Low CPU utilization & Low FPS

[Dwarden 1125]

they point was more related to our ultra being offscale to PS2 ...

if anyone remember early PS2 beta, you could edit the viewdistace to nearly whole map and even the active object distance (3-5x more than now)

don't ask where the performance was ... but by us, you can at least watch the things moving on monitor ;)

also i find interesting when people talk about 'thousands players' which you never see on screen at once ... due to overagressive culling in PS2

---------- Post added at 00:44 ---------- Previous post was at 00:42 ----------

You me and everyone else would love to see the performance of the engine double...which is all you would get at %50 parallelization...but thats still double...Dwarden you were good enough to give me a quick response to a question i had a while ago but i have yet to hear back on this http://www.texasmulticoretechnologies.com/products/ from what i have read it really sounds like exactly what RV4 could use :)

while it looks fancy , implementing such into existing engine isn't question of short time or often not possible at all ..

[windies 11]

why people think PlaneSide 2 on ULTRA setting equals Arma 3 settings ...

(PS2 has only some km viewdistance and quite low object viewdistance)

sigh ... (facepalm)

Why are you so hostile towards feedback? I get that it's an apples to oranges comparison, that's mainly because there is nothing mirroring ArmA to compare to. Still it is as close as we can compare. Your attitude is worse than some of the trolls on these forums about feedback at times, and this from a developer.

With all due respect, for a PR guy, you sure do seem to practice a lot of condescending behavior towards your paying customers, and often seem to be dismissive towards people's problems. (i.e. when you posted the -nologs "fix" [workaround], and *asked* for feedback, was given feedback that it did not resolve the stuttering that was introduced in Beta for some players, and outright dismissed it as my computer being either too good, or too bad. How is that useful to anyone?).

Not like we can play Arma with a big view distance anyways. But, you are right. There probably isn't much comparison to a PS2 map with hundreds of people playing at once (in an online environment) with all sorts of things going on... when, compared to walking around on an empty map at agia marina, or the airfield, for example (in an SP environment)... which seems to be enough to begin to bring Arma to its knees and cause gpu utilization drops, and fps drops. And, it only gets worse from there.

Crucify if you like, but I just don't see how it would be possible at this point for Arma to even handle (for example) 64 players with an equivalent view distance to an armored kill map on bf3, and an equivalent amount of action going on (in a mp or sp environment, for that matter). I certainly can't on this machine which handily exceeds the recommended specs. And, there is no shortage of other people reporting the same.

For all the talk about how massive Arma is and how it shouldn't be compared to other games, it is quite frustrating that I (and many others) can't play missions that even begin to approach the level of action of these "smaller" games. Helicopter showcase still runs like a complete turd. Small missions with minimal AI, in an SP environment are enough to bring the game (not our systems) to its knees. And it certainly isn't our systems, when much of our available horsepower is sitting idle while our fps takes a bath. And, when it happens, it doesn't matter if we are on a cell-phone resolution with a 500 view distance, or maxed with a 3k view distance at 2560x1600. But, you already know this don't you?

Surely, a walk-through of an abandoned agia marina (or a fly-over) should not be more demanding on my system than a 64 player MP match in BF3, or a big MP match in PS2, or a mission in DCS World (completely maxed out at 2560x1600 with draw distances out to 15k and still playing at 50fps), etc, etc. What game/scenario would you consider an acceptable comparison?

Having this "big, epic" game and being relegated to playing it like a simplistic sp game, having to largely avoid missions that exceed the scope of the infantry showcase... that's a ton of fun... Especially, after having done that already in your previous Arma release. </sarcasm>

I surely hope that an empty Agia Marina, or the Helicopter Showcase (as two ready examples) is not somehow more demanding on our systems than a full on 64 player MP environment on a more highly detailed map larger than the view distance I even play Arma at. Of course, I know it is not, b/c we can all monitor and compare our hardware utilization in any of these scenarios. There is a big difference between not needing and not using available hardware resources in order to accomplish a task.

This mirrors my sentiments exactly. Well said.

---------- Post added at 22:54 ---------- Previous post was at 22:45 ----------

they point was more related to our ultra being offscale to PS2 ...

if anyone remember early PS2 beta, you could edit the viewdistace to nearly whole map and even the active object distance (3-5x more than now)

don't ask where the performance was ... but by us, you can at least watch the things moving on monitor ;)

also i find interesting when people talk about 'thousands players' which you never see on screen at once ... due to overagressive culling in PS2

---------- Post added at 00:44 ---------- Previous post was at 00:42 ----------

while it looks fancy , implementing such into existing engine isn't question of short time or often not possible at all ..

If I max out view distance I really can't "watch things move on the monitor" any more than I can if I do the same thing in PS2. I think that's a gross overstatement.

As far as ArmA 3 performance is concerned, not comparing it to anything else but itself, It's actually worse than ArmA 2 in real world scenario's I.E. multiplayer or actual single player missions with AI. I've yet to see this "optimized" thus far and if anything it's gotten a tad worse with stuttering issue's happening even with the -nologs startup parameter.

I'm trying to provide you feedback and it seems like you are more interested in trying to sweep issue's under the rug and create excuses as to why the engine can't perform in real world scenario's on systems that exceed the recommended specs set forth by the developers.

[ric 1]

while it looks fancy , implementing such into existing engine isn't question of short time or often not possible at all ..

just an FYI it is designed to take older software that was single thread/core and upgrade it to multi :)

---------- Post added at 01:28 ---------- Previous post was at 01:24 ----------

Why are you so hostile towards feedback? I get that it's an apples to oranges comparison, that's mainly because there is nothing mirroring ArmA to compare to. Still it is as close as we can compare. Your attitude is worse than some of the trolls on these forums about feedback at times, and this from a developer.

This mirrors my sentiments exactly. Well said.

---------- Post added at 22:54 ---------- Previous post was at 22:45 ----------

If I max out view distance I really can't "watch things move on the monitor" any more than I can if I do the same thing in PS2. I think that's a gross overstatement.

As far as ArmA 3 performance is concerned, not comparing it to anything else but itself, It's actually worse than ArmA 2 in real world scenario's I.E. multiplayer or actual single player missions with AI. I've yet to see this "optimized" thus far and if anything it's gotten a tad worse with stuttering issue's happening even with the -nologs startup parameter.

I'm trying to provide you feedback and it seems like you are more interested in trying to sweep issue's under the rug and create excuses as to why the engine can't perform in real world scenario's on systems that exceed the recommended specs set forth by the developers.

i just reinstalled windows and the stuttering (for me) is from A3 thrashing my HD now i am using a program from intel that uses my SSD as cache and that has helped but i think i may have to move the game to my SSD ...I just don't want to shorten the life of it with all the thrashing :( then again it would be nice if A3 could use some of the 4GB (out of 8) of ram i have doing nothing :(

[jurrasstoil 10]

i just reinstalled windows and the stuttering (for me) is from A3 thrashing my HD now i am using a program from intel that uses my SSD as cache and that has helped but i think i may have to move the game to my SSD ...I just don't want to shorten the life of it with all the thrashing :( then again it would be nice if A3 could use some of the 4GB (out of 8) of ram i have doing nothing :(

As a 32bit application it is limited to 2gb of ram in windows. To use more it would require arma to become a 64bit application. Considering we are on the 4th "version" of the RV engine and it still suffers from the same god awful performance limitations from 12 years ago, I'd put the likelihood of that happening at 0%.

Mobile Medic hits the nail on the head with his last post.

[MavericK96 0]

Noticed this in the changelog for yesterday's dev branch release:

Simulation tasks can now potentially use one more CPU core

Sounds promising...any change in performance?

[Anachoretes 10]

Planetside2 is a game? Unexpectedly..

MavericK96

I think it's are very scene-based, and hard to detect.

A3 could use some of the 4GB (out of 8) of ram i have doing nothing

And of course you can explain how AA3 would use this RAM?

Edited August 7, 2013 by Anachoretes

[omerc 10]

Game should be released and get out from beta in about 2 months. They say will be released q3 end of q3 is end of September, October is already starting q4. but I doubt it will be ready for q3.

So far this problem is reported since alpha release 5th march. So fare in this 5 months there is no major or any improvements of the performances at all. Could they done miracle in 60 days?

So my advice to you is to save your nerves only solution is uninstall it and try in about 2 years. Maybe you will be better luck in two years.

Basically they can't optimize engine they need new one and they don't work on it at all. Engine is to old to be possible to optimize it for new hardware we wll have and it is standard already few years.

I'm surprised the developers still answer these topics...

How can you make that up? There have been numerous optimizations in both the Alpha and Beta stage: optimizations that have been proved by both BI and the community.

[nikiforos 450]

Noticed this in the changelog for yesterday's dev branch release:

Sounds promising...any change in performance?

Nope and I don't expect any better performance.

Really disappointed I must say.

PS

Everybody hold you breath until we see Altis. I guess our frame rates will go down the hill.

So if you are unhappy now ....

Edited August 7, 2013 by Nikiforos

[omerc 10]

Nope and I don't expect any better performance.

Really disappointed I must say.

PS

Everybody hold you breath until we see Altis. I guess our frame rates will go down the hill.

So if you are unhappy now ....

Watching dslyecxi's chopper tutorial all recorded on Altis, it shows no sign of slowdown. I remember him running an i7 3820, so I see no reason to worry.

[nikiforos 450]

At least I'm prepared I'm not sure about you though.

I was planning to buy a new GPU GTX 770 but now that I'm seeing no progress in optimization I will skip it.

I can invest some money to buy SSD and will wait at least 6 months before moving into the GPU market.

Edited August 7, 2013 by Nikiforos

[jurrasstoil 10]

Watching dslyecxi's chopper tutorial all recorded on Altis, it shows no sign of slowdown. I remember him running an i7 3820, so I see no reason to worry.

Which is astounding considering all the AI and scripting he used in that video.

[Sam75 0]

I get good performance with a gtx480... everything set to ultra except ssao in 1920x1200

[nikiforos 450]

In Arma 2 there was quit a big difference in frames between Utes and Chernarus(bigger cities etc.) . I expect the same for Altis with big villages and more detail.

I think it's logical to expect worse frames isn't`?

[TSAndrey 1]

In Arma 2 there was quit a big difference in frames between Utes and Chernarus(bigger cities etc.) . I expect the same for Altis with big villages and more detail.

I think it's logical to expect worse frames isn't`?

Only if Altis has bigger villages and more details. The game is only rendering objects around you, so it shouldn't make a big difference.

[nikiforos 450]

Yes but I think the villages are much bigger than Agia Marina. Biggest village on Altis is at least 2-3 times bigger than Agia Marina.

[omerc 10]

Only if Altis has bigger villages and more details. The game is only rendering objects around you, so it shouldn't make a big difference.

That would make sense. Playing on a server the other day, a village double or triple size of agia marina was modded on Stratis. There was no performance hit whatsoever roaming in the village.

[Dwarden 1125]

Why are you so hostile towards feedback? I get that it's an apples to oranges comparison, that's mainly because there is nothing mirroring ArmA to compare to. Still it is as close as we can compare. Your attitude is worse than some of the trolls on these forums about feedback at times, and this from a developer.

This mirrors my sentiments exactly. Well said.

---------- Post added at 22:54 ---------- Previous post was at 22:45 ----------

If I max out view distance I really can't "watch things move on the monitor" any more than I can if I do the same thing in PS2. I think that's a gross overstatement.

As far as ArmA 3 performance is concerned, not comparing it to anything else but itself, It's actually worse than ArmA 2 in real world scenario's I.E. multiplayer or actual single player missions with AI. I've yet to see this "optimized" thus far and if anything it's gotten a tad worse with stuttering issue's happening even with the -nologs startup parameter.

I'm trying to provide you feedback and it seems like you are more interested in trying to sweep issue's under the rug and create excuses as to why the engine can't perform in real world scenario's on systems that exceed the recommended specs set forth by the developers.

feedback like game X does 1000fps and game Y does 10fps is sort of useless ...

PlanetSide 2 viewdistance now, is way lower than was possible to adjust in early/closed beta (they lowered it since drastically) ...

PS2 maps (which is 8x8 km) don't have all map visibility (not even terrain) ...

and object visibility is even lower ...

hence i don't get why you trying compare it this way?

what you want to compare as rendered except the resulting framerate counter ... ?

now if you say the PS2 plays smooth and Arma 3 don't then that's more of value ...

also i wonder where you get the idea we or i trying sweep or hide some issues ...

my point was that hardware req. for ULTRA settings in 'insert random game' != ULTRA setting 'in our games' ...

[Vigil Vindex 64]

Can you tell us what spec you are using to play on ultra and not get crap fps in a3?

[St. Jimmy 272]

Can you tell us what spec you are using to play on ultra and not get crap fps in a3?

Well that depends what is crappy fps. I can get in a good Domi server with 20 people good fps IMO but my good fps means 30-40fps with random drops below 20fps. That's with i7 2600K @4,4GHz and GTX 560 Ti.

[xXxatrush1987 10]

same here, ultra settings, self hosted evo or domi missions 2-32players, 50(32players, loading new town)-120fps(2players^^). (viewdistance serverside limited to 2500m)

4.4ghz 2700k

7970 stock

game runs fine just use well coded missions.

bis coding example: escape from stratis all real player, just around 80fps on ultra, but don´t forget viewdistance is limited like before.

[nikiforos 450]

Does 30 fps with a SSD feel smoother than 30 fps with a HDD?

[xXxatrush1987 10]

due to less lag spikes while streaming new things: yes, all in all it allmost doubles fps when heavy streaming is to be done, driving from airport to agia marina for example.

[nikiforos 450]

Ok sounds good :)

[ric 1]

As a 32bit application it is limited to 2gb of ram in windows. To use more it would require arma to become a 64bit application. Considering we are on the 4th "version" of the RV engine and it still suffers from the same god awful performance limitations from 12 years ago, I'd put the likelihood of that happening at 0%.

Mobile Medic hits the nail on the head with his last post.

Planetside2 is a game? Unexpectedly..

MavericK96

I think it's are very scene-based, and hard to detect.

And of course you can explain how AA3 would use this RAM?

@both of you, I am aware of the limitations of 32 bit I should have added /sarcasm to my statement

---------- Post added at 13:55 ---------- Previous post was at 13:50 ----------

Well that depends what is crappy fps. I can get in a good Domi server with 20 people good fps IMO but my good fps means 30-40fps with random drops below 20fps. That's with i7 2600K @4,4GHz and GTX 560 Ti.

I get about the same except when we hit the matina then it drops into the teens :(

I left aram3 last night and fired up arma2 and did bench mark #2 with everything maxed out at 1080x1920 and was getting avg17 fps ...is that normal given my specs?

[xXxatrush1987 10]

avg 17fps on all max on this system is quiet well. considering it´s running on that old school 64gb ssd and hardly limited by the gtx660, which is hard limited by its memory bandwith and small memory interface.

new 240gb(samsung 840 pro/evo) ssd+overclocked gtx760 would do it at 25fps i would assume, ddr3 over 2000mhz effective would be the the spot on the i and you would be capable of reaching 45fps maxed out.

one thing to arma 2: arma 2 is much more limited to streaming than arma 3 is, the foilage on chernarus also cripples gfx cards to death on high antialiasing settings.

so ssd and gfx card would be a huge boost in arma 2 performance. as the rest of arma 2 is fuc*ed up in relation to arma 3, with a decend rig your arma 2 performance should be around 25-30% slower than arma 3 on exactly the same settings(utes/stratis editor comparision quick an dirty here on my pc)

Edited August 7, 2013 by xXxatrush1987