Low CPU utilization & Low FPS

[v8_laudi 1]

What res are you playing at?

[Leon86 13]

were you hosting or your friend?

[MJK-Ranger 0]

Hi.

Arma 3 runs smoothly here. 60 FPS with mostly all the settings on low :)

[ast65 10]

as long BIS still uses the core virtual reality engine from 2001 with some sugarcoating on it, nothing will really change :p

[white 1]

Hi.

Arma 3 runs smoothly here. 60 FPS with mostly all the settings on low :)

could you please post an screenshot flying the heli above the base in the showcase please?

[Daniboo 1]

I'm also having some FPS issues.

My processor is an AMD 950, 8GB of ram, and a GTX 660Ti. It should run Arma 3 on pretty high graphics without any problems, but I can only run on High with 15-30fps in combat (medium sized combat, 20 AI's vs 20 Ai's).

I KNOW the card can do mostly Very High and Ultra, but I'm getting 20-35fps with that... any suggestions?

V-sync is turned off btw.

[stk2008 14]

Yep suggestion is to wait mate thats all we can do.

people with monster rigs are still struggling as its not utilising the cores much.

Its not really just our computers its got to be optimised more but it is ALPHA still so lets see

I'm also having some FPS issues.

My processor is an AMD 950, 8GB of ram, and a GTX 660Ti. It should run Arma 3 on pretty high graphics without any problems, but I can only run on High with 15-30fps in combat (medium sized combat, 20 AI's vs 20 Ai's).

I KNOW the card can do mostly Very High and Ultra, but I'm getting 20-35fps with that... any suggestions?

V-sync is turned off btw.

[gallexme 1]

if u really want to play the game try winxp mode with that i got 50fps on ultra instead of 1-5 on low

but i think theres no dx11 now :D

[TehXenos 10]

My issues are similar with some of these people, in that I get great FPS in singleplayer and it drops pretty significantly when with lots of AI (which is fair enough) and when in multi (which isn't ideal), but overall its not that bad.

I'd be happy if performance was better in multiplayer, but its still playable for me for the most part. Its only when I host servers with a couple people spread out amongst the map causing trouble that it reaches unplayable levels.

I'm confident Arma 3 will alleviate some of the performance issues people are having, and I'd much rather have these issues in alpha (its been 4 days haha) than in release.

I get over 60fps on most things ultra in singleplayer, and likely 40-60 in most multiplayer situations. When under the pump (packed wasteland servers, etc.) its somewhere around 30, which is annoying but still very playable.

I'm running 1080p on a 2500K @ 4.0 and a 680 OC.

[Daniboo 1]

Yeah, it's only Alpha xD So you also mean my PC should handle more than what it does right now? right?

[andawra 10]

as long BIS still uses the core virtual reality engine from 2001 with some sugarcoating on it, nothing will really change :p

This. So much this. I just tried playing the 404 wasteland mod online, and online is really where your FPS will go to die.

I have around 20 fps in the wasteland mod with about 30 people online, when i change my mostly HIGH 1080p settings to everything to its lowest possible settings @ 640x480 i have not 1 fps increase, not 1! its simply the same fps at completely different settings.

i have around 30% cpu utilization while its doing that. on amd.

sadly bohemia games will always run much worse on AMD cpu's, i remember playing dayz with a friend, he had pretty much the same rig with the exception of having an i7. he had 15-20 fps more, which is plain ridiculous, its a slightly better CPU than mine, so i wouldnt mind 5 fps increase, or 10 in extreme situations, but 15-20 just means that the virtual reality engine is not only extremely unoptimized ( always has been ) but also generally strongly in favor of INTEL solutions.

which is why this will never change, don't blame it on the game being alpha, because you are going to be very disappointed, this a core problem. this will change when they code a new engine from the ground up that will include some serious optimizations. and i don't see that happening anytime soon. which is also why dayz standalone is going to disappoint alot of people, its not even running on the arma 3 engine which atleast has a minimal amounts of few optimizations compared to the arma 2 and arma 2.5 engine, let alone the gameplay enhancements.

and let it be known that when a game runs @ 60 fps in the editor ( which it does ) it shouldn't run bad on an online server. if there is alot of ai activity SOMEWHERE on the map it should not matter. AI calculations should only affect the server, it really seems at times that this load is shared or that your performance will always equal the servers performance. which is stone-age optimization. the only load on my PC should be physics calculations and everything that has to be rendered, but ofc only things that are on my screen, and not some units on the other side of the map that i cant see.

this is still a simulator engine that they try to make additional money with by selling it at as a mainstream videogame. that strategy will always make the gamer suffer.

Edited March 8, 2013 by andawra

[k3lt 3]

if u really want to play the game try winxp mode with that i got 50fps on ultra instead of 1-5 on low

but i think theres no dx11 now :D

Actually DX11 has better performance due to improved multithreading..

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ff476891(v=vs.85).aspx

[Nathan1506 1]

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.

I'm using the Phenom II x4 @around 4ghz and i've never had any problems, with Arma 2 or this alpha

[WalkerDown 1]

Res + what settings are you on?

I'm getting 45 fps on ULTRA at any res with twin GTX680s in SLI

It's not res dependant, i've tried everything from 1024x768 to 2560x1600 .. and with any gfx setting (from everything to low to anything to ultra), in mp i always end to have those FPS. Nor that im alone eheh, it's a 20 pages thread. :D

Again: this is about mp (multiplayer) it's not about the editor or showcase. mp is what it counts.

[wasabi 1]

http://s7.directupload.net/images/130308/xauphfjj.jpg

just leaving this here for the record ...

[Neus 11]

So what are we waiting for then? Driver updates or Alpha updates?

[Paronity 1]

So what are we waiting for then? Driver updates or Alpha updates?

Both.

They can increase the performance by tuning the multithreading of the engine, as well as the drivers can increase performance by tuning them as well.

To note, I don't expect my entire CPU to be utilized, but I do expect to be able to pull decent frame rates with a rig that is well above the recommended specs. I think that is what most people are trying to get at. Most games easily tax the GPU and make use of most of it's processing power, yet ARMA 3 continues to put my card in "meh" mode because it doesn't even have to try.

[MaverickFerran 1]

First my System:

Q6600@3Ghz

AMD Radeon HD 5770

4 GB RAM

installed on Samsung SSD 830

Win 8 Pro.

Setting:

All Standard

Low PIP

No Post Effects

High Shadows

My quite old and outdated machine can run Arma 3 really fine. Permanently having 40 fps + in the showcases. Except the Town in the infantry showcase. there it dropps zo about 30fps. And on the airfield its about 22fps. But as soon as its out of sight it raises to over 30 again. Wasteland is unplayable with about 10-15 fps. But this one Map, were you have to conquer or defend positions is playable with 40+ fps.

There are permanently 50-53% of my CPU used and 95-100% of my GPU.

So for me it looks like there are simply 2 cores used, but the work is shuffled over all 4. In the case of AMDs Piledriver and Bulldozer CPUs, its just logical that their workload is lower. Because the Software is showing 8 or 6 threats, but its 4 or 3 Modules. Arma is just using 2 Threats so you would have 25% ond a FX-8xxx CPU and 33% on a FX 6XXX CPU.

But the architecture is more difficult.

The follwing example is based on an FX-8xxx CPU, which means 4 modules.

The FPU for example can be split or work as one. So you have one 256bit unit or 2 128 bit units. Working as one, suddenly means you just got 4 FPUs instead of 8. In this Case the workload would go to about 50% for the FPUs. But other Units in this Module Architecture like ALUs and AGUs (2 of each on a module), cant be simply split. So there are always 8 of those units. Arma 3 can maybe just use 2. So you got a 25% workload on ALUs and AGUs and a 50% workload on the FPUs.

And the overall activity of the whole CPU maybe goes to something about 30-40%.

This is expressed very simplified. And i do not know, how Arma really uses the CPU. But i hope you got what i mean. That means a 50% workload on Intel Quads without HT and 30-40% on a AMD-Piledriver or Bulldozer CPU is the maximum you can get at the moment. And if you got a super-fast GPU, the CPU is bottlenecking way before. So if your GPU is bored, just turn AA or AF up, so that the GPU is used and the Simulation looks nicer, you wont see any difference in FPS by doing this.

As an undergraduate of informatics, i know how long it takes to optimize code especially focused on multithreading. And that its sometimes not possible with limited financial resources.

But unlike the Big Publishers, Bohemia offers fair pricing, mod support, no suppressing DRM and they have supported the Arma-Series quite a long time in the past.

And what I have seen so far, is a real good job, i am greatly looking forward to new content for Arma 3.

So keep up the good work and lets hope that Bohemia can improve the AI-Code in near future.

Edited March 8, 2013 by MaverickFerran

[Neus 11]

Okay thanks. I'm not actually sure if I've got the problem these guys are having, my GPU uses around 60% and my CPU stays around 35% (thats the problem. I think?). I have the AMD FX 6100. Would be nice to know if my rigs just not good enough, or if I've just got to wait for updates.

Thanks.

[tkpfin 1]

I got the helicopter showcase running well with my tweaks. Minimum FPS was 38 and average was about 50 and the game looked gorgeous.

Screenshots with FPS visible:

http://imageshack.us/a/img600/4596/ultragruffix.png

http://imageshack.us/a/img23/3048/sohighfps.png

http://imageshack.us/a/img152/1271/miracleofoptimization.png

My specs:

Core i5 2500k (stock)

GTX 570

8GB ram

Windows 7 64 bit

[k3lt 3]

I got the helicopter showcase running well with my tweaks. Minimum FPS was 38 and average was about 50 and the game looked gorgeous.

Screenshots with FPS visible:

http://imageshack.us/a/img600/4596/ultragruffix.png

http://imageshack.us/a/img23/3048/sohighfps.png

http://imageshack.us/a/img152/1271/miracleofoptimization.png

My specs:

Core i5 2500k (stock)

GTX 570

8GB ram

Windows 7 64 bit

I'm not sure if you're serious or trolling..

[root 1]

I'm not sure if you're serious or trolling..

I got the helicopter showcase running well with my tweaks. Minimum FPS was 38 and average was about 50 and the game looked gorgeous.

Screenshots with FPS visible:

http://imageshack.us/a/img600/4596/ultragruffix.png

http://imageshack.us/a/img23/3048/sohighfps.png

http://imageshack.us/a/img152/1271/miracleofoptimization.png

My specs:

Core i5 2500k (stock)

GTX 570

8GB ram

Windows 7 64 bit

It looks really bad. Are you serious?

[tkpfin 1]

It looks better than BF3 on PS3.

[Dwarden 1125]

my answer was related to these expecting unrealistic results ... of course we are aware of the issues and get them fixed ...

[wasabi 1]

I got the helicopter showcase running well with my tweaks. Minimum FPS was 38 and average was about 50 and the game looked gorgeous.

Screenshots with FPS visible:

http://imageshack.us/a/img600/4596/ultragruffix.png

http://imageshack.us/a/img23/3048/sohighfps.png

http://imageshack.us/a/img152/1271/miracleofoptimization.png

My specs:

Core i5 2500k (stock)

GTX 570

8GB ram

Windows 7 64 bit

Looking at the capabilities your Hardware holds, this is just sad, and im actually serious...