Low CPU utilization & Low FPS

[opendome 91]

yea its getting ridiculous and I have low hopes for any optimization in the future (they seem to be more content making things like zeus and karts...)

[sgtsev3n 12]

dont expect from BI that they will fix this issue.

they wont. they didnt fix it in arma 2 and they wont fix it in arma 3.

if you wait for the fix, you will end up waiting until your life ends.

BI know about this problem, but they dont know how to fix it. if they would know, they would fixed it long time ago.

[nikiforos 450]

Wow this thread still going on? People need to realize that BI won't do shit about the current situation. I keep read Sitreps, changelogs the past year and we seem to be stuck, no more frames. Personally I accepted reality and I recommend the rest to do the same. It's not worth it any more, BI is the worst company in optimization it seems.

[sgtsev3n 12]

Wow this thread still going on? People need to realize that BI won't do shit about the current situation. I keep read Sitreps, changelogs the past year and we seem to be stuck, no more frames. Personally I accepted reality and I recommend the rest to do the same. It's not worth it any more, BI is the worst company in optimization it seems.

^this.

[windies 11]

Hi Windies,

Although I agree in general that the game needs performance improvement, I don't think it is fair comment to say that they are focused on pleasing the modders. Some nice new scripting commands are all well and good, but many mods depend on good game performance (like Jarheads JSRS for example) so it would also benefit the modders just as well as the next guy to have a well running engine. Nothing would please me more than to have rock-solid performance (60FPS all the time) for one of the mods I'm writing. Timing critical stuff goes to shit at low FPS and it's a real pain to try and workaround.

I'm of the opinion that they will add in the new content and only then look at fixing up the engine. Looking at all previous platforms and their patch history, I would imagine that the performance patches will be towards the end of A3's life (or a bit further along from now anyway).

Without the modders, they really wouldn't have anywhere near the same success they do now. They're a smart company, They know how to work this community and they've been doing it for a long time. Yeah everyone would benefit from better performance, I just don't think the time invested is worth it to them if people keep buying a sub par product and supporting them with money even though they don't support us with a better product. Modders support them because it's the only platform they can live out their digital dreams on without costing them much of anything. Modders make up a large, very large portion of this community. It stands to reason that supporting them, keeping them interested, is more important than having a good functioning game, because in turn those modders bring in niche groups who will also buy the game because they can't get X mod anywhere else, Performance aside and even bugs aside as long as they don't break a mod.

That about sums it up in this community, We can have total shit performance where the game is unplayable and everything is accepted, but break a function in a mod and watch the community rage. It shows where the priorities lay both from the company and the community.

Until there's a reason to fix issue's, until the community gives them a reason, they're just gonna continue to exist and with the above mentality, that point will probably never be reached so in turn we get the same issue's every iteration like a CoD franchise spinoff. That's how BI operates. They don't care beyond the customer they might lose and if that number of customers is big enough to justify fixing or changing something, just like any other company out there. This community in turn, doesn't really care enough for it to matter unless their mods are affected.

So to sum it up, as long as BI supports modders, the game will survive and continue to have the same issue's because they aren't as important as scripting commands and bloated feature's.

Also why would you fix issue's that prevent you from playing at the end of the life cycle versus the beginning? Why would you focus on content before the game is really playable? Kind of odd logic but hey it works for them so keep it up! :rolleyes:

[das attorney 858]

Hmm, yes I see what you mean. I totally forgot about companies like EA and Activision stopping their games from being modded.

[zaira 10]

I'm sure it keeps getting swept under the carpet in this thread, in a lot of cases, you shouldn't be worrying about the CPU as much as the frequency of the RAM, I have 2000Mhz Dominator GT CL8 and after a bios reset, it was running at 1600MHz, I didn't bother to change it back at the time as it makes no conceivable difference for browsing etc. Then I read that the Arma engine has a problem with transferring to and from the RAM ( or something along those lines) I clocked my RAM back up to 2000MHz and got 10-12fps for 400MHz I spend most of my time flying so really hate it every time I fly over a town but the RAM increase has made a massive difference to my minimum FPS, I only wish I could try 3000MHz. I'm really keen to hear some feedback from folks on high frequency DDR4 as that may be a game changer when they eventually start hitting 4000MHz :)

I have 100s of hours on the same few flying missions and have easily replicate-able (sp) scenarios to test FPS, not to mention the gains in the benchmark etc.

For reference,

4770K

8GB Dominator GT 2000MHz CL8

R9 290X

Water cooled

All settings on Ultra

Overall visibility 3540

Objects 1900

Disabling 2 cores and overclocking my 4770K to 5.5GHz sees no real gain, maybe 3-4 FPS

All cores clocked at 4.8 sees about 5 FPS

Overclocking my GPU or crossfiring them sees no FPS increase.

u have test with 2400 MHz (DDR) DDR4 on 256 bit BUS (quad channel), that is 4+ times bandwith of DDR3 2000, and no big fps difference. So high speed ram wont fix the min fps...

Arma engine loves IPC and high freq.

[James111333 10]

Bit of an odd result with the DDR4 as faster ram gave me 20% increase in FPS across the board where as 5+GHz on my 4770k only gave me 6-10% at best. All in controlled conditions, I guess the server plays a big part of it too, isn't that why they are re writing a lot of DayZ including new 64 bit servers?

[LSD_Timewarp82 21]

Ridiculous that some people still trying to tell that more Mhz here and there will boost the frames in Arma... And the only thing Arma would love is the dev which try to fix the engine.

[sgtsev3n 12]

Ridiculous that some people still trying to tell that more Mhz here and there will boost the frames in Arma... And the only thing Arma would love is the dev which try to fix the engine.

^this. seems like some players loves those problems and defending them.

[zaira 10]

Ridiculous that some people still trying to tell that more Mhz here and there will boost the frames in Arma... And the only thing Arma would love is the dev which try to fix the engine.

This is just how computers work. You allways have bottleneck, in some situations it is GPU in some situations it is CPU, in some it is HDD.

ARMAS engine is in mostly CPU bottleneck. HPU bottlenck you can fix easy, u can buy better GPU, or add SLI/CF. GPU hardware advences much more than CPU. In 4 years GPU performance is like 4 times better, CPU, like 40%.

Solution to engine problems is to revrite rendering job, and AI job, it is obvious that those to things affect performance most radicaly (test it yourselv, high VD, and high number of AI). Frustration comes becouse you cant buy better CPU, no matter how much mony you are willing to spend. But as time pases, cpu slowly advances and buying fastest cpu, can bring you some minor FPS boost.

[jathlon77 10]

This is just how computers work. You allways have bottleneck, in some situations it is GPU in some situations it is CPU, in some it is HDD.

ARMAS engine is in mostly CPU bottleneck. HPU bottlenck you can fix easy, u can buy better GPU, or add SLI/CF. GPU hardware advences much more than CPU. In 4 years GPU performance is like 4 times better, CPU, like 40%.

Solution to engine problems is to revrite rendering job, and AI job, it is obvious that those to things affect performance most radicaly (test it yourselv, high VD, and high number of AI). Frustration comes becouse you cant buy better CPU, no matter how much mony you are willing to spend. But as time pases, cpu slowly advances and buying fastest cpu, can bring you some minor FPS boost.

The bottleneck is the engine not being capable of utilizing the CPU to its full potential. Don't blame the CPU blame the engine. It's pretty embarrassing that a company that makes games cannot get with the times and make use of the hardware that is available. I have a GTX690 with a rampage 4 3930 CPU w/32 gb Ram and I'm getting mediocre fps. Multiplayer I'm getting 20-25 and sometimes it goes 5-10. Fix the darn game and everyone will be happy and BI will make triple their money.

[LSD_Timewarp82 21]

This is just how computers work. You allways have bottleneck, in some situations it is GPU in some situations it is CPU, in some it is HDD.

ARMAS engine is in mostly CPU bottleneck. HPU bottlenck you can fix easy, u can buy better GPU, or add SLI/CF. GPU hardware advences much more than CPU. In 4 years GPU performance is like 4 times better, CPU, like 40%.

Solution to engine problems is to revrite rendering job, and AI job, it is obvious that those to things affect performance most radicaly (test it yourselv, high VD, and high number of AI). Frustration comes becouse you cant buy better CPU, no matter how much mony you are willing to spend. But as time pases, cpu slowly advances and buying fastest cpu, can bring you some minor FPS boost.

2 weeks ago i tested an IntelHexacore with my Mach2GT Compressorcooling Unit, i overclocked it to over 5Ghz, had enough GPU Power with 3x780Ti (TriSli) but this system does a shit to the frames, they went down like one every other system. Funny how long a customer need to wait to play Arma in acceptable FPS, not the time should pass, they only should start to optimize this prehistoric engine, not a single statement was taken by the devs to this, that behaviour should explains itself

[sgtsev3n 12]

Petition: Fix the issues with CPU utilization in Arma 3 (RealVirtuality 4 engine)

https://www.change.org/p/bohemia-interactive-fix-the-issues-with-cpu-utilization-in-arma-3-realvirtuality-4-engine

Vote up:

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=716

[zaira 10]

2 weeks ago i tested an IntelHexacore with my Mach2GT Compressorcooling Unit, i overclocked it to over 5Ghz, had enough GPU Power with 3x780Ti (TriSli) but this system does a shit to the frames, they went down like one every other system. Funny how long a customer need to wait to play Arma in acceptable FPS, not the time should pass, they only should start to optimize this prehistoric engine, not a single statement was taken by the devs to this, that behaviour should explains itself

point is that intels hexacore are not more powerful than quads in this game. Becouse they have less performance per core at the sam clock, and are generation behind...

yes problem is in engine, they need to revrite it. Im realistic, and i dont expect they will in arma 3 lifetime. So i wait for best cpu i can buy, and overclock it to extreme :(

I like the damn series so much, i just have the fealing that BIS doesnt respect me as their customer enough for them to go to adventure of revriting the engine. Probably becouse time and money involved in engine core modifications. They are not stupid, they know excactly what in engine needs to be modified.

[nikiforos 450]

Petition: Fix the issues with CPU utilization in Arma 3 (RealVirtuality 4 engine)

https://www.change.org/p/bohemia-interactive-fix-the-issues-with-cpu-utilization-in-arma-3-realvirtuality-4-engine

Vote up:

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=716

I respect what u are doing but I'm afraid it's not going to help the situation. I have been playing since Operation Flashpoint 2002 and still if you play the old games now with new hardware you will experience bad optimization and the games running bad.

I lost faith in BI regarding this issue and I have no hopes to be honest.

I will sign the petition but nothing will change.

[sgtsev3n 12]

I respect what u are doing but I'm afraid it's not going to help the situation. I have been playing since Operation Flashpoint 2002 and still if you play the old games now with new hardware you will experience bad optimization and the games running bad.

I lost faith in BI regarding this issue and I have no hopes to be honest.

I will sign the petition but nothing will change.

thanks.

i agree with you. i lost faith too. BI wont fix it.

still, we need to show that the community wont be silent until BI start to fix the problem. we need to show them we care about the problem even if they are silent and wont fix it.

BI should be happy that we care about the problem. this shows that we are interest in this game and really, it is a great game with all its content and DLC but it brings nothing to have over 1000 tanks, 400 terrains, 200 jets, 9000 weapons etc when the is not fixed and is not playable.

@ zaira:

"becouse time and money involved in engine core modifications"

im not sure about this, but investing time and money into fixing the engine would make customers happy which would bring BI more money than now and a good reputation for theyr game.

for example, i told my friend about ArmA 3 and he asked me few days later if its worth buying arma 3. i told him: if you are willing to play with bad FPS in single and multiplayer, then yes. now he wont buy it.

if they would fix the engine, people would say "yes it is worth buying it" instead of "only when you are willing to play with bad FPS, no matter what system you have".

[LSD_Timewarp82 21]

point is that intels hexacore are not more powerful than quads in this game. Becouse they have less performance per core at the sam clock, and are generation behind...

yes problem is in engine, they need to revrite it. Im realistic, and i dont expect they will in arma 3 lifetime. So i wait for best cpu i can buy, and overclock it to extreme :(

I like the damn series so much, i just have the fealing that BIS doesnt respect me as their customer enough for them to go to adventure of revriting the engine. Probably becouse time and money involved in engine core modifications. They are not stupid, they know excactly what in engine needs to be modified.

You may look a few pages back, i already try to explain since 1 year that no single upgrade on the world will give the Game "the magic" to run smoothly with acceptable fps on better systems (and i build a lot of ExtremeRigs this year for customers). And as always i say, an improvement of gameplay starts at minimum +10FPS instantly without falling back.

thanks.

i agree with you. i lost faith too. BI wont fix it.

still, we need to show that the community wont be silent until BI start to fix the problem. we need to show them we care about the problem even if they are silent and wont fix it.

BI should be happy that we care about the problem. this shows that we are interest in this game and really, it is a great game with all its content and DLC but it brings nothing to have over 1000 tanks, 400 terrains, 200 jets, 9000 weapons etc when the is not fixed and is not playable.

@ zaira:

"becouse time and money involved in engine core modifications"

im not sure about this, but investing time and money into fixing the engine would make customers happy which would bring BI more money than now and a good reputation for theyr game.

for example, i told my friend about ArmA 3 and he asked me few days later if its worth buying arma 3. i told him: if you are willing to play with bad FPS in single and multiplayer, then yes. now he wont buy it.

if they would fix the engine, people would say "yes it is worth buying it" instead of "only when you are willing to play with bad FPS, no matter what system you have".

I have to agree, it´s my first "Arma" (other parts played, but not much) but it will be the last. Begging the devs that they will finally start optimize the most broken part of the game didnt sound legit to me, they should start by their own. But like we saw last months no one give a shit to this, no statement, nothing. That is for me like a feeling of left behind by the devs and thats why i wont buy ever a game from BI...

[nikiforos 450]

Devs are ,ΙΜΟ, provocative sometimes by ignoring the most major issue of the game. If I can't run the game with enjoyable frames not all mods in the world can help.

[mac d 10]

Update my system last week ... from a i5 3570k to a i7 4790k.

AND it worked *O*

Finally got to play ARMA 3 decently (single player around 40 to 50 fps ... okay ,still not what you would expect but better then before)

Then ,offcourse ,a certain Mr. Murphy comes by and screws you over

Had tot do a full reinstall of the system today... Windows ,drivers ,the works.

And ,offcourse ,ARMA.

Guess what ??

... It runs like CRAP .... AGAIN :@

*I'm seriously going fulltime mental*

[opendome 91]

we seriously need a support group for arma games and low FPS no matter what, itll help us from going crazy

Edited September 2, 2014 by Opendome

[mac d 10]

we seriously need a support group for arma games and low FPS no matter what, itll help us from going crazy

http://www.quickmeme.com/img/12/12db0b1cad6ad9e77dac73ce5563895a65ad1d3de6f1a43c0a97f552cc774131.jpg

As long there's beer ,count me in :D

[opendome 91]

I think this would be a moonshine situation

[das attorney 858]

I think this would be a moonshine situation

Mmm, blindness :)

[opendome 91]

exactly, than you cant see the horrible FPS regardless of system