Low CPU utilization & Low FPS

[sparayno1 1]

i7 920 OC to 3.8 Mhz

GTX 670 OC

6 gb DDR3 ram

CPU usage around 30%

GPU usage around 40-50%

FPS hovers around 20-40. Please optimize this game for better FPS

[smiley_ie 7]

Ran a game with a friend last night i was hosting the game ran @ 40 - 60fps at the start we played for about an hour then fps where sitting on 25 ? And this is on a i7950@4.1 7gig 1600 GTX680. If i change settings to low or ultra - screen res FPS stay the same.

This should be BIS's number one priority to fix fps and performance problems I'm starting to regret buying this, I'm getting more frustrated playing it than enjoying it.

[stk2008 14]

I agree they need to

STOP

every thing else and start ompimizing there is no point adding this and that if no one can run the bloody game to use it.

I have supported BIS from start and they do come through for there fans but ARMA2 was unable to use quads correctly if they have not added quad support to this it will die its just so unoptimized.

I know its ALPHA and like I said I am sure they will get it right but yes optimization should be the first thing done persoanly any way

[RiGLEY 10]

Yeah, the core of the engine seems to be very old. They added some third party physics, third party clouds...etc., some new animations, sounds but they need to optimize the core rendering engine, otherwise only the most hardcore fans will continue to play the game.

[stk2008 14]

I am hardcore fan have been since days of OFP but I am getting a little worried they wont fix the problem they admitted they could not in ARMA2 (engine limitations or some thing I may be wrong)

Any way like I said BIS do listen and support there fans so we will wait and see.

Yeah, the core of the engine seems to be very old. They added some third party physics, third party clouds...etc., some new animations, sounds but they need to optimize the core rendering engine, otherwise only the most hardcore fans will continue to play the game.

[k3lt 3]

Your sad attempt at humor is somewhat a loss in this forum. Regardless of the context for your post you are making yourself look like a utter tool and most likely your post proceeds to emit the truth about your age.

Just report him and move along..

[jamie1992 17]

For anyone caring.

AMD X4 640 3GHZ

4GB Ram

ATI Radeon HD 5770 1GB

Get around 30FPS on high with PP and AA off. Oh and clouds turned to standard, for some reason my PC dislikes clouds...

Edited March 7, 2013 by Placebo

[Placebo 28]

Just report him and move along..

Exactly.

Posts deleted, infraction sent, now we can move along.

[white 1]

I´m disappointed with bohemia, the 1 thing i wanted, and expected, was better cpu support with multicore optimizations.

Nowdays almost every major engine suports 4+ cores, frostbyte, source, cryengine, udk, but arma 3 suffers from the exact same issue as arma 2, barely uses 2 cores.

i have an amd x6 @3600, 16gb 1600mhz ram, ssd agi 3 120gb, creative xfi and nvidia 660ti oc. low fps on any graphics settings, autodetect sets it all on ultra.

multiplayer go as low as 10fps, in arma 2 in certain scenarios i get the exact same thing, whenever i upgraded the videocard nothing changed.

better looking game with cool new features i give you that, but sadly the exact same performance issue rendering expensive hardware useless. i really hope bohemia recognizes this, give us a statement, and finally do something about it, or not, but at least oficcially recognize the issue. bad press? well thats being honest. if the game wont run on the recommended steam settings ill endup asking for my money back. because this issue is one of the things that i dont expect to magically be fixed, arma 2 is the example.

arma 2 and now arma 3 are the only games i cant get at least decent (30+) fps the entire time.

Edited March 7, 2013 by white

[Speederr 1]

i7 920 OC to 3.8 Mhz

GTX 670 OC

6 gb DDR3 ram

CPU usage around 30%

GPU usage around 40-50%

FPS hovers around 20-40. Please optimize this game for better FPS

You kinow this is Arma ! Arma was always bad optimized :D

This one, for alpha is very optimized than his brother Arma 2

[cofi0276 1]

Same here. I have low FPS no matter what my graphics options are. I tried to put everything to low including the view distance and resolution to 640x480 and i still get 20 FPS. I also noticed that the less FPS i have the less the CPU usage is. Can someone please explain to me where is my CPU power going since its clearly not going into anything graphic related.

CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 (6M Cache, 2.50 GHz, 1333 MHz FSB) OC: 3.5 GHz

GPU: ATI Radeon HD 6950

MBO: Asus P5Q Deluxe

RAM: Corsair Dominator 4x2GB TWIN2X4096-8500C5DF

HDD: 500 GB WESTERN DIGITAL Caviar Black

PSU: Chieftec 650W CFT-650-14C

[down8 30]

weird but I Tested many times, and I have a gain between 10-20 FPS just alt-tabing ingame, go to windows and back to the game.

[curvne 1]

GTX 580 SLI

i7 2600k @ 4.4GHz

Singleplayer (infantry showcase)

70-80 FPS at starting area

35-45 when approaching the village

FPS was somewhat better if I changed settings to low near the village.

Multiplayer:

35-50 FPS when running around in the "forest".

20-34 FPS in cities.

Doesnt matter if I play with ULTRA or LOW. Basically the same, give or take 5-10 fps if I play around with all the settings/resolutions.

I really hope they will look into this because if the fps stay like this, there is no way I'll continue playing Arma 3.

It doesn't matter if you play around with 50 different stances and the game looks amazing if it does not play smooth. Trying to enjoy a game at 20 fps is not happening.

[tremanarch 6]

they should hire a poor soul - which only purpose should be to re watch all the code of the rendering engine and the AI.

Something has been forgotten it feels. some temporary stuff.

WHen I have large AI battles in Editor I have low fps and after they are dead I have high fps, but not as high as without AI at all.

Then after 3-4 hours intensive AI gaming it seems the whole game engine is slower even if I restart a whole new mission. (when I restart the whole game.exe it feels fresh and young again)

Something with the temporary cache or something might be wrong. and this could add to the OP Problem.

--

When I am not mistaken I had also such behaviour in Resistance, and evven before in CWC and Red Hammer.

There must be something digged deep down in the engine that should get overhauled. Maybe the streaming concept should get reworked - dunno exactly where the bottle neck is when CPU and GPU are not maxed each. Maybe Streaming?

--

I know this is so tough, it is maybe easier to remake the whole new engine than to search the old code databases and read the various Comments. I can only imagine what a nightmare it is.

But, why not let someone do it who is so dedicated. a true fan.. like in Linux, the code is open source, so many guys make good stuff because they like their system optimised, its not only a job for them.

I think 10 coders that are bugged by a behaviour can solve an error better than 20 payed coders that only do their job. (no offense just a comparison thought).

--

but maybe its really pointless and we all should hope that future PC's are better in exactly that what ArmA needs, thats not exactly CPU nor GPU but something like all components playing toegther in a symphony :)

[antoineflemming 14]

they should hire a poor soul - which only purpose should be to re watch all the code of the rendering engine and the AI.

Something has been forgotten it feels. some temporary stuff.

WHen I have large AI battles in Editor I have low fps and after they are dead I have high fps, but not as high as without AI at all.

Then after 3-4 hours intensive AI gaming it seems the whole game engine is slower even if I restart a whole new mission. (when I restart the whole game.exe it feels fresh and young again)

Something with the temporary cache or something might be wrong. and this could add to the OP Problem.

--

When I am not mistaken I had also such behaviour in Resistance, and evven before in CWC and Red Hammer.

There must be something digged deep down in the engine that should get overhauled. Maybe the streaming concept should get reworked - dunno exactly where the bottle neck is when CPU and GPU are not maxed each. Maybe Streaming?

--

I know this is so tough, it is maybe easier to remake the whole new engine than to search the old code databases and read the various Comments. I can only imagine what a nightmare it is.

But, why not let someone do it who is so dedicated. a true fan.. like in Linux, the code is open source, so many guys make good stuff because they like their system optimised, its not only a job for them.

I think 10 coders that are bugged by a behaviour can solve an error better than 20 payed coders that only do their job. (no offense just a comparison thought).

--

but maybe its really pointless and we all should hope that future PC's are better in exactly that what ArmA needs, thats not exactly CPU nor GPU but something like all components playing toegther in a symphony :)

Putting a whole lot of AI in the editor and getting low FPS is understandable. What isn't understandable is playing MP with everything on low, no particles on screen, yet getting 12 FPS. And, for the naysayers whose games happen to run ArmA3 just fine, your FPS should improve when you turn away from particles or vegetation (like, for example, looking at the ocean with your back to the island). The FPS decreases over time too, indicating poor resource management by BIS. What I mean by this is, if you are in an area with a lot of vegetation and/or particle effects, and you move to an area where there are minimal vegetation and particle effects, the game should in essence not factor that in. I understand always computing/calculating AI and stuff, but it shouldn't do the same for vegetation and particle effects. So, in essence, for the client, it should delete those from memory and then reload that when you come near those. Does what I'm saying make sense anyone?

[Sephisto 1]

This is the kind of CPU usage I'm getting..

[kernriver 4]

weird but I Tested many times, and I have a gain between 10-20 FPS just alt-tabing ingame, go to windows and back to the game.

Interesting.

How often do you do it? Only when you start a mission, or when you see FPS drop, or?

[AussieStig 10]

http://i.imgur.com/vao0Ha0.jpg

This is the kind of CPU usage I'm getting..

Can I ask how your getting these stats up? I'd like to see exactly what mine is like.

[antoineflemming 14]

Interesting.

How often do you do it? Only when you start a mission, or when you see FPS drop, or?

The same thing happens with me. And I've been doing that a lot to check my CPU usage. For me it increases at least 5 FPS but can go from an increase of 5 to an increase of 20. But then it'll automatically drop back down to like 12 at the lowest point.

[Leon86 13]

This is the kind of CPU usage I'm getting..

about 50% load, could be worse.

[Sephisto 1]

Can I ask how your getting these stats up? I'd like to see exactly what mine is like.

PlayClaw

You can download the trial. I'm not sure if the unpaid version will let you see overlays though.

[DavidJerk 1]

Just speaking up to add my voice to the mix. Same problems here. I have above the recommended for everything except video card which is still well above the minimum, and the game is nearly unplayable on most multiplayer servers. It doesn't seem to matter what I try to tweak, nothing seems to work much.

Can I ask how your getting these stats up? I'd like to see exactly what mine is like.

You can also use MSI Afterburner, which is free.

Edited March 7, 2013 by DavidJerk
Adding quote

[duhsveti 1]

Well tried with a lot of different settings and the only thing that increases my fps seems to be lowering the view distance. Better than nothing i guess...

[white 1]

amd x6

660ti oc

16gb

ssd

win8 x64

played on a window at 1024x the heli showcase.

you can see the gpu utilization on the osd and the cpu/memory on the windows resource monitor. on the tray are my temps.

18fps and the game doesnt use 50% of my hardware. it uses 35% which is about 2 cores of my 6 core. obviously using only 2 cores is bottlenecking the hell out of my pc.

if a proper 6 core support was implemented, like newer game engines have, i should get at least double that fps.

PS.: Before anyone asks, just tried with -cpucount=6 and like in arma 2, changed nothing.

as a comparison, fullhd with ultra settings (autodetect) and -cpucount=6 :

http://i.imgur.com/NegAfep.jpg

ah shit ingame steam screenshot doesnt show the osd, well it was 18fps and 50% gpu usage. il take another later.

Edited March 7, 2013 by white

[ruhtraeel 1]

2 hd5870 just suffer too strong from low bandwith so no way you even get near a 7970 in arma series, but they were nice cards 2 years ago.

my hd7970 averages at 80fps(limited by msi afterburner), all max exept postfx off, postAA off, vsync off and viewdistance at 2,3km, objects at 880m.

running fine with i7 4,6ghz and 2133mhz(effective) RAM.55-67fps Maxed out

multiplayer(urban warfare001) stock mission settings, as host for around 8 player(including myself) i got 45min fps and at the end off mission around 30min fps.

#

in single player a big improvement over arma 2(Maxed out, 1080p) is done, can´t run like arma 3 does.

multiplayer multiplayer just needs dedicated server, then it would run much faster.

but you will see tha arma 3 as every arma game takes every drop off hardware it gets.

standards for arma: intel processor, nothing has a high ipc like them in pc sector.

radeon hd79xx card/geforce titan: arma 3 just sucks up bandwith and video Ram like a boss

mfg

Regardless of how it stacks up, me and a lot of people should be getting higher framerates.

You can see people here with even more powerful rigs like 2 4gb version 680's who are getting similar framerates with me.

I would gladly upgrade my PC once the radeon 8xxx series comes out because AMD now has a set performance to beat (gtx Titan), but if upgrading to a beast card like a lot of people have here doesn't even help the performance, I know it's not the card's fault and upgrading would be useless.

This is really an amazing game as it is; it's just the performance could be better. Here's to hoping that BI can resolve these issues so that the entire community can enjoy the game.

Edited March 7, 2013 by ruhtraeel