Low CPU utilization & Low FPS

[MavericK96 0]

Changing like 95% of the settings between Very Low and Ultra does fuck-all for performance. The only ones that really matter are View Distance, Terrain Detail and Object Detail. Basically, anything to do with the distance of rendered objects. Though, given the performance sometimes I am almost positive the game is rendering far more than it should be (i.e. non-existant or very poorly optimized occlusion culling).

[[frl]myke 14]

Ultra settings? I have a similar problem

a few days ago you advised me to buy another processor

Please read the post i replied to. The poster gave no information about his ingame settings so i had to guess what could be the problem. From my experience, often (but not exclusively) such FPS problems are caused by Ultra settings on a non-ultra systems. If people want helpful answers, they should post meaningful questions. If the only info is "it doesn't work" my default reply will always be "then something is wrong". For more precise answers more precise info has to be given. Simple as that.

[TheGoldenTip 10]

Myke;2675637']Please read the post i replied to. The poster gave no information about his ingame settings so i had to guess what could be the problem. From my experience' date=' often (but not exclusively) such FPS problems are caused by Ultra settings on a non-ultra systems. If people want helpful answers, they should post meaningful questions. If the only info is "it doesn't work" my default reply will always be "then something is wrong". For more precise answers more precise info has to be given. Simple as that.[/quote']

cpu: AMD FX 8120 eight-core

gpu: Nvidia gtx 770

ram : corsair vengence ddr3 16gb

os: windows 7 home premium 64-bit

My in game setting I auto-detected and it automatically sets everything to ultra...

When I play single player I only get 20 fps...

When I put it to verylow=20fps, low= 20fps... and so on...

I optimized it= 20fps

did "-cpuCount=8" in the launch options = 20fps

re-installed =20fps

switched game to secondary drive= 20fps

re-installed windows 7 = 20fps

And that is just single player...

On multiplayer I get 9-15 fps max... did the exact same steps and nothing...

[[frl]myke 14]

cpu: AMD FX 8120 eight-core

gpu: Nvidia gtx 770

ram : corsair vengence ddr3 16gb

os: windows 7 home premium 64-bit

My in game setting I auto-detected and it automatically sets everything to ultra...

When I play single player I only get 20 fps...

When I put it to verylow=20fps, low= 20fps... and so on...

I optimized it= 20fps

did "-cpuCount=8" in the launch options = 20fps

re-installed =20fps

switched game to secondary drive= 20fps

re-installed windows 7 = 20fps

And that is just single player...

On multiplayer I get 9-15 fps max... did the exact same steps and nothing...

When you get always and with every setting the (more or less) exact FPS, then there's something wrong with your PC. The exact same FPS is technically impossible while changing as example the view distance. Lowering this should immediately significantly raise FPS. Your PC is not bad, normal to high (some even very high) settings should be possible. I can only guess but are all hardware drivers correctly installed and up to date?

[oldbear 390]

@ TheGoldenTip : getting "Ultra" with a GTX is OK, getting 20 FPS with an AMD FX 8120 is probably related to your "Visibility" settings.

The FX 8120 is not fitted to get high FPS on Arma3 because of the way the CPU is built and the way RealVirtuality Engine is working.

Have a look at CPU hierarchy RealVirtuality Engine wise :

So having a mid-range CPU, you must work on your settings.

The only video "Quality" setting you are going to tweak is "Visibility".

This "video" setting is in fact a CPU setting due to the way the RealVirtuality Engine is managing terrain drawing.

I will suggest you to lowered it to 2000/2500m

As the FPS rate is rather under the average refreshing screen rate I suggest to disable Vsync in the "Display" settings.

In the "AA&PP" area, I will suggest you to use HardOcp recipe "... best AA combo in this game, FXAA Ultra + 2X/4X or 8X FSAA and you will get the best texture quality, no blurring, crisp textures, and well anti-aliased objects and vegetation." source -> http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/10/02/arma_iii_video_card_performance_iq_review/6#.U10IqCiJuuM

[windies 11]

Changing like 95% of the settings between Very Low and Ultra does fuck-all for performance. The only ones that really matter are View Distance, Terrain Detail and Object Detail. Basically, anything to do with the distance of rendered objects. Though, given the performance sometimes I am almost positive the game is rendering far more than it should be (i.e. non-existant or very poorly optimized occlusion culling).

I've thought the same many times about poor occlusion culling. Actually on that note, I have a feeling the game is often doing/simulating/drawing/calculating more than it should or really needs to.

Edited April 27, 2014 by Windies

[Furret 0]

I've thought the same many times about poor occlusion culling. Actually on that note, I have a feeling the game is often doing/simulating/drawing/calculating more than it should or really needs to.

I watched a video on the new VBS and they were showing off improved performance when rendering lots of objects, perhaps they've improved how the engine handles culling objects? I believe it was called "real-time object aggregation technology"

video here:

[F3r4_N3n3m 10]

Hi guys,

I have been trying for some time now to optimize my configuration in Arma3 so I would get some playable Performance - without success may I add. Before I give it up and send the game back I'd like to give here one last try.

I will try to describe my rig and the Settings I am using, as well as the commands and tweaks I have tried already.

SYSTEM DESCRIPTION:

CPU: i5-4670k@4.5GHz

GPU: 2x HD7990@1100MHz/1575MHz/1.2V (TDP@300W, clock is stable and constant on all 4 cores)

PSU: Corsair AX1200i

MOBO: MSI Z87-GD65

RAM: Corsair Vengeance 2x 8GB DDR3 1600MHz CL9

HD: SSD Samsung 840 Evo 250GB (Steam) + 120GB (Windows)

COOLING: Water cooled with a great deal of cooling power - GPU@50°C max and CPU@60°C max

OS: Windows 8.1 64-bit

CATALYST: 14.1 Beta, 14.3/ 14.3 Beta and 14.4/ 14.4 Beta

SETTINGS, FPS@SP AND UTILIZATION IN GAME:

RESOLUTION: 1080p

ULTRA: 25-50fps, 20-25% GPU utilization (on all 4 cores) and 60-70% CPU utilization (on all 4 cores)

STANDARD: 30-80fps, 20-30% GPU utilization (on all 4 cores) and 60-70% CPU utilization (on all 4 cores)

TWEAKS AND FIXES USED:

-maxMem=16384

-maxVRAM=3072

-cpuCount=4

-exThreads=7

-----------------------

GPU_MaxFramesAhead=1;

GPU_DetectedFramesAhead=1;

The Performance is just not acceptable. When I am in towns or playing multiplayer I get very often less than 20fps. Even when sacrificing Quality I can't find a configuration that will make it enjoyable.

The game Looks great and it would be very fun to Play. However the fun is spoiled when I start lagging. :/

I'd appreciate some CONSTRUCTIVE comments and insights!

I have had no Problems with any other games. I Play BF4 on Ultra@1080p/Resolution scale 150% and I still get over 140fps in Multiplayer. There I get limited by the CPU that runs at good 90-99% while the GPU is chilling at 60-70% utilization. But at least I have the Performance that I wanted.

[LSD_Timewarp82 21]

Here we see a perfect example. Even 2 HighEnd Dual GPU Graphicscard + his good CPU @ 4,5 Ghz arent able to run the game in acceptable Frames. Cmon devs, thats just ridicolous. I cant find words for that :(

[Honza1616 1]

cpu: AMD FX 8120 eight-core

gpu: Nvidia gtx 770

ram : corsair vengence ddr3 16gb

os: windows 7 home premium 64-bit

My in game setting I auto-detected and it automatically sets everything to ultra...

When I play single player I only get 20 fps...

When I put it to verylow=20fps, low= 20fps... and so on...

I optimized it= 20fps

did "-cpuCount=8" in the launch options = 20fps

re-installed =20fps

switched game to secondary drive= 20fps

re-installed windows 7 = 20fps

And that is just single player...

On multiplayer I get 9-15 fps max... did the exact same steps and nothing...

I have the same problem and I do not know what to do,

nothing helped advise me here

One more thing here is to buy a new CPU from Intel, but that now I have no money: D

[TheGoldenTip 10]

@ TheGoldenTip : getting "Ultra" with a GTX is OK, getting 20 FPS with an AMD FX 8120 is probably related to your "Visibility" settings.

The FX 8120 is not fitted to get high FPS on Arma3 because of the way the CPU is built and the way RealVirtuality Engine is working.

Have a look at CPU hierarchy RealVirtuality Engine wise :

http://www.armedassault.info/ftp/pics/news/pics1/Arma2-OA_i7-4770K_i5-4670K_90.jpg

So having a mid-range CPU, you must work on your settings.

The only video "Quality" setting you are going to tweak is "Visibility".

This "video" setting is in fact a CPU setting due to the way the RealVirtuality Engine is managing terrain drawing.

I will suggest you to lowered it to 2000/2500m

As the FPS rate is rather under the average refreshing screen rate I suggest to disable Vsync in the "Display" settings.

In the "AA&PP" area, I will suggest you to use HardOcp recipe "... best AA combo in this game, FXAA Ultra + 2X/4X or 8X FSAA and you will get the best texture quality, no blurring, crisp textures, and well anti-aliased objects and vegetation." source -> http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/10/02/arma_iii_video_card_performance_iq_review/6#.U10IqCiJuuM

Thank you all so much for your help... My fps is good enough now until I can buy a new cpu...

---------- Post added at 02:08 ---------- Previous post was at 02:07 ----------

Thanks for all the help, i appreciate it. I'll just start working to get a new cpu

[F3r4_N3n3m 10]

Thank you all so much for your help... My fps is good enough now until I can buy a new cpu...

---------- Post added at 02:08 ---------- Previous post was at 02:07 ----------

Thanks for all the help, i appreciate it. I'll just start working to get a new cpu

Hey guys,

Just Forget this idea about getting new Hardware because of this game. Invest your time and Money searching and supporting other game developments that are actually interested in delivering a decent experience to users.

Check my System... I still have Major Performance issues, getting fps lower than 20fps all the time. The game just ain't done for playing... :/

SYSTEM DESCRIPTION:

CPU: i5-4670k@4.5GHz

GPU: 2x HD7990@1100MHz/1575MHz/1.2V (TDP@300W, clock is stable and constant on all 4 cores)

PSU: Corsair AX1200i

MOBO: MSI Z87-GD65

RAM: Corsair Vengeance 2x 8GB DDR3 1600MHz CL9

HD: SSD Samsung 840 Evo 250GB (Steam) + 120GB (Windows)

COOLING: Water cooled with a great deal of cooling power - GPU@50°C max and CPU@60°C max

OS: Windows 8.1 64-bit

CATALYST: 14.1 Beta, 14.3/ 14.3 Beta and 14.4/ 14.4 Beta

[neofit 65]

I doubled my fps in Arma3 by changing one single setting in my BIOS from the default: I put "C1E Support" to disabled from the default of enabled.

My system:

CPU: Intel Core i7 920 @2.6 GHz

MB: Asus P6X58D-E (bios 803)

Gfx: NVidia GTX-780

It is probably a problem with my particular combination of hardware. It looks like the CPU was never getting out of the power saving state, or, since I have this system since the i7-920 came out (4 years ago, more.?) and I never had any problems with any other game but the Armas, I suspect it is BIS' engine that stresses the CPU in such a way that it only partially or never gets out of sleep state. Anyways, like I said above, with the "C1E support" off the fps is literally doubled.

[oldbear 390]

@ F3r4_N3n3m : ATM on my "i3-4130/HD 7770/8 Go/SSD 256" rig, I am enjoying the game, getting 30/40 FPS playing in "High", Visibility = 2500m in Single player missions and 20/35 FPS in Multiplayer.

Of course there are some drop down in FPS rate under heavy fire or in urban areas, but the game is still played smoothly in such circumstances.

[Ezcoo 47]

Hey guys,

Just Forget this idea about getting new Hardware because of this game. Invest your time and Money searching and supporting other game developments that are actually interested in delivering a decent experience to users.

Check my System... I still have Major Performance issues, getting fps lower than 20fps all the time. The game just ain't done for playing... :/

Hi F3r4_N3n3m, make sure that your GPUs have power saving mode competely disabled (the power saving setting should be something like "always full / prefer maximum performance" and that the power management mode of Windows is set to "Maximum/Best performance" in Control Panel. Check also BIOS (UEFI) settings to make sure that the power saving modes are disabled there too.

Make also sure that the viewdistance settings in game are not too high (try eg. 1500, 2000, 2500, ... ,4000 meters).

[CaptainObvious 95]

Hey guys,

Just Forget this idea about getting new Hardware because of this game. Invest your time and Money searching and supporting other game developments that are actually interested in delivering a decent experience to users.

Yeah, because daily updates show that the devs don't care at all :rolleyes:

[Sneakson 1]

Hey guys,

Just Forget this idea about getting new Hardware because of this game. Invest your time and Money searching and supporting other game developments that are actually interested in delivering a decent experience to users.

Check my System... I still have Major Performance issues, getting fps lower than 20fps all the time. The game just ain't done for playing... :/

SYSTEM DESCRIPTION:

CPU: i5-4670k@4.5GHz

GPU: 2x HD7990@1100MHz/1575MHz/1.2V (TDP@300W, clock is stable and constant on all 4 cores)

PSU: Corsair AX1200i

MOBO: MSI Z87-GD65

RAM: Corsair Vengeance 2x 8GB DDR3 1600MHz CL9

HD: SSD Samsung 840 Evo 250GB (Steam) + 120GB (Windows)

COOLING: Water cooled with a great deal of cooling power - GPU@50°C max and CPU@60°C max

OS: Windows 8.1 64-bit

CATALYST: 14.1 Beta, 14.3/ 14.3 Beta and 14.4/ 14.4 Beta

You're doing something wrong then. In singleplayer you should be able to get 60 fps on Ultra basically in well designed missions and in multiplayer it all depends on the server and mission so join a different one with a different mission.

[TheBigOne_014 16]

Hey guys,

Just Forget this idea about getting new Hardware because of this game. Invest your time and Money searching and supporting other game developments that are actually interested in delivering a decent experience to users.

Check my System... I still have Major Performance issues, getting fps lower than 20fps all the time. The game just ain't done for playing... :/

SYSTEM DESCRIPTION:

CPU: i5-4670k@4.5GHz

GPU: 2x HD7990@1100MHz/1575MHz/1.2V (TDP@300W, clock is stable and constant on all 4 cores)

PSU: Corsair AX1200i

MOBO: MSI Z87-GD65

RAM: Corsair Vengeance 2x 8GB DDR3 1600MHz CL9

HD: SSD Samsung 840 Evo 250GB (Steam) + 120GB (Windows)

COOLING: Water cooled with a great deal of cooling power - GPU@50°C max and CPU@60°C max

OS: Windows 8.1 64-bit

CATALYST: 14.1 Beta, 14.3/ 14.3 Beta and 14.4/ 14.4 Beta

Hey, don't belive this guy. I have a 30-55FPS in SP and and 20-40FPS in MP (depends on the server)

Here is my rig:

CPU: i5 2300 @2.8Ghz Air cooled stock fan

GPU: GTX 560 STOCK

RAM: 8Gb GSKILLED @1600Mhz

HD: 2x Samsung 150Gb RAID 0

Monitors: HP 21" @ 1680x1050 (where i play) and a ACER 19" (to keep an eye on TS3, system monitor and Recorder)

All this with High-Ultra settings and a VD of 2500m

[F3r4_N3n3m 10]

You're doing something wrong then. In singleplayer you should be able to get 60 fps on Ultra basically in well designed missions and in multiplayer it all depends on the server and mission so join a different one with a different mission.

I am talking about single player... there I am getting 20-50fps on the first campaign missions!

And the rendering distances I am using as is. Every quality setting has a different set of rendering distances.

Ultra is unplayable, Very High Barely, Standard is ok but also with a lot a crashs and major drops in towns or when there is action. And not just a fast drop... but really entire city parts where fps stays under 20fps.

---------- Post added at 11:46 ---------- Previous post was at 11:41 ----------

Hi F3r4_N3n3m, make sure that your GPUs have power saving mode competely disabled (the power saving setting should be something like "always full / prefer maximum performance" and that the power management mode of Windows is set to "Maximum/Best performance" in Control Panel. Check also BIOS (UEFI) settings to make sure that the power saving modes are disabled there too.

Make also sure that the viewdistance settings in game are not too high (try eg. 1500, 2000, 2500, ... ,4000 meters).

I have searched for any other power saving control in BIOS but couldn't find anything that wasn't already disabled. Same thing goes to windows.

My PSU measures power consumption and I am using only about 400-450W when playing Arma 3. When playing BF4 my rig is draining arround 800-870W.

So I would say that it is very likely that Arma 3 has a problem with my hardware.

---------- Post added at 11:48 ---------- Previous post was at 11:46 ----------

Hey, don't belive this guy. I have a 30-55FPS in SP and and 20-40FPS in MP (depends on the server)

Here is my rig:

CPU: i5 2300 @2.8Ghz Air cooled stock fan

GPU: GTX 560 STOCK

RAM: 8Gb GSKILLED @1600Mhz

HD: 2x Samsung 150Gb RAID 0

Monitors: HP 21" @ 1680x1050 (where i play) and a ACER 19" (to keep an eye on TS3, system monitor and Recorder)

All this with High-Ultra settings and a VD of 2500m

Hey, easy there... I am just reporting my problem to see if anyone can help me solve it.

I am also very displeased that I am getting such bad performance with my system. But I have seen more people here complaining of the same as in any other game out there. So there is the possibility that the game is poorly optmized.

[jumpinghubert 49]

I watched a video on the new VBS and they were showing off improved performance when rendering lots of objects, perhaps they've improved how the engine handles culling objects? I believe it was called "real-time object aggregation technology"

video here:

thats the right direction arma3 have to go!

[windies 11]

Hey, don't belive this guy. I have a 30-55FPS in SP and and 20-40FPS in MP (depends on the server)

Here is my rig:

CPU: i5 2300 @2.8Ghz Air cooled stock fan

GPU: GTX 560 STOCK

RAM: 8Gb GSKILLED @1600Mhz

HD: 2x Samsung 150Gb RAID 0

Monitors: HP 21" @ 1680x1050 (where i play) and a ACER 19" (to keep an eye on TS3, system monitor and Recorder)

All this with High-Ultra settings and a VD of 2500m

I call BS on this since I have:

i5-3570k @ 4.4ghz

R9 280X

8gb Gskill Ripjaws 1600 - 9-9-9-24

120gb Kingston HyperX 3K SSD

and I still easily drop to 10fps in multiplayer on most missions unless it's either a very small player count or a coop with very little AI. Even in SP in some stock missions I can drop to 15-20 fps and I use primarily the same settings I used when I had my Phenom II which is nowhere near Ultra except for shadows and textures on Very high. Everything else is generally standard or high except for object detail which I either use low or standard depending on how a missions performs. So I highly doubt your claim.

But hey, I can get 120 FPS on the main menu now watching the little battle scenario and I can get like 150 fps on an empty map staring at the ocean :rolleyes:.

*edit* oh and a view distance of 3000/1400/100.

Edited April 28, 2014 by Windies

[[frl]myke 14]

I am talking about single player... there I am getting 20-50fps on the first campaign missions!

And the rendering distances I am using as is. Every quality setting has a different set of rendering distances.

You do know that you can fine tune these presets, don't you? Try turning object details and terrain details one notch down, adjust viewdistance and object draw distance a bit down and you should see a immediate effect on your FPS. Also make sure that shadow detail is above normal.

[F3r4_N3n3m 10]

Myke;2677207']You do know that you can fine tune these presets' date=' don't you? Try turning object details and terrain details one notch down, adjust viewdistance and object draw distance a bit down and you should see a immediate effect on your FPS. Also make sure that shadow detail is above normal.[/quote']

Hi Myke,

Yes, I did try a lot with the settings. I am just posting my performance on the "as is" configurations so it is comparable to others.

I was just expecting that someone would recognize a big flop on hardware compatibility or on the tweaks and settings I am using.

I am really surprised that people are saying here that they have very enjoyable gaming with 20-30fps. Maybe it is not my hardware but my eyes. I think BI should be adding an appointment by the doctor in the "requirements" to run the game. :/ (yeah, that was sarcasm... and that is because I am really frustrated)

[[frl]myke 14]

Hi Myke,

Yes, I did try a lot with the settings. I am just posting my performance on the "as is" configurations so it is comparable to others.

I was just expecting that someone would recognize a big flop on hardware compatibility or on the tweaks and settings I am using.

I am really surprised that people are saying here that they have very enjoyable gaming with 20-30fps. Maybe it is not my hardware but my eyes. I think BI should be adding an appointment by the doctor in the "requirements" to run the game. :/ (yeah, that was sarcasm... and that is because I am really frustrated)

MP is known to have horrible FPS, BI is working on it. Meanwhile, open the editor and see if FPS changes when playing around with the settings. Focus on View/Draw distances, object quality and terrain quality as those are CPU related and should give noticable difference in FPS. If not, then definately something on your system isn't the way it should be.

[F3r4_N3n3m 10]

Hi guys....

I am going to post a few new observations I made during latest testing.

Although I am getting satisfying Performance on BF4, it still works with a low GPU and CPU utilization. I have been trying to optimize this but couldn't find a real working fix.

Parallel to that I have been trying to make Arma 3 run with reasonable Performance, which seems to be an impossible Task!

I have also tried something that I haven't done in a very Long time, running my CPU and GPU at stock clocks. :)

Here are some relative observations. Both games were tested at their original ULTRA Settings and on a not so demanding Single Player mission:

- BF4 is not affected by reducing CPU clock from 4.5GHz to 3.4GHz. Arma 3 reduced 10fps by doing the same.

- Arma 3 is getting only half the GPU utilization that I have on BF4. And the CPU utilization is the same at ~70%, although on Arma 3 I see more dynamic on the graph;

- BF4 uses 40% more GPU Memory than Arma 3;

- BF4 uses 25% more RAM than Arma3;

- BF4 gets in average 175% better FPS than Arma 3.

The comparison is not to be taken so seriously, since These are two different games. It is however peculiar to see that Arma 3 is using less GPU Memory and less RAM. I really didn't expect that.

And to say that my BF4 Performance is being limited by the CPU is just a big misconception. The bad scaling from crossfire is due to poor implementation I'd say.