Low CPU utilization & Low FPS

[MavericK96 0]

I don't have the time to read all 225 pages of this thread, but has anyone tried messing with virtual memory allocations in windows? Disable, change values etc?

I've been getting a "your computer is running slow" message lately after exiting arma 3. I switched to windows basic from aero and the messages stopped and I even gained a substantial increase in all around game performance. I've noticed, as I've seen posted in this thread, that my RAM usage is always less than 45% while running arma 3. Given these two observations I would assume that arma is using virtual memory moreso than my 8 available gigs of ram? Strange. Gonna run some tests later.

I'm late as hell to this thread, so don't be mad at me if I'm stating what's already been posted.

I've messed with it a bit...doesn't make any discernible difference in CPU utilization as far as I can tell.

[MavericK96 0]

Haven't tried disabling Aero...I think you can just set the arma3.exe to disable it when run, correct?

I've been noticing a lot more lag as the dev build progresses...hitting low 20s FPS-wise in missions lately, kinda makes me sad. All while my CPU cores chug away at 50% utilization or less...

[iLLcAtTiViSsiMo 10]

Upped my virtual memory. Didn't improve the game but at least I'm now able to use aero AND play arma 3 without my OS yelling at me =)

[stk2008 14]

ohhh what a surprise another update and nothing of use.

stop adding and fixing issues that are pointless come on bis sort the performance out first 99% of us cant even enjoy the cool stuff being added or fixed unless we want to play in slide show mode.

and whats up with the optimization bog we was told was coming?

:(

this is arma 2 all over again the performance will not be fixed i bet you may s well uninstall and forget about this game

[nikiforos 450]

stk2008 I feel your pain. Every day I take a look at the changelog and no mention of any optimization at all.

I haven't played the game for almost a month now and I feel that this period will get prolonged. I know a lot of people that already left the game because of that.

It's like they fix the colour of the car but don't give a damn about the car engine.

[MavericK96 0]

I still play the game regularly, but I am a bit disappointed that there has been really no developer input on this issue since before release. Performance for me seems to be declining, if anything, on the dev branch. It was better than Alpha/Beta but it's starting to get worse now, it seems.

[windies 11]

I still play the game regularly, but I am a bit disappointed that there has been really no developer input on this issue since before release. Performance for me seems to be declining, if anything, on the dev branch. It was better than Alpha/Beta but it's starting to get worse now, it seems.

I had better performance in early alpha than I do now. It's been steadily declining since beta tbh.

[MavericK96 0]

Well, in early Alpha we didn't have Altis. Still, yeah, it's definitely been feeling worse lately.

[windies 11]

Well, in early Alpha we didn't have Altis. Still, yeah, it's definitely been feeling worse lately.

I'm comparing Stratis to Stratis. I noticed performance declining over the course of the Beta and into release.

[aussiebobby 1]

from GTX570 to R9 290 in helo´s Altis-Benchmark: from 48fps to.......................................48fps LOL. I think I have to push my 3570k from 4,9GHZ to 15GHZ.

Mine was 42fpsFX8350,HD7950 both at stock clocks and I also only had 4gig ram when I did the benchmark.

I also have a GT630 2gig,GT9800?,HD6850x2,HD6790,HD5700? GPUs and Fx8150 and Phenom II x4,955 cpus as well as mine(FX8350) that I could do benchmarks with.

But I don't think Ill be surprised by the results of any combo of the above

[aussiebobby 1]

helo´s Altis-Benchmark

Gigabyte GeForce GT 630 PCI-E 2.0 2GB DDR3 331.65 Game Ready WHQL driver..$65 card

FX8350,no OC

4 gig ram

39fps.

I did OC the card to get 39fps,but stock was 31fps.

The extra $244 I payed for the 7950 got me 3 fps more than the GT630.

Edited November 17, 2013 by AussieBobby

[aussiebobby 1]

@ AussieBobby : the "weak link" is the FX8350, dump your extra $ on an i5 and you will get more than 3 FPS [have a look]

You must remember that even if Arma games with Arma 3 are "GPU demanding" all the family is "CPU dependent".

Your excuse is the weak link.

Ill upgrade cpu and gpu to the specs like the poster(JumpingHubert) I was replying to and get an extra 6fps.

How about Tentpegs specs a few pages back

6 Core i7 3970x OC'd to 4.8 Ghz

16GB Corsair Dominator ram OC'd to 2133Mhz

HD7990 GPU ( 6GB GDDR5 )

another $2000 and Ill get 5fps more.

[TSAndrey 1]

What's up with all the sudden BI defenders. Bad scripting isn't the only problem for bad MP performance. INFACT, why can a server even impact a clients performance?

[MavericK96 0]

This issue has been acknowledged by the developers themselves (not recently, but earlier in this very thread). It's not as if it's some nonsense made up by BIS haters.

[ratszo 17]

This issue has been acknowledged by the developers themselves (not recently, but earlier in this very thread). It's not as if it's some nonsense made up by BIS haters.

And this thread is a sticky in the 'troubleshooting' forum --where players help other players optimize their gameplay.

What's your problem? Post your specs, maybe we can help.

Sorry, i don't see any "Bis, fix your game." stick anywhere, so you might be out of luck here.

[MavericK96 0]

And this thread is a sticky in the 'troubleshooting' forum --where players help other players optimize their gameplay.

What's your problem? Post your specs, maybe we can help.

Sorry, i don't see any "Bis, fix your game." stick anywhere, so you might be out of luck here.

What are you talking about? I know the history of the thread...hell, I posted the sixth post. It's been mostly trying to get developers to take a look at the low utilization = low FPS issue, and for awhile there was some developer interaction. Lately, though, it's all but gone quiet, but the problem remains. It's not something you can just fix with tweaks...it's a long-term, ongoing issue that has plagued the engine/game since OFP, really.

I'm not trying to incite flames against BIS here or anything, but it's undeniable, it's been at least acknowledged by devs, but recently we haven't heard much about progress on this issue. Keeping this thread active shows that people still know and care about this issue and shows that it needs to be addressed.

[aussiebobby 1]

To go back to the origin of this thread, on these tests, you can see that the CPU and GPU load is quite high in SP and Campaign, nearly always between 80% and 100% but in MP, the GPU load is falling to 30-50% in the most strange way, that can be a real issue!

In fact Multi-Player, is the real problem.

Playing a well built missions using foolproof scripts and player friendly parameters will help you getting a nice MP game experience even if you can expect a limited FPS loss [max 5/10].

Playing a crappy mission on a crappy home-made server will probably end in "slideshow" state.

This has nothing to do with the game itself but mainly with the ways the game is used, once again it's all about freedom and nothing Dev can repair with a patch.

I did some playing around with settings for a good part of the day and did get some better results with out sacrificing the graphics(mine craft low) to much.

I did however install the GT630 along side of the HD7950 using the Hybrid Physx hack.Did buy the Nvidia with that in mind and use it in a home server or steamBox(not holding breath here).

profs

Kombustor score

Submitted by AussieBobby (anonymous mode) on November 18 2013, 2:40 pm

http://www.ozone3d.net/msi_kombustor/score_200.php?id=173084

Screen shot of both cards working in game, Altis-Benchmark

http://img35.imageshack.us/img35/9978/o26.bmp

I did the benchmark using the games autodetect and it puts everything to ultra, however I did put the visibility down to 2000m

Score was 32fps

I did note that the 7950 never went over 50% and the GT630 30% usage.

[iLLcAtTiViSsiMo 10]

Downloaded BF4 cause I got sick of performance issues with Arma 3. Boy was I disappointed. BF4 isn't half the game Arma 3 is. In BF4 I feel like an idiot running around with a gun with aircrafts crashing all over the place.

Nothing compares to the Arma experience. I will, however, state that I am able to run BF4 on max settings without a hiccup. Have you seen the recommended specs for that game?

What's my point? Arma 3 has the ulitimate military shooter experience over any other military shooter out there. BIS, PLEASE say something about the performance issues and your plans if any. We just want the games we enjoy to run well on our rigs and I truly believe you would have a MUCH larger fan base if your game would simply utilize hardware as flawlessly as your competitors, no matter how big their names are.

You guys have one hell of a franchise here, let the difficult learning curve scare newcomers such as myself away, not the framerate.

In all honesty, even if you told us that there is absolutely no way to fix the performance issues, I would respect that even more than being left in the dark and participating in all of these apparently useless threads (even created a few =/) I would gladly contiue to play Arma 3 even if that was the closure to the the performance issue I've been waiting for.

Edited November 18, 2013 by iLLcAtTiViSsiMo

[nikiforos 450]

Lol, I had the exactly same thoughts. Got an offer to buy BF4 for a low price and I thought what the hell do it. First thought ? Arma is superior to all these games and sometimes even graphically.

However as you stated my frames never drop below 50 with high/medium settings on BF4.

Edited November 18, 2013 by Nikiforos

[iLLcAtTiViSsiMo 10]

Lol, I had the exactly same thoughts. Got an offer to buy BF4 for a low price and I thought what the hell do it. First thought ? Arma is superior to all these game and sometimes even graphically.

However as you stated my frames never drop below 50 with high/medium settings on BF4.

Exactly. I'm not praising BF4 in the least. Visually I was expecting something spectacular with BF4, but it honestly doesn't even touch Arma 3. It's just frustrating that after finally finding the best miltiary shooter ever, I have to deal with crap framerates in the area I play it the most, multiplayer. There are no tweaks that can fix this game engines problems. I visit forums every day in hopes to discover some type of closure to the performance issues by the devs.

I've recieved replies from them in the steam forums but very rarely and most of the time they make me feel like I'm annoying them. It's amazing I continue to play it at all with how they react to fans in the forums. You can feel their frustrations all too clearly but without resolve.

Edited November 18, 2013 by iLLcAtTiViSsiMo

[LucidPotato 10]

This thread shouldn't even continue. Now it's just come to ranting on about how BI hasn't done shit about performance. We all know that people are getting shit performance. This problem will most likely never be solved since:

first of all: the engine is a fucked up 12 year old piece of shit that doesn't take advantage of modern computers.

Second: of all BI doesn't give a shit about us or their game since this is very likely the end of the Arma series. BI was just trying to get a game out to us. Obviously quality and content doesn't matter to them anymore.

[Maio 293]

This thread shouldn't even continue. Now it's just come to ranting on about how BI hasn't done shit about performance. We all know that people are getting shit performance. This problem will most likely never be solved since:

first of all: the engine is a fucked up 12 year old piece of shit that doesn't take advantage of modern computers.

Second: of all BI doesn't give a shit about us or their game since this is very likely the end of the Arma series. BI was just trying to get a game out to us. Obviously quality and content doesn't matter to them anymore.

Lucid,

Others have managed to express their negative views on the current state of Arma 3 in less aggressive ways.

1. BI is continuously working on ways to improve performance. However, big, noticeable changes take time.

2. Point 1. is dependent on manpower, which BI has in limited supply.

3. Your post is a rant itself and falls under flamebating. See forum rule nr.1

You are free to continue discussing both negative and positive aspects as long as you do it in a civil manner.

[stk2008 14]

Hi maionaze do you know if/when we will get the optimization blog it was mentioned a very long time ago?.

Thanks

[iLLcAtTiViSsiMo 10]

Ummm...did anyone elses framerate skyrocket after the last patch? My games is running incredibly well in MP with default ultra settings and view distances of 3800. 3200 and 200. Whatever BIS did, me likes it.

[nabbl 10]

Ummm...did anyone elses framerate skyrocket after the last patch? My games is running incredibly well in MP with default ultra settings and view distances of 3800. 3200 and 200. Whatever BIS did, me likes it.

WHAAT?

Can you test a bit further ? Like going onto a Wasteland Server or such unoptimized mission?