mission that i test gameplay and performance i got 102fps on CF from 55 on a single card! The microstuttering is pretty much gone!

Edited April 23, 2012 by Grillob3

[bangtail 0]

ROPs (rip off prices)lol jk

But why the 580 is as good or better than the 680 ONLY in arma 2?in bf3, batman AC and skyrim 680 is 20-30% better!But not in arma 2!I have not tested the 680 (downclocked) at 580 speeds...that would make the 680 a terrible card on arma 2!

Denco

I had the 7970 cf but i rma to get the 680 (way better). But i got one 7970 and i was not that happy with performance!Then i order another one and its way better!Do it if you have the money!Makes gameplay smoother because you cap your fps at 60!with your settings.On a mission that i test gameplay and performance i got 102fps on CF from 55 on a single card! The microstuttering is pretty much gone!

Arma 2 is not an optimal environment for GPU testing (that goes for either camp) - it is extensively CPU limited.

considering SLI / Crossfire aren't industry standards and fully rely on benevolence and support in drivers and profiles (company/user defined)

then i would say 'unknown gains'

I wouldn't agree with you regarding SLI/CF not being industry standards. Far too much is spent on promoting them as such, especially within the enthusiast market.

Any gaming PC manufacturer's 'high end' box features some incarnation of SLI/CF.

They are, of course, heavily dependant on profiles/support but when they are supported properly, the gains are well worth the investment IMHO. This is extensively documented, so again, citing 'unknown gains' is not accurate.

Edited April 23, 2012 by BangTail

[Dwarden 1124]

they not standard, each generation acts different, ups and downs with drivers, etc.

for casual users it's better powerful single gpu than CrossFire/SLI

ofcourse if you can get two good cards for bargain then sure ...

[bangtail 0]

they not standard, each generation acts different, ups and downs with drivers, etc.

for casual users it's better powerful single gpu than CrossFire/SLI

ofcourse if you can get two good cards for bargain then sure ...

Of course, every generation of GPU behaves differently, SLI/CF or single GPU.

I do agree that SLI/CF is not always a good choice for people with limited PC experience as it can cause more problems than it solves.

A single fast card is always better in that situation, none of the headaches associated with profiles/support etc.

Unfortunately, due to the way it is promoted, people assume that it is an automatic 100% increase in performance and that is certainly not always the case.

Edited April 23, 2012 by BangTail

[domokun 515]

Of course, every generation of GPU behaves differently, SLI/CF or single GPU.

I do agree that SLI/CF is not always a good choice for people with limited PC experience as it can cause more problems than it solves.

A single fast card is always better in that situation, none of the headaches associated with profiles/support etc.

Unfortunately, due to the way it is promoted, people assume that it is an automatic 100% increase in performance and that is certainly not always the case.

For most OA users, SLI/CF are not good value for money, because OA is a CPU limited game.

In fact, this CPU bottleneck (rather than GPU limitation), is commonplace among simulators.

But AMD/Nvidia marketing like to seduce customers with simple slogans, where x2 GPUs = x2 power...

However, we also need to recognise that its much easier and cheaper to install a new GPU than a new CPU (where generally you have to replace your motherboard & RAM).

[jedra 11]

I actually think the crossfire scaling on Arma 2 is pretty good. I get around a 20fps increase with crossfire enabled. OK, I then get a bit of crossfire 'stutter' but it's not bad enough to go single GPU. Incidentally I use the profiles in CCC to run Take On Helicopters under the Arma 2 profile and that also benefits from a 20+ fps gain (which is a 100% increase for me in Seattle).

You are correct though, in some games it makes no difference at all other than introducing instability!

[grillob3 11]

My crossfire and sli always were very good in arma 2! In tests on map with no cpu stress i can see a gain from almost double the performance!

Jedra if you are not using it yet...add the -winxp on your short cut.

I HAVE A QUESTION for Dwarden : when i had my 7970s i would see arma 2 oa using over 2.5 gb of vram and more! And on my 680s i see going up to the limit 2gb vram on gpu-z , msi afterburne and presision-x! Why is that? starts like 1gb and keeps increasing all the way to cap....is this a memory leak?There is some performance dropping so i have to do a "flush" or alt-tab then goes back to under 1gb...but after that will increase again!My resolution is 1920x1080.

[Dwarden 1124]

well the VRAM is used all the time as you stream in objects ... so if You have 3GB card it will probably use all the VRAM available

[grillob3 11]

well the VRAM is used all the time as you stream in objects ... so if You have 3GB card it will probably use all the VRAM available

So is not a leak?Then the more vram the better for arma 2?Like a gtx 680 4gb arma would use the 4 gb?

[bangtail 0]

I've never seen it get to 3GB, ~2.7 is the highest I've ever seen it go (when I was using 3GB 580s).

If you use "Vhigh" instead of "Default" for memory usage, it will cap the memory usage at ~1GB

4GB 680s will be around in a couple of weeks and then GK-110 in September/October :D

Edited May 1, 2012 by BangTail

[grillob3 11]

I've never seen it get to 3GB, ~2.7 is the highest I've ever seen it go (when I was using 3GB 580s).

If you use "Vhigh" instead of "Default" for memory usage, it will cap the memory usage at ~1GB

4GB 680s will be around in a couple of weeks and then GK-110 in September/October :D

The same here but does this makes a difference 2gb vs 3 gb? i am only using one 1920x1080!

[bangtail 0]

The same here but does this makes a difference 2gb vs 3 gb? i am only using one 1920x1080!

I have seen it get close to 2GB but it has not gone over (1600P). If I were to use hardware AA, I'm sure it would but I use FXAA in ArmA 2 and have not had any problems thus far.

I'll be picking up a couple of the 4GB models in the weeks to come as I don't like the fact that several games come very close to 2GB while using FXAA. This means that with hardware AA, I'd most definitely be over the limit.

2GB should be ok for ArmA 2 @ 1080P but hardware AA (at high levels) may push it over. Certain other games will likely exceed 2GB (Crysis 2 and BF3 for example).

Edited May 5, 2012 by BangTail

[grillob3 11]

What is weird for me is after flushing the memory (shift+num- flush), memory usage shows less than 800mb on msi afterburn and then rise up to 2gb gtx 680 limit then performance gets worst, so i have to flush every 10 minutes!

[Leon86 13]

maybe arma claims just a bit too much. You can save a bit by closing everything in the background and "disable desktop composition" (go to the arma exe properties and compatibility). This disables the aero interface when arma is running, freeing up a bit of memory.

[grillob3 11]

maybe arma claims just a bit too much. You can save a bit by closing everything in the background and "disable desktop composition" (go to the arma exe properties and compatibility). This disables the aero interface when arma is running, freeing up a bit of memory.

Thanks leon but i have all these futures off already and i do you trick for all my games!Disable visual themes and disable desktop compositon. The memory being eat up is pretty much in multiplayer.

[lao fei mao 21]

The truth is if you have a video card with more than 1.5G VRam, you must set "Default" with the video memory option, Which means the game will use as much as VRam, thus more terrain and objects data were stored in the VRam temporarily, less frequence of reading them from your storage disk. iIf only you don't change the island, the fps would be more stable and less stutter and pop-up lod, you can totally feel the difference when you teleport yourself from one place to another place.

I've ever tried the HD6970 2G, GTX580 3G, the "Default" would use almost all 2G of HD6970, and 2.8G of GTX580, so I think the 6G SaphireHD6970 or 4G EVGA GTX680 gonna bring best game experience. Or may I say if you got a video card with more than 4G VRam, you donn't need a SSD.

Edited May 24, 2012 by Lao Fei Mao

[domokun 515]

Grillob3: Lao Fei Mei offers good advice. You'll find that tweak and many other among these tried and tested tweaks to get the game running smoothly but looking great.

And let us know how you get on...

[grimwald 24]

Sorry about thread-resurrection. Figure this is very specifically on topic, though.

I have a 7970, using 12.8 driver pack, and get the foliage shimmer and sparkle on trees & grass - mostly when using NV.

I installed the CCC (reluctantly) and enabled High Quality in AI Catalyst but it didn't help me. I had to disable AA from within ARMA2OA to get rid of the sparkly trees.

Could anybody who's resolve this (denco or Froggyluv?) share any more tweaks or better driver versions? Particularly if you got rid of the sparkle and still had AA working.

Best solution found:

http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/arma2.cfg#ARMA_2:_Operation_Arrowhead

Alter arma2oa.cfg

Turn on FXAA

FXAA=15;

FXAAsharp=6;

vsync=1; //I found less stutter with Vsync enabled. This is nice and easy to alter through Video Settings -> Advanced, anyway.

If you have arma2oa 1.61 or newer you'll have to use the other configs (PPAA).

Edited August 29, 2012 by Grimwald
better syntax