Low CPU utilization & Low FPS

[k3lt 3]

[img ]http://i.imgur.com/W0Y3D8q.jpg[/img]>100kb

As you can see only 1 core peaks at around 70%, other 3 cores usually stays below 50% and rarely go any higher, while gpu usage stays very low. (which would indicate cpu bottleneck, but then again why 3 other cores have pretty low usage?)

Can anyone do some more tests? It looks like multithreading is not working properly. (also very low cpu temp is a usefull indicator aswell, in full stress my cpu goes to around 55C) :rolleyes:

Edit:

Here is another screenshot with absolutely every possible graphic setting @ low / off with min. draw distance:

[img ]http://i.imgur.com/wGi2zgu.jpg[/img]>100kb

And for the record, i would like to remind that my rig is in recommended requirements specification.

Here is the issue on feedback tracker: http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=716

Edited March 8, 2013 by k3lt

[Masterfragg 10]

A bit of a random suggestion but please try it.

Disable vsync if it is enabled. It uses a buffer which when it drops below 60fps it caps it low.

I was stuck at <30 when I disabled vs it ramped up to 50's. Then I lowered some settings now I see a solid daytime 60fps.

Also post your specs there may be a hardware specific thing I can suggest.

[looter 10]

Might also be worth playing with the "-cpuCount=#" launch parameter.

[Masterfragg 10]

Might also be worth playing with the "-cpuCount=#" launch parameter.

You know, I feel dumb for not thinking about that myself. After all the tweaking I've done with Arma2 over the years suddenly this has been released and I feel like I've had a memory wipe XD

[k3lt 3]

A bit of a random suggestion but please try it.

Disable vsync if it is enabled. It uses a buffer which when it drops below 60fps it caps it low.

I was stuck at <30 when I disabled vs it ramped up to 50's. Then I lowered some settings now I see a solid daytime 60fps.

Also post your specs there may be a hardware specific thing I can suggest.

It's in my signature, and i tried every possible graphic setting including vsync.

[MavericK96 0]

Ugh...this was a problem for the entirety of ArmA 2...I seriously hope it is not an issue in ArmA 3 as well.

[Masterfragg 10]

Ahhh, you have fairly decent hardware so it shouldn't be too much of a problem.

I will say when I was using a AMD Phenom II x4 940 @ 4ghz-ish (Can't remember exact ghz) I had issues running even Arma2. I'm not saying an upgrade is in order but the intel chip made a night/day difference to my gaming.

Only thing I can suggest otherwise is put literally everything on minimum and see which setting is causing issue. Hmmm, if you can't work something out maybe a ts3 session to bounce some ideas about may be in order to see if we can get you gaming.

[Minoza 11]

Yeah... just made few tests, and I'm afraid I'm plagued by this same issue once again (same thing in Arma 2).

Check out these:

1. 90 AI in editor (45 for each side, mixed types + vehs, helis...), simple seek and destroy type of test mission, getting around 20 frames avg using settings at the bottom of this post (links on images)

CPU graph

GPU graph

2. 30 AI in editor (15 for each side, mixed types + vehs, helis...), same as above, same settings, getting 40 avg

CPU graph

GPU graph

Hardware:

i7 3770K OC@4.4GHz

GTX 670

16GB ram

Arma 3 Alpha installed on SSD (Samsung 830, 128gigs)

Win 7 x64

1920x1200

In game settings here, here and here...

I'm really liking the game so far, but this is one thing that put me off from Arma 2 after playing it for 2 years on lower end hardware where it actually ran fine...

[k3lt 3]

I have edited first post with screenshot with lowest possible settings (the second one..)

And here is another one, where surprisingly it looks ok. (very high gpu and vram usage with high fps though the cpu usage is still a bit low?)

[img ]http://i.imgur.com/wltxlKy.jpg[/img]>100kb

Can someone explain me this sorcerery?

Edited March 6, 2013 by [FRL]Myke

[oo para oo 13]

i am on gtx 580 sli i5 4.5 ghz ssd and get aorund 30-40 fps on high settings. Was hoping for more but it is alpha.

[stk2008 14]

yep i was really hoping arma 3 would be more optimized dont get me wrong its alpha but even peeps with monster rigs aint getting that good an FPS.

My rig aint great but was hopeing for better FPS on release oh well lets see what the patches bring :).

Personaly I would love BIS to work more on optimization rather than any thing else at this stage

[Masterfragg 10]

Quad Core optimization on this seems to be a bit skitty. No game has done quad optimization like Far Cry 2 (Hence why it is STILL used in benchmarks today) they need to take a leaf out of FC2's book.

OP: How was your Arma2 fps out of curiosity?

[fortun 14]

Hmm, very around 25-30 Fps, but still only uses around 60% of both Graphic and Cores. Non of it is in full use and still i don't get higher fps?

[k3lt 3]

Quad Core optimization on this seems to be a bit skitty. No game has done quad optimization like Far Cry 2 (Hence why it is STILL used in benchmarks today) they need to take a leaf out of FC2's book.

OP: How was your Arma2 fps out of curiosity?

Much better actually, in Arma 2 i was getting 50+ fps pretty easily on med-high settings.

[Masterfragg 10]

Hmm, very around 25-30 Fps, but still only uses around 60% of both Graphic and Cores. Non of it is in full use and still i don't get higher fps?

I've never seen arma use more than 60% of CPU hence why ridiculously high overclocks have always been required. Brute speed enables that 60% to be a little faster.

Graphics gets bottlenecked by CPU hence why neither is being used above 60%.

Set shadows to high so the GPU processes them it may release the cpu a bit more.

---------- Post added at 11:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:48 PM ----------

K3lt, I'll return shortly I'ma see if I can think of anything that may help.

I'm just going to go play with some launch parameters to see how they change things in game if I find anything that seems to help I'll post asap

[steven breen 0]

This is a helpful thread, seeing as I was unsure whether to buy now or wait a month or two. ....

[k3lt 3]

I've never seen arma use more than 60% of CPU hence why ridiculously high overclocks have always been required. Brute speed enables that 60% to be a little faster.

Graphics gets bottlenecked by CPU hence why neither is being used above 60%.

Set shadows to high so the GPU processes them it may release the cpu a bit more.

---------- Post added at 11:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:48 PM ----------

K3lt, I'll return shortly I'ma see if I can think of anything that may help.

I'm just going to go play with some launch parameters to see how they change things in game if I find anything that seems to help I'll post asap

Thanks, btw. i tried -cpuCount=4 start parameter and the game is crashing on startup. (using Steam)

So i guess it's actually for physical cpu's not cores?

Another screenshot where the cpu usage is beyond a joke:

[img ]http://i.imgur.com/TgbgeBj.jpg[/img]>100kb

Actually on this screenshot it looks like the game is actively using only 1 core? (and the temp. is only like 4-5C higher than the one i see when idling in windows..)

Oh and if someone wondered, for the gpu/cpu usage/temps i'm using MSI Afterburner with HWiNFO64.

Edited March 6, 2013 by [FRL]Myke

[stk2008 14]

hope this aint another ARMA 2 that wont make full use of cores

[Masterfragg 10]

Right, -cpuCount=4 didn't crash my game. Infact, it may be a placebo effect but I seem to be running better....

this is the exact problem I had with AMD CPU back on Arma2, I'd put it down to the fact that it's an alpha but I'm still testing.

Stupid suggestion incoming apologies in advance.

Restart your computer. I know it sounds stupid but many, MANY people have said it helped them.

Also get the DirectX runtimes from MS website if you can and manually update. Windows 7 is a bitch for DX on format. (sorry if these are bad suggestions just going by what have helped people)

At the moment I'd say our hardware is pretty much equal in everything but CPU and I just ramped my game up to 2720x1530 and got 60fps in editor with settings ramped to high after "-cpuCount=4" however I'm about to test in mission.

...The editor lies to us...

[aop 1]

I had similar experience with my Core i5-2500K@4.3GHz, 8GB RAM and GTX570 rig (ArmA 3 installed on SSD). Poor CPU and GPU utilization combined with poor fps in certain scenarios. For example the infantry and scuba showcases ran very well (low number of AI opponents) but the helicopter showcase was running around 30fps regardless of what graphics settings I used, only view distance seemed to have significant impact on fps in that mission.

I played around with the editor for couple a hours and the fps seems to be tied to number of AIs in singleplayer. I put 100+ vs 100+ AI battle in the largest town and as the mission started the fps was around 3 and steadily climbed to 20+ as the AIs killed each other. With 15 vs 15 mission in the largest town the game ran 40-50fps.

The performance in multiplayer was worse. 30 vs 30 PVP was practically unplayable and 10 vs 10 PVP in the largest town ran only 30-40 fps. Considering the largest town isn't nowhere as large as the big towns in Takistan and Chernarus and the performance is worse it doesn't seem like the big towns in Altis are going to be playable with current generation of computer hardware.

I was expecting ArmA 3 to take full advantage of multicore CPUs so seeing identical CPU utilization behavior as in ArmA 2 is a sad. :(

[stk2008 14]

hi how do u add -cpucount=4 to steam shortcut?

EDIT

yep I am gutted about the lack of CPU usage I have a quad core and tbh theres no point.

I just hope they can add it because they could not in ARMA2 due to engine limitations i do beleive

[k3lt 3]

hi how do u add -cpucount=4 to steam shortcut?

Right click Arma 3 on Steam, Properties, Launch Settings and paste here.

[Masterfragg 10]

right, i lowered back down to <99% GPU usage and was stuck at 57fps at night in town.

I checked CPU and it gave me an 80%-50%-30%-50% core usage.

This would suggest CPU bottlenecking (In editor)

Whilst usage could be much better it's still better than Arma2's at the moment.

[k3lt 3]

right, i lowered back down to <99% GPU usage and was stuck at 57fps at night in town.

I checked CPU and it gave me an 80%-50%-30%-50% core usage.

This would suggest CPU bottlenecking (In editor)

Whilst usage could be much better it's still better than Arma2's at the moment.

Uh yeah, but you have i5 2500k at nearly 5Ghz which is rather top notch.. You cant expect that kind of hardware/overclock from average player. :p

[stk2008 14]

Right click Arma 3 on Steam, Properties, Launch Settings and paste here.

Thanks