Low CPU utilization & Low FPS

[mobile_medic 43]

wow can't believe people are still debating this. I don't believe the game's main issue is going to be addressed from performance point of view at all. 3 years time you'll play the game so it feels fluid and runs well enough on whatever systems are out at that time.

They knew what they were doing. It's a business and it's a very clever way of getting money out of people before the official release. It seems to be a trend at the moment. The die hard fans here aren't of benefit to the series. If only people expected more. The game is simply a graphics overhaul. Nothing more than that.

I still can't play Arma 2.

[xXxatrush1987 10]

I still can't play Arma 2.

then your rig must be quite some ... you know it^^

arma 2 runs well on low end dual cores like phenom x2 550 and 4850 graphic cards, not on max, but thats not intended with so old and slow hardware.

and todays mission makers don´t look how it runs on low end systems but on mid to high end systems. and i like that missions are not over after 100 ai are gone(which a 550 easely runs, even local multiplayer.

to call arma 3 a simply graphics overhaul is not fair, because gameplay is much different now, much more fluent and sometimes even fast paced, you will never get that feeling in ofp or arma 1/2. the armor (body or vehicle ) is on a new level too and the performance is a blast, even faster than arma 2 when hosting local game.

[doveman 7]

then your rig must be quite some ... you know it^^

arma 2 runs well on low end dual cores like phenom x2 550 and 4850 graphic cards, not on max, but thats not intended with so old and slow hardware.

It doesn't run well on my Phenom II X4 955 @3.6Ghz and ATI 6950 overclocked. Depends on the mission but sometimes I get 50fps and other times I get 17-20fps.

[mobile_medic 43]

then your rig must be quite some ... you know it^^

arma 2 runs well on low end dual cores like phenom x2 550 and 4850 graphic cards, not on max, but thats not intended with so old and slow hardware.

and todays mission makers don´t look how it runs on low end systems but on mid to high end systems. and i like that missions are not over after 100 ai are gone(which a 550 easely runs, even local multiplayer.

to call arma 3 a simply graphics overhaul is not fair, because gameplay is much different now, much more fluent and sometimes even fast paced, you will never get that feeling in ofp or arma 1/2. the armor (body or vehicle ) is on a new level too and the performance is a blast, even faster than arma 2 when hosting local game.

good for you.

I am running an i7 960 oc'd to 3.9ghz, with 12 gigs ram, and a gtx 580 3gb, oc'd to 824mhz. I get sub-20 in Chenarus. Conversely, my friend plays fine on average settings with a gtx 275.

The problem is not people's rigs. Get over it. Not to mention, I never said the first thing about playing broken user missions. I never got into that world that much in arma 2, b/c I was constantly trying to get just the campaign to play. Step into chenarus and I get shit for performance. Takistan... same story. PMC, I actually got decent performance out of, and more proper use of my hw. Same difference at 720p rez or 2560x1600 rez. I know it's fun for some of you to talk shit about other people's rigs, or assume it's b/c we want to run it on the absolute maximum settings, but you are mistaken. I'm glad you don't have issues. Does not mean others do not. It is well known that the root of this issue arises not from people's lack of a hoss rig, or arma being too hoss.

Yeah, Arma 3 gameplay is much improved. however, a good number of us don't get to realize the improvement in gameplay, b/c the game is still largely unplayable due to long standing, widely repeatable, widely reported issues not having to do with our rigs. I don't care what kind of suspension you have on your ride, or the color your paint job, or the fancy seats, when the engine doesn't turn over.

It's exactly this kind of nonsense that serves no good, and does nothing other than provide cover for the root of the issue. If you don't have problems, move on. good for you. Don't accuse others of making shit up, though, just b/c you don't.

Edited April 22, 2013 by Mobile_Medic

[Leon86 13]

I completed the campain on my old core2duo, but it ran like shit at the end. nowhere near 20 fps.

the campain unrelated missions and multiplayer run pretty good in a2 though.

[white 1]

Project lead Joris-Jan van ‘t Land gives his thoughts on the PS4, along with optimizing ARMA.

“Optimization is never a single, nor a finished task. We are constantly work in this field and will keep doing so with new hardware and updated drivers. It’s hard to ultimately say whether or not ARMA 3 in its Alpha state is already ‘optimized’.

“A large number of users have reported it running better than ARMA 2 on the same systems, while others face issues on their setups. There is also the fact that some optimization has to wait for later stages of development – when the code and data don’t change as frequently. One thing is certain: we do not believe we are ever done optimizing and work on it always.â€

ARMA 3 is currently scheduled to release in Q3 of 2013.

http://gamingbolt.com/bohemia-have-no-plans-to-bring-arma-3-on-the-ps4-praises-sony

oh rly =/

[Premises187 0]

“Optimization is never a single, nor a finished task. We are constantly work in this field and will keep doing so with new hardware and updated drivers. It’s hard to ultimately say whether or not ARMA 3 in its Alpha state is already ‘optimized’.

/

Outrageous!

I guess this supporter badge signifies that I'm the idiot for buying the supporter edition.

Never again.

[dnk 13]

So, how would you define "optimized" and when does a game reach such a state of being?

[Sakai 1]

The game is optimized way better than arma 2... With the settings I play on ArmA 3... My PC would of explode on ArmA 2... So they did a good job on that!

[daze23 1]

I completed the campain on my old core2duo, but it ran like shit at the end. nowhere near 20 fps.

the campain unrelated missions and multiplayer run pretty good in a2 though.

yeah, I find it hard to believe anyone got a good framerate in some of those 'high command' missions at the end of the campaign

[MavericK96 0]

The game is optimized way better than arma 2... With the settings I play on ArmA 3... My PC would of explode on ArmA 2... So they did a good job on that!

Complete opposite for me. Work to be done for sure.

[white 1]

is on a new level too and the performance is a blast, even faster than arma 2 when hosting local game.

i urge you to check this post which shows how wrong you are:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?153524-CPU-VS-RAM-Performance-amp-CPU-Threading-Benchmarked&p=2379703&viewfull=1#post2379703

[bangtail 0]

i urge you to check this post which shows how wrong you are:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?153524-CPU-VS-RAM-Performance-amp-CPU-Threading-Benchmarked&p=2379703&viewfull=1#post2379703

Subjective I'm afraid, I also find A3 much better performance wise than A2.

[white 1]

Subjective I'm afraid, I also find A3 much better performance wise than A2.

Well i take well explained tests with screenshots a little more seriously than completely vague statements. but thats just silly old illogical me right.

[bangtail 0]

Well i take well explained tests with screenshots a little more seriously than completely vague statements. but thats just silly old illogical me right.

Just stating my experience :)

[Insanatrix 0]

Just stating my experience :)

Just stating ours as well. Invalidate ours on the basis of "Just stating my experience" and you invalidate your own as well.

[bangtail 0]

Just stating ours as well. Invalidate ours on the basis of "Just stating my experience" and you invalidate your own as well.

I didn't invalidate anything - learn how to read.

People are entitled to post their positive experiences as much as you are entitled to your endless negativity (that is directed at you specifically and not at other people with problems).

I'm sorry everyone isn't getting on your 'conspiracy theory' train but it does run fine for some people, deal with it ;)

Never did I say it ran well for everyone - you do understand what 'subjective' means right?

I've also repeatedly said, that as much as it runs well for me, it certainly is not perfect and there is still a lot of work to be done before it launches.

---------- Post added at 15:57 ---------- Previous post was at 15:32 ----------

Project lead Joris-Jan van ‘t Land gives his thoughts on the PS4, along with optimizing ARMA.

“Optimization is never a single, nor a finished task. We are constantly work in this field and will keep doing so with new hardware and updated drivers. It’s hard to ultimately say whether or not ARMA 3 in its Alpha state is already ‘optimized’.

“A large number of users have reported it running better than ARMA 2 on the same systems, while others face issues on their setups. There is also the fact that some optimization has to wait for later stages of development – when the code and data don’t change as frequently. One thing is certain: we do not believe we are ever done optimizing and work on it always.â€

ARMA 3 is currently scheduled to release in Q3 of 2013.

http://gamingbolt.com/bohemia-have-no-plans-to-bring-arma-3-on-the-ps4-praises-sony

oh rly =/

I have to agree here - I hadn't read this until now but that is not a well thought out comment.

Edited April 23, 2013 by BangTail

[nikiforos 450]

Why is night game and mostly while using NVG so FPS demanding? It cuts my FPS by 40-50%!!

I even loaded ARMA II OA and played at night but I didn't notice any FPS hit there.

Is this issue known ? Am I the only one experiencing this?

[Insanatrix 0]

I didn't invalidate anything - learn how to read.

People are entitled to post their positive experiences as much as you are entitled to your endless negativity (that is directed at you specifically and not at other people with problems).

I'm sorry everyone isn't getting on your 'conspiracy theory' train but it does run fine for some people, deal with it ;)

Never did I say it ran well for everyone - you do understand what 'subjective' means right?

I've also repeatedly said, that as much as it runs well for me, it certainly is not perfect and there is still a lot of work to be done before it launches.

---------- Post added at 15:57 ---------- Previous post was at 15:32 ----------

I have to agree here - I hadn't read this until now but that is not a well thought out comment.

Just to make sure you're reading my posts, what conspiracy theory? All I've said is that the game has poor performance, I would like an acknowledgement from the developers, and people need to stop being dickbags just because they don't have problems. Please tell me how any of that is a "conspiracy theory"?

Anything I say about possible causes to why there is poor performance is simply my opinion and I'm not asking you to believe them but I will defend them until they are proven false by facts and not some fanboy's wet dream reality. If that constitutes in your mind a "conspiracy theory" then so be it.

I understand what subjective means, do you understand what a double standard is, or how about a confirmation bias?

[bangtail 0]

Just to make sure you're reading my posts, what conspiracy theory? All I've said is that the game has poor performance, I would like an acknowledgement from the developers, and people need to stop being dickbags just because they don't have problems. Please tell me how any of that is a "conspiracy theory"?

Anything I say about possible causes to why there is poor performance is simply my opinion and I'm not asking you to believe them but I will defend them until they are proven false by facts and not some fanboy's wet dream reality. If that constitutes in your mind a "conspiracy theory" then so be it.

I understand what subjective means, do you understand what a double standard is, or how about a confirmation bias?

Do I really need to go quote your claptrap from that other thread (rhetorical - I'm not going to waste my time) or can we just leave it be - or should I just put you on ignore now and save myself some time?

You choose ;)

Your incessant name calling is becoming tiresome - give it a rest already.

[tet5uo 4]

or should I just put you on ignore now and save myself some time?

This is what you should do. You're contributing just as little to this thread trying to debunk the issue.

[bangtail 0]

This is what you should do. You're contributing just as little to this thread trying to debunk the issue.

I'm not trying to debunk the issue, I merely said it runs ok for me.

I never said it runs ok for me and so it must run ok for everyone else.

Edited April 24, 2013 by BangTail

[antoineflemming 14]

Subjective I'm afraid, I also find A3 much better performance wise than A2.

I can sorta agree with that statement for me. When it's good, it's better, and when it's bad, it's worse. By that, I mean that when the FPS/GPU usage isn't dropping, it actually runs better than Arma 2. But, if I play for 10 - 15 mins, then the GPU usage will drop from 99 to anywhere between 98 and 20%. The lower the percentage, the lower the FPS. And it can get pretty bad sometimes. But, if GPU usage stays at 99%, then I get pretty good FPS around Stratis (from like 33 to 50). It'll drop to around 25 when in towns. I'd say performance with AI is worse than in Arma 2 though. And MP performance depends on the server, and more importantly, the MP mission.

[bangtail 0]

I can sorta agree with that statement for me. When it's good, it's better, and when it's bad, it's worse. By that, I mean that when the FPS/GPU usage isn't dropping, it actually runs better than Arma 2. But, if I play for 10 - 15 mins, then the GPU usage will drop from 99 to anywhere between 98 and 20%. The lower the percentage, the lower the FPS. And it can get pretty bad sometimes. But, if GPU usage stays at 99%, then I get pretty good FPS around Stratis (from like 33 to 50). It'll drop to around 25 when in towns. I'd say performance with AI is worse than in Arma 2 though. And MP performance depends on the server, and more importantly, the MP mission.

Thank you - I'm not here trying to tell anyone with performance problems that they are wrong - just that not everyone is having problems (or the same problems at least).

The drop associated with buildings/towns is definitely still there although I don't find it quite as drastic as it was in A2, having said that, we don't have any towns as big as the ones on Chern as of yet.

[white 1]

I'm not trying to debunk the issue, I merely said it runs ok for me.

I never said it runs ok for me and so it must run ok for everyone else.

Oh wait, no surprise, you're one of the guys who has been here for a month and already has 4 infractions.

Enjoy ignore.

great ad hominem.

infractions to me can show a lot of other things, one example could be anti stablishment non conformant behaviour, traits that usually stir up discussions with great output once challenged by upto par individuals that use proper logic as means of argumentating, instead of plain meaningless logical fallacys over and over like yourself. and i had a couple of those infractions, but were taken away after it was cleared, by me, that they were wrongfull. so you need to take into account why each one exist in the first place.

your best way to prove your point would be post a video or screenshots to support your statement, because you see, you can find videos, screenshots and lots of information made by people that suffer from it in an effort to shed light on this troublesome subject, however, there are close to no material at all showing otherwise. what we endup getting by those that voice their positive opinions about performance, even with a very sizeable amount of posts, usually amount to zero.

i´m not saying you are lying, i´m also not saying that you can´t post as much as you like, i´m just saying that posting without any sort of evidence or at least logical conclusions made while using some supportive material will just endup being completely dismissed by everyone and not taken seriously. will endup as just noise.

Edited April 23, 2013 by white