Low CPU utilization & Low FPS

[LSD_Timewarp82 21]

And dont forget ridiculous commands like -maxmem=16384 and -high and the other ones which brings 0 pfs^^ Those are "Expert" suggestions....

Hahahahahahaha

[jumpinghubert 49]

@gamerpaddy

in multiplayer the fps are often server dependent. In all other cases your cpu-clock/cpu is the bottleneck. If you get bluescreens @ 4GHZ your vcore is too low. Please take a look to one of the overclocking guides in the internet before you overclock. The two main limiting factors in arma3 is the amount of ai and the scripts. Please try another game mode or another server.

@Timewarp

do you think there is no chance at all to get more fps in arma3 "because of the engine"? So all tips and tweaks are senseless at all? Then lets close all related threads with the statement: its da ändschinn!

[Sneakson 1]

Hello, i have (like many others) FPS problems. if i ask someone, how do i fix it, the common answer is: get a better pc...

Ok, now ive tried some settings.

Background informations:

im using tbbmalloc allocator (you can find by google tbbmalloc)

im running an AMD phenom 1100T @ 6x3.3ghz with watercooling to keep below 45°C,

GTX 670 (no oc),

4x4gb ddr3 1333 rams,

steam and arma on secondary SSD,

windows on primary SSD

Settings:

<depending on test, it could change>

1920x1080 (at primary montor) 60hz

arma3.cfg maxframesahead 1 and detectframesahead 1

VSync is DISABLED (even in nvidia control panel, global setting and ingame)

Turbo Core (AMD turbo stuff) is disabled

Launch parameters:

-cpuCount=6 -exThreads=7 -maxMem=8192 -maxVram=2048 -noBenchmark -noLogs -noPause -noSplash -malloc=tbbmalloc

The game is running at 30fps in singleplayer (if im not running an gamemode like Joes sandbox)

At multiplayer, its depending on how many players there are.

I got at 5-10 players 23-30fps

10-20 i got 18-23fps

above 20 its between 9 and 18fps

Ok, first i thought my pc is too slow (like everyone without clue say)

i switched the settings to LOW (it was everything on HIGH), after that the fps did not change, but the graphics was terrible.

Hmm, what about ULTRA. OK so now i switched everything to Ultra (viewdistance 3500, objects 2000), same fps as before.

Now i overclocked my CPU from 6x3.3 to 6x4ghz. the game was actually playable (25fps on 40player server), but after some time i got an bluescreen over and over again.

Back to default clock (after trying 3.8, 3.6 and 3.5ghz)

Weird, ok lets have some fun and activate Nvidia sorround, so i can play on 3 monitors.

The result was:

5760x1080@60hz vsync on, everythign on ultra, 12km viewdistance 5km object, 200m shadow. AA 8x, SMAA ultra, HDAO ultra, caustics activate blah.

Then the surprise: 20player server: 26fps WAT?

i heard that my PC is actually doing something now, CPU load was 90%, RAM was 78% and graphics 98% and the fans was audible even with headset on.

Fine, but its hard to play on that resolution, and 26fps is not the solution. its still too low.

Here are some screenshots and "screen shots"

i cant post URL's for informations like dxdiag, screenshots. so i have to use a bug to post it:

Ingame:

http://s1.directupload.net/images/140417/c9edi2y6.jpg

Outgame (captured with an camera):

http://s7.directupload.net/images/140417/vqu3xc8o.jpg

http://s14.directupload.net/images/140417/ef7culay.jpg

Well, will this be fixed soon?

Ive planned to get a i5 4670k.

but if this is going to be fixed someday, i will keep 1100T until there is a 400% better one for same price.

P.S. if someone needs more informations about my system, heres the dxdiag (x64)

http://pastebin.com/HpmzWzTc

(redirect to pastebin )

Somewhat weak CPU... 30 fps in singleplayer is quite low depending on your settings and mission.

I'm surprised that multi-screen thing worked though. May mean your CPU is sweating harder than your graphics card but interpreting any ARMA data is like seeing the future in someone's coffe.

Your fps is probably constant in multiplayer because the server is limiting you.

Edited April 17, 2014 by Sneakson

[LSD_Timewarp82 21]

@Timewarp

do you think there is no chance at all to get more fps in arma3 "because of the engine"? So all tips and tweaks are senseless at all? Then lets close all related threads with the statement: its da ändschinn!

Well, thats correct. GPU+CPU Power doesnt matter at Arma in the current state of the Game. A couple of weeks ago i built a PC for a customer with a Overclocked Hexacore Intel and 3x780Ti´s, SSD and the best crap you can buy for money. So i ve decided to start a benchsession to compare his rig to my with 770GTX SLi. There was no feelable (compared to the frames while playing) significant difference to my system. Such things like 2-3 Frames more in this or that situation are complete useless. U only need to look in Steam Discussion panel how many high end pc users have problems with this game, the world wide web is full of those threads. Just think logical...

In my opinion only the devs have the oppurtunity to edit the engine in a way that the user would be able to feel the increase of smoother gameplay.

It´s no offense to the devs of course.

[sXr 10]

Hi everybody, sorry for my english.

I bought a GTX 690 and I think, I have some problem on game.

When i play to "Arma III", when I launch MSI after burner, In game I can see that:

- GPU1 USAGE % >> The maximum goes to 48%

- GPU2 USAGE % >> The maximum goes to 48%, It doesn't work at those maximum

The probleme that I have 30/40fps in game and my CPU used 20/30%

But, When Im playing some other "new game" , GPU1 and 2 work to 80% >> 99%

Thanks for your help ;)

My config:

GTX 690 driver 335.23

I7 4820K 3.7ghz

16go DDR3

[LSD_Timewarp82 21]

Lol, the next one with a high end pc and low frames. How suprising..

[nikiforos 450]

I have to admit that you guys still discussing in this topic are hero's. It's good to have hopes for better performance but also to have some realistic expectations. I feel for u guys but don't expect miracles or anything to happen soon.

Keep up the good spirit.

[sXr 10]

That's mean there are no solutions :/

[nikiforos 450]

My personal recommendation is to save your energy for other things. Don't waste more money on this and just let it flow. If it happens and the game gets optimized then good, otherwise just wait for other titles to play with.

[sXr 10]

Ok thanks ;)

[nikiforos 450]

U welcome :)

[windies 11]

Just went from a Phenom II x4 965 BE @ 3.8ghz to an i5 3570K @ 4.2ghz and DDR2-800 to DDR3-1600 and there's a marked improvement however the issue's with frames dipping below 20-25 fps is still there under heavy load. One thing that's even more apparent now is that changing settings aside from Object detail and distance does absolutely nothing. I needed to upgrade anyways but if you're looking to upgrade just for ArmA and you have something that works good now, I wouldn't spend the money.

Edited April 18, 2014 by Windies

[bigsyke 10]

Here is my take on everything.

I've tried Arma3 on 3 different machines. I7 4770k, 8350, 6300. All terrible. Now, I've had other games run at 30fps and were still playable. It seems to me, and probably only me, the real killer here is a slight micro-studder, which is more apparent the longer I've played Arma3, vs other games. I've put in a ton of hours into the game, and there IS a slight micro-studder, even at 60fps.

I have everything at the lowest setting to help counter this studder, yet it isn't the gpu, its something with the multi-player engine.

It's almost as if the screen is being rendered at 60fps, but the objects are refreshed at about 10-20fps. This is more apparent while flying. This makes the game unplayable for me.

Oh, and this is with multiple FO ISP's, 40/40Mbps.

I am willing to bet this is directly related to server/client-side CPU utilization, but probably more on the server side.

[Sneakson 1]

Hi everybody, sorry for my english.

I bought a GTX 690 and I think, I have some problem on game.

When i play to "Arma III", when I launch MSI after burner, In game I can see that:

- GPU1 USAGE % >> The maximum goes to 48%

- GPU2 USAGE % >> The maximum goes to 48%, It doesn't work at those maximum

The probleme that I have 30/40fps in game and my CPU used 20/30%

But, When Im playing some other "new game" , GPU1 and 2 work to 80% >> 99%

Thanks for your help ;)

My config:

GTX 690 driver 335.23

I7 4820K 3.7ghz

16go DDR3

Universal issue.

Here is my take on everything.

I've tried Arma3 on 3 different machines. I7 4770k, 8350, 6300. All terrible. Now, I've had other games run at 30fps and were still playable. It seems to me, and probably only me, the real killer here is a slight micro-studder, which is more apparent the longer I've played Arma3, vs other games. I've put in a ton of hours into the game, and there IS a slight micro-studder, even at 60fps.

I have everything at the lowest setting to help counter this studder, yet it isn't the gpu, its something with the multi-player engine.

It's almost as if the screen is being rendered at 60fps, but the objects are refreshed at about 10-20fps. This is more apparent while flying. This makes the game unplayable for me.

Oh, and this is with multiple FO ISP's, 40/40Mbps.

I am willing to bet this is directly related to server/client-side CPU utilization, but probably more on the server side.

Never noticed what you're saying. How are the objects "refreshed"? In ARMA2 grass and trees only move a few times per second when affected by the wind which looks really strange unless you have a character moving across the screen smoothly.

Also if you believe you're having micro-stuttering measure frametimes using Fraps. Take the data into Excel or some other graphing program (I believe Frafs is a free Fraps complement that automatically draws graphs from Fraps ft data) and see if there are any spikes.

[Polymath820 11]

All of ArmA 3's issues as far as I can see are caused by:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?176411-ArmA-3-Low-FPS-%28likely-possible-reason%29

[Falconeye 10]

Hi,

do you think 4GB memory is enough for Arma 3 in 2560x1440 ?

thanks

[Sneakson 1]

Hi,

do you think 4GB memory is enough for Arma 3 in 2560x1440 ?

thanks

32-bit or 64-bit OS? Harder with 64-bit OS.

Try it and if there's some sort of memory issue just buy 2x4GB memory... only costs less than $100 anyways.

I'm not exactly sure how much VRAM you'll need though.

[jumpinghubert 49]

Here is my take on everything.

I've tried Arma3 on 3 different machines. I7 4770k, 8350, 6300. All terrible. Now, I've had other games run at 30fps and were still playable. It seems to me, and probably only me, the real killer here is a slight micro-studder, which is more apparent the longer I've played Arma3, vs other games. I've put in a ton of hours into the game, and there IS a slight micro-studder, even at 60fps.

I have everything at the lowest setting to help counter this studder, yet it isn't the gpu, its something with the multi-player engine.

It's almost as if the screen is being rendered at 60fps, but the objects are refreshed at about 10-20fps. This is more apparent while flying. This makes the game unplayable for me.

Oh, and this is with multiple FO ISP's, 40/40Mbps.

I am willing to bet this is directly related to server/client-side CPU utilization, but probably more on the server side.

I have the opposite experience. Do you have arma3 @SSD? Try rotational blur @ 200. What ingame settings and graphic card do you have?

[Honza1616 1]

I also have a problem with low FPS

I custom topic based but sometimes I deleted it :-/

Example:

If I set the details I have high CPU utilization of 50% and 50% GPU, 30 FPS

when I give medium detail I use 40% of CPU and GPU 40%, 33 FPS

If I set the details on low power CPU is 30%, and the GPU has 15%, 35 FPS

Why not increase GPU performance so I could have more FPS?

Why can not I have more FPS

We had 2 graphics card HD 7770 in Crossfire

someone advised me at replace with a new graphics card and we exchanged it for a different brand in the idea that AMD chips are optimized for playing Army (Nvidia) GTX 780, did not help

I bought a SSD drive and installed it Armu, did not help

I would like to ask if this problem could cause older versions of PCI-Express

I'm on board PCI-e 2.0 and

graphics card has a 3 generation

GK therefore does not use the power board when it fails to work fast enough

I think it would solve the problem board with PCI-e 3.0? It would mean i buy a new processor

Or do you think that this problem may cause a CPU?

[jumpinghubert 49]

I also have a problem with low FPS

I custom topic based but sometimes I deleted it :-/

Example:

If I set the details I have high CPU utilization of 50% and 50% GPU, 30 FPS

when I give medium detail I use 40% of CPU and GPU 40%, 33 FPS

If I set the details on low power CPU is 30%, and the GPU has 15%, 35 FPS

Why not increase GPU performance so I could have more FPS?

Why can not I have more FPS

We had 2 graphics card HD 7770 in Crossfire

someone advised me at replace with a new graphics card and we exchanged it for a different brand in the idea that AMD chips are optimized for playing Army (Nvidia) GTX 780, did not help

I bought a SSD drive and installed it Armu, did not help

I would like to ask if this problem could cause older versions of PCI-Express

I'm on board PCI-e 2.0 and

graphics card has a 3 generation

GK therefore does not use the power board when it fails to work fast enough

I think it would solve the problem board with PCI-e 3.0? It would mean i buy a new processor

Or do you think that this problem may cause a CPU?

your cpu is bottlenecking. Best choice for arma3 is a haswell 4670k and 2400er ram. Then you will have maybe 50fps and 100% gpu utilization. I was able to play with 50fps in sp-missions on very high settings and full AA/atoc on a 3570k @ 4.8 GHZ and a weak GTX 570. For arma3 a weak gpu/strong cpu combi is better than a strong gpu/weak cpu combination.

[sXr 10]

Thanks dude, thanks for your forum

I installed Arma 3 on my SSD and now i'm 70/80 fps :D

[ziffa 11]

your cpu is bottlenecking. Best choice for arma3 is a haswell 4670k and 2400er ram. Then you will have maybe 50fps and 100% gpu utilization. I was able to play with 50fps in sp-missions on very high settings and full AA/atoc on a 3570k @ 4.8 GHZ and a weak GTX 570. For arma3 a weak gpu/strong cpu combi is better than a strong gpu/weak cpu combination.

BULLSHIT!

BULLSHIT!

BULLSHIT!

BULLSHIT!

don't speack if you don't know nothing about cpu bottlenenecking!do you think you must have an 4.8ghz oc processors to run this shitty game?NO!you are wrong

I have an intel core i5 2500k considered one of the best cpu on the market,overclocked to 4.1ghz,with an nvidia 780 overclocked to 1018mhz

you say"on sp i was able to play with 50 fps"thanx!the game only work on sp the problem is the mp!all this post speack about mp probem and you write this bullshit about sp!

Good why i bought this game...why

[nikiforos 450]

i5-2500k @4.1 bottlenecking? No way . Recommending people to spend money instead of telling BIS to optimize the game is the wrong path to go.

Your i5-2500k is good enough to run this game and ofcourse if you could push your overclock a little more to 4.3 would be better.

Edited April 18, 2014 by Nikiforos

[windies 11]

Haswells are worse overclockers than IB and SB If that's the route you wanna go. I'm running i5 3570K @ 4.5ghz now and it still runs pretty rough in multiplayer and large SP missions with lots of AI. I suppose I should upgrade to Haswell as well right since obviously my CPU is bottlenecking? :rolleyes:

[Sneakson 1]

He's got an AMD Phenom II X6 1075T not a i5-2500K or 3570K... his CPU is absolutely definitely bottlenecking a 780.