Low CPU utilization & Low FPS

[nikiforos 450]

Set view distance to max 2000

Set object details to standard

Disable AA and put FXAA to Very high or ultra

Close other programs and browsers during gameplay ( will not result in higher FPS but will give a smoother game)

Also lower PIP to low or disable

Ofcourse we all like to believe that BIS will optimize the game for better gaming experience but until then try the above suggestions :)

[white 1]

Hello! I've got following problem:

When i join a server i've got around 30-40 fps on respawn on my settings. After 1-2 hours of playing i've got 18-25 fps on same position with same settings. What could be the problem??

its not on your end.

The next question is: Will bis do something for better optimisation? I mean its not possible that i've got just 20-50 fps on my pc that is for sure good enough to run arma 3 on very high with same fps.

maybe, personally i dont feel very confident about it.

[ravenbb 1]

If a server hasnt been set to remove the dead enemy it can effect the FPS over time.

[tonschuh 3]

Heh, that's where you would go amiss with the comparison. A closer comparison would be with a real-time strategy game, as they're not player-centric.

I would compare against one, if you could suggest me one, as this are not really my gaming favourites.

:)

If a server hasnt been set to remove the dead enemy it can effect the FPS over time.

But should this be not only a negative effect if your hardware is maxed-out and not if your hardware is only running on 40-60% load ?

:confused:

What I can't really understand as well is, even that the game-engine seems to be not optimized for Multi-Core-CPU's, should it be then not still possible to max some of the Core's out ?

:confused:

---------- Post added at 18:15 ---------- Previous post was at 16:48 ----------

these who always expect theirs multicore CPU maxxed out by games fail to realize that there is always overhead by syncing or minimal timeframe needed to finish operation on actual primary thread ,

there is also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdahl's_law and much more problems in multithreaded coding (there are whole books about it)

so 99+% utilization of both CPU / GPU or just all multiple CPU/GPU in complex gaming is yet to be seen , they not benchmarks and specialized tasks ...

we will work on improving multithreaded capability of the Arma 3 engine,

yet this feature is in Arma 2 engine since 2009 http://www.bistudio.com/english/company/developers-blog/91-real-virtuality-going-multicore

ironically the last paragraph from the article still does apply

I think no one would cry if our rigs would be just not powerful enough for the game, like when Crysis came out, but to get our rigs only up to 40-60% utilised AND getting a bad performance is just not sell-able. It's like driving a Porsche and only be able to use the first 2 gears.

:j:

[omerc 10]

It's like driving a Porsche and only be able to use the first 2 gears.

:j:

Porsche Carrera GT would take you up to 80 mph on the first 2 gears. Not bad on the highways :)

[mobile_medic 43]

Porsche Carrera GT would take you up to 80 mph on the first 2 gears. Not bad on the highways :)

Good luck cruising down the highway in that gear, at that speed, and the resulting rpm. And, a perfect example of only taking advantage of a portion of the available capacity.

[omerc 10]

Good luck cruising down the highway in that gear, at that speed, and the resulting rpm. And, a perfect example of only taking advantage of a portion of the available capacity.

You shouldn't expect comfort or mileage that's right!

[tonschuh 3]

Porsche Carrera GT would take you up to 80 mph on the first 2 gears. Not bad on the highways :)

I'm used to Autobahn's, where you are allowed to drive 250km/h (or more if you can) with your Porsche. Imagine to have 6 lanes in 1 direction on your Autobahn and be only allowed to drive 80 with your Porsche.

;)

[mobile_medic 43]

After latest patch, not surprised that the "Top Known Issues" still doesn't have the *top known issue* on the list... But, hey... at least we can rest easy knowing that "fish do not react to players" is a "top known issue".

[ascendence 10]

It really pissed me off how BIS isn't able to optimize their game

yeah yeah sure its an alpha, but ARMA2 already ran like garbage - yeah ARMA3 runs better already, but its still far away from what it should be.

i can play other titles on high qualities, only this game has so huge problems with utilizing its given resources.

man i always loved BIS but i just can't take this anymore, we shouldn't be putting up with this and instead demand some performance tweaks.

and for the next BIS title, ditch this old engine and develop a new one , you can't continue this guys

[PuFu 4600]

Iand for the next BIS title, ditch this old engine and develop a new one , you can't continue this guys

ain't gonna happen

[ascendence 10]

ain't gonna happen

i am aware of that but everyone knows how many problems the ARMA engine nowadays has, its like sailing with a boat that got holes in it, its gonna sink sooner or later ( i dont mean popularity wise , more technical wise).

all these problems with the super AI, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnt

problems with the CPU/GPU usage

performance issues in general

probable memory leaks

[nikiforos 450]

I wonder if it's worth it to upgrade some of my components.

I have an i5-2500k(4,2Ghz), GTX 570 and 8 gb ram.

At the same time I read about other people with better systems that have same kind of issues with lag and low FPS.

So should I upgrade or maybe keep the same system and hope that it will run better in the future?

[mobile_medic 43]

I wonder if it's worth it to upgrade some of my components.

I have an i5-2500k(4,2Ghz), GTX 570 and 8 gb ram.

At the same time I read about other people with better systems that have same kind of issues with lag and low FPS.

So should I upgrade or maybe keep the same system and hope that it will run better in the future?

I wouldn't recommend it. Diminishing returns with this game once you upgrade beyond a certain point. So long as they continue their current course, the bulk of your performance problems will not be due to the lack of capability of your hardware, but the lack of the game taking more full advantage of modern hardware in the first place.

The bottleneck is the game, not the hardware. My vote, keep the same system. Don't upgrade it just for Arma, as it is not worth it. Wait and see if they ever actually officially acknowledge and attempt to address the issue in a meaningful way. Because, so far, we have been told this is a "brand new engine", which is clearly not the case. And, they still won't put a years old issue, and the current top voted issue in bug tracker in their list of "Top Known Issues". No amount of hardware upgrade is going to fix that problem :/

[ProfTournesol 956]

Because, so far, we have been told this is a "brand new engine"

Where ?

[Guvna-D 10]

Well if this isn't fixed on release im getting a refund.Its clearly a major issue and easily grounds for a refund (depending on country).Such a shame, really fun game if it worked.Imagine what it would be like if it actually utilized your whole set up, makes me depressed.

[mobile_medic 43]

Where ?

https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/ArmA_3#About

Together with the brand new Real Virtuality™4 engine, limitless opportunities for content creation and a passionate community, the PC’s premier military simulation game series is back. Arma 3 – This Is War.

[froggyluv 2136]

https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/ArmA_3#About

That reads more like "Enjoy our latest iteration!" rather than "We dumped RV and went nuts with Outerra!!"

:cool:

[antoineflemming 14]

I wouldn't recommend it. Diminishing returns with this game once you upgrade beyond a certain point. So long as they continue their current course, the bulk of your performance problems will not be due to the lack of capability of your hardware, but the lack of the game taking more full advantage of modern hardware in the first place.

The bottleneck is the game, not the hardware. My vote, keep the same system. Don't upgrade it just for Arma, as it is not worth it. Wait and see if they ever actually officially acknowledge and attempt to address the issue in a meaningful way. Because, so far, we have been told this is a "brand new engine", which is clearly not the case. And, they still won't put a years old issue, and the current top voted issue in bug tracker in their list of "Top Known Issues". No amount of hardware upgrade is going to fix that problem :/

Agreed. Oh, and for those who don't get the whole "not on the Top Known Issues list", that's important because it is an indicator of BIS's priorities. Currently, this issue still doesn't seem to be a priority for them. Quite sad.

[Insanatrix 0]

Agreed. Oh, and for those who don't get the whole "not on the Top Known Issues list", that's important because it is an indicator of BIS's priorities. Currently, this issue still doesn't seem to be a priority for them. Quite sad.

I'm sure it's a priority, I just don't think there's much they can do without a larger rewrite of the engine. Doing some more testing trying to find out exactly what is causing massive fps drops, I found that the AI behavioral functions are a large cause of low fps with even just a few AI. I did a test with 3 blufor squads and 3 opfor squads on opposite side's of Agia Marina and gave them each 1 Seek and Destroy WP with open fire engage, full speed and Aware, Logged the FPS and then simply changed the Aware behavior to Careless. There was a massive fps difference between Aware and Careless, and you could see a large jump after mission load when the behavior switched. Looking at the FSM's when their behavior is set to careless, it skips a couple of the larger behavioral FSM's. The FSM's themselves are not overly complicated or complex, they simply call upon pre-compiled functions for each state.

From what I read, the scripting is done in one thread, correct me if I'm wrong, I'm guessing the behavior functions are single threaded because of this. This could explain the slowdown with AI as a separate function would have to run for every AI unit for every state in one single thread. If the rendering thread is synchronized with the scripting thread, this would probably be why you see a large drop in GPU usage as more entities are placed. I think if that is the major cause of the AI reducing performance, the only way to alleviate it would be to find a new way to simulate the AI, or make the scripting multi-threaded, Both of which would probably require a large rewrite of the code base.

[Sneakers O'Toole 2]

Well i get lack of utilisation and low fps when there is no ai. In fact I havent tried anything with ai in it yet. So it would seem that the problem is more fundamental than ai.

[antoineflemming 14]

Well i get lack of utilisation and low fps when there is no ai. In fact I havent tried anything with ai in it yet. So it would seem that the problem is more fundamental than ai.

No, maybe for you it's that your PC isn't adequate. What are your system specs? And what do you mean by low FPS? What command line parameters do you currently have? The cpuCount and malloc commands affect gameplay.

[Sneakers O'Toole 2]

What do you mean by 'no?'.

I am telling you that my cpu and gpu is underused when no ai is present.

This is not something you can disagree with.

2500k and 6950(70).

[tet5uo 4]

So 133 pages later and the die-hards are still trying to convince us there is no performance problem?

[Dwarden 1125]

there is plenty of answers from developers on the subject but people tend to ignore them, what else is there to say ? we know about it, will be dealt with ... all needed to be said was said