Low CPU utilization & Low FPS

[CombatComm 10]

Can someone help me optimize?

Asus P8Z68-V Pro/Gen3

i7 2700k UEFI BIOS OCd at 3.9ghz (i think)

GTX 680 4GB VRAM (does added vram matter or help with Arma?)

16 GB RAM (no pagefile)

Windows 8 (Eh)

PSU is 600W and I feel like after using a coomputer power calculator im estimated at 504 without any OCs.

I am running great, dont get me wrong but I want to squeeze all I can out of the ALPHA build so that when engine optimization hits I will be smooth as butter at 200% resolution everything high. Yes, I want to be greedy but am not very computer savvy.

[ruhtraeel 1]

The performance is a bit ridiculous. I have a decent machine, and with most stuff maxed out and a 1.5k view distance, I average around 30-45 FPS in the showcases. When I play multiplayer, I get 20-25 FPS, regardless of WHATEVER settings I am using. I literally tried maxing the game out, and then putting everything to minimum, and there was almost no difference in performance at all.

[CombatComm 10]

Something to try guys!! If you have hyperthreading and an NVIDIA card try using the threaded optimzation toggle in the control panel. I saw insanely extended load times but I believe I saw a slight FPS inscrease. This is with no AI on map. I dont know, maybe its just placebo affects. In any case it was not worth the added load time but something to explore perhaps?

Crap, never mind. Upon disabling this I still had increased load times but also this slight FPS increase. I don't know what changed....

Edited March 7, 2013 by CombatComm

[jaloko 1]

Same here guys, This is really bad, i shouldn't need a 2000+ dollar computer or oc my cpu and gfx card to play this, BI i hope you are doing something about this with all your supporter money, idc bout day z or new weapons, i don't need them if CANT PLAY THE GAME!

And for all you saying "This is alpha" arma 2 was in alpha once as well =.=

Also seems as if AMD is tone card that gets ownt, happened in arma 2 as well. Same engine better gfx, but same optimization , i just hope they planned for this. I do want to stay optimistic tho. and hope that the people saying "This is just alpha" are right and BI isent look at them tugging their collars and going "Ehhhhh".

Edited March 7, 2013 by jaloko

[EXpMiNi 1]

The performance is a bit ridiculous. I have a decent machine, and with most stuff maxed out and a 1.5k view distance, I average around 30-45 FPS in the showcases. When I play multiplayer, I get 20-25 FPS, regardless of WHATEVER settings I am using. I literally tried maxing the game out, and then putting everything to minimum, and there was almost no difference in performance at all.

Same here, I can have 50-60 fps alone or 30-35 in city, but in multiplayer it's catastrophic (like 20 max).

[ruhtraeel 1]

Same here, I can have 50-60 fps alone or 30-35 in city, but in multiplayer it's catastrophic (like 20 max).

Does your FPS also stay the same regardless of what settings you use in multiplayer? If so, then something is seriously wrong.

[kazer 3]

Joining the club...

i7 920 @ 3.8, GTX 670, 6GB RAM

Reducing view distance to a point got me ~42FPS, while staring in the distance on an empty map. Seems like that's my FPS cap (except if I stare at the ground/sky or scope, in which case I jump to 100+), as NOTHING in the settings will get me over 45FPS, not even minimal viewing distance at 1024x768...

I further drop to around 30FPS if there's so much as one AI soldier around, and then to 20 if there's serious AI action (like in heli showcase).

Meanwhile, completely independent of FPS, CPU load hovers pretty steadily near 50%, while GPU goes between 50 and 70%, with occasional short spikes to low 80s.

:(

[AussieStig 10]

Same here, I can have 50-60 fps alone or 30-35 in city, but in multiplayer it's catastrophic (like 20 max).

http://i.imgur.com/POl7T.jpg

I'm the same as you.

This issue is no longer about the lack of CPU utilization, because from what I've read, BIS is not going to ever fix it. But you can tell that something stupid is going on when I'm getting 60-70 fps in the editor with no AI, but as soon as I start adding just a few AI, or I join a muliplayer game, the effects are catastrophic and I drop to 20fps. That kind of drop should not be happening with 30 AI.

[EasyC 10]

Obviously knowing that this is an alpha, but resource usage is yet again terrible and I just can't help feel pessimistic about it improving upon release. GPU usage especially yet again, often as low as 25-30%. CPU not much better.

[GLKjack 1]

I'm the same as you.

This issue is no longer about the lack of CPU utilization, because from what I've read, BIS is not going to ever fix it. But you can tell that something stupid is going on when I'm getting 60-70 fps in the editor with no AI, but as soon as I start adding just a few AI, or I join a muliplayer game, the effects are catastrophic and I drop to 20fps. That kind of drop should not be happening with 30 AI.

Same problem

[killerwhale 1]

I have a decent machine

your GPU is poor

[root 1]

Same here.

I have GTX 580 in SLI with i5 2500k @ 4.5 Ghz and what i'm worried about is usage of GPU's.

When in SLI my both GPU's are used on 30-40 % max, which reflects in low FPS 30-40 FPS. If I disable SLI and play just with one GPU the usage is about 60-70 % and FPS 50-60.

Nvidia needs to work on proper SLI profile for ARMA 3. I have tried the SLI profile from ARMA 2 but it didn't help much.

[RiGLEY 10]

IMHO this issue should be absolutely #1 priority for the developers.

It is pathetic just how unoptimized this engine is. I understand that this is only an alpha, but as I understand, this is the case since previous versions, and not much has been changed.

Come on, take your time, but do something about it!

[antoineflemming 14]

Well seems like my performance varies depending on the server. So I still don't really have a solution. And I agree, this should be BIS's priority. The next priority should be adding and tweaking features that currently work in ArmA 2. Next should be tweaking their new features.

@root I think this is a BIS issue, not an Nvidia issue. BIS needs to make sure their game works, and by that I mean proper resource management. And, I'm curious, why is it that Multiplayer is so terrible with FPS and Single player is not?

[amatzu 10]

Hi is Arma 3 not compatible with windows 8 or it's just the game it self?

Im running on STANDARD video setting and get 17fps and below.

My pc specs:

Processor: AMD FX-8120 Eight-Core Processor

Memory: 10240MB RAM

DirectX Version: DirectX 11

Card name: ASUS HD7670 Series (2gb)

[Azimov 1]

Guess I'll join the bandwagon. CPU and GPU hovering near 30% and 60% respectively.

While barely reaching 35 fps, even after fiddling with the videosettings.

Setup:

Gtx670

i7 870

8 gig ram

[RubberSlug 1]

CPU: Intel i5 750 @ 2.8ghz

RAM: 12GB

GPU: HD5850

Monitor: 1280x1024

I get 5-25 FPS in the infantry showcase with every setting as low as possible (except for the traditional gotcha settings we all know and love). I've read that people with poorer machines have gotten fine performance, so I'm wondering if there are any tricks I'm missing.

Also, I intend to upgrade and I'm looking at a 660Ti and a i5-3570K, so if anyone has that setup it would be nice to know your performance.

Edited March 7, 2013 by RubberSlug

[ruhtraeel 1]

your GPU is poor

My GPUs are getting older, but it still should run better than how it's doing right now. Two of my GPUs runs similarly to a 7970, losing some games and winning some games.

[antnxx 1]

I found out that I get the best performance with Automatic Detection settings:

Setting Object Detail and View Distance a little bit lower. With vsync ON

My specs:

Gtx 680

i7 3770k

16 GB

SSD 120GB

[AL_ 10]

Me and my friend tried a coop mission yesterday (the daylight one, with respawns). It was running awesome, My settings were all maxed except shadows, motion blur and disabled anti alliasing (of any kind, I hate it, makes me think I need glasses when all edges are blurry). When beggining, I was getting about 25-60 fps, depending on a situation and direction I was looking. The problem started to appear slowly, fps went down, and after two hours I was running stable 15 fps, nothing I tried to improve it helped. It was weird, because graphics load howered between 15-25%, and cpu cores were all quite idling (25-50% each). So, after two hours, it was rather unplayable. Maybe the respawn system buffers a lot of something (although dead bodies and vehicles do disappear). My pc was the server.

specs: i5-750 @3,3ghz / 8GB DDR3-1600 @1450? cl8 / GTX560 OC playing on 1680x1050

[RubberSlug 1]

Me and my friend tried a coop mission yesterday (the daylight one, with respawns). It was running awesome, My settings were all maxed except shadows, motion blur and disabled anti alliasing (of any kind, I hate it, makes me think I need glasses when all edges are blurry). When beggining, I was getting about 25-60 fps, depending on a situation and direction I was looking. The problem started to appear slowly, fps went down, and after two hours I was running stable 15 fps, nothing I tried to improve it helped. It was weird, because graphics load howered between 15-25%, and cpu cores were all quite idling (25-50% each). So, after two hours, it was rather unplayable. Maybe the respawn system buffers a lot of something (although dead bodies and vehicles do disappear). My pc was the server.

specs: i5-750 @3,3ghz / 8GB DDR3-1600 @1450? cl8 / GTX560 OC playing on 1680x1050

I have the same processor and it runs at 3.67 ghz by default--did you downclock it? That actually gave me a slight FPS boost in ArmA II, but I didn't think to try it here.

Edit: I'm referring to the fact that you were able to get a good framerate at the beginning. I haven't achieved that yet.

[xXxatrush1987 10]

My GPUs are getting older, but it still should run better than how it's doing right now. Two of my GPUs runs similarly to a 7970, losing some games and winning some games.

2 hd5870 just suffer too strong from low bandwith so no way you even get near a 7970 in arma series, but they were nice cards 2 years ago.

my hd7970 averages at 80fps(limited by msi afterburner), all max exept postfx off, postAA off, vsync off and viewdistance at 2,3km, objects at 880m.

running fine with i7 4,6ghz and 2133mhz(effective) RAM.55-67fps Maxed out

multiplayer(urban warfare001) stock mission settings, as host for around 8 player(including myself) i got 45min fps and at the end off mission around 30min fps.

#

in single player a big improvement over arma 2(Maxed out, 1080p) is done, can´t run like arma 3 does.

multiplayer multiplayer just needs dedicated server, then it would run much faster.

but you will see tha arma 3 as every arma game takes every drop off hardware it gets.

standards for arma: intel processor, nothing has a high ipc like them in pc sector.

radeon hd79xx card/geforce titan: arma 3 just sucks up bandwith and video Ram like a boss

mfg

[krazikilla 5]

Is it possible that the Performance Problems are especially with AMD CPUs?

My Specs:

Win64 Prof.

AMD 1090T Phenom, 6cores, @3.2Ghz

Gfercoe GTX670

8GB Ram

Arma on a totally new SSD

It looks like all the graphic specific thingies (Rendering and so on) i can max out or reduce to very low, but the FPS are not much effected.

Also my CPU is not really much used. Only 1 core to around 70% and the others nearly nothing.

Do you think changing to a new intel CPU would help here?

[chomiq 10]

For all of those reporting low gpu usage:

Launch editor and place yourself in the village area. Take note of your fps and gpu usage.

After that change your weather to heavy overcast. Preview again and compare.

Personally I managed to achieve 99% of gpu usage and high fps during stormy weather. With sunny weather my gpu usage was somewhere around 40-50%.

[AussieStig 10]

This thread is the biggest 'troubleshooting' thread for Arma 3 right now by a long shot, and it's clearly a mass issue. Am I the only one that would just like acknowledgement from BIS that they are looking into this terrible optimization issue?

I mean, I'd love to put faith into Bohemia, and say that they have probably already started working on a fix, and it'll be fixed within a few weeks/months, but with their terrible performance history, I just can't do it.

I also just searched through nearly 40 pages of bug reports on feedback.arma3.com, and not once was any performance, utilization or specifications issues even acknowledged.