Low CPU utilization & Low FPS

[postal vending machine 10]

Hi all, I am at my wits end!

My computer specs are in my signature, and I'm not sure what kind of frame-rates should I be aiming at? The high pre-set settings puts me down to a disconcerting 35-37 FPS when looking at the trees on the Southwest side of Agia Marina (Which makes me worry about bigger forests in Altis). I've tried locking my FPS to 30 with Evga Precision to get consistency in the framerate, but it felt too sluggish. I also tried disabling Anti-Aliasing however the frame-rate seemed to fluctuate too much for my liking when lots of buildings/rocks are visible. I set the game to the standard pre-set for a while, and it was pretty smooth, but I felt like I was playing ArmA 2 on dreary-old Utes rather than ArmA 3 on shiny-new Stratis.

I've got no idea what to do with my settings now, or what frame-rate I should be looking for. I've heard people with similar or worse computer specs merrily express how high their frame-rates are on higher settings than I'm using. Can anyone lend me some advice here?

Thanks :)

Edit: In contrast; I find Crysis, APB and Planetside 2 to be smooth and enjoyable at 30 FPS, my friend suggested that it was probably because those games use specialized motion-blur to mask the bad frame-rate. If it's possible, maybe Bohemia Interactive should consider doing the same since a lot of people seem to be having performance problems? So people with lower frame-rates can enjoy the game more, rather than constantly tweaking graphics settings, or looking for computer upgrades.

Edited August 14, 2013 by Postal Vending Machine

[TSAndrey 1]

my friend suggested that it was probably because those games use specialized motion-blur to mask the bad frame-rate.

I don't see how PP effects could mask bad framerate. Infact, I think FPS in Arma is less important than in shooters like Crysis, PS2, Battlefield and etc....

[postal vending machine 10]

I don't see how PP effects could mask bad framerate. Infact, I think FPS in Arma is less important than in shooters like Crysis, PS2, Battlefield and etc....

I'm not looking for a great 60+ frame-rate, I'm just trying to find a consistent experience that feels playable to me while keeping some stunning visuals.

Here's two quotes about motion-blur masking low framerate from reputable sources I could quickly find on a google search before work.

I've been told that the motion-blur I'm thinking of is called 'Per-Object' motion-blur.

"Crysis is a very playable game at 25-30 frames per second, mainly due to a well-implemented use of motion blur." - Gamecritics.com

"Basically, the choice comes down to whether you want to enable or disable Motion Blur using this setting, and that mostly depends upon personal taste. Bear in mind that it is a known property of motion blurring that it can help mask the perception of lower framerates." - TweakGuides.com

http://www.tweakguides.com/Crysis3_11.html

http://www.gamecritics.com/the-noobs-guide-to-optimizing-crysis

[windies 11]

The rough or unsmooth feeling in ArmA is because animations and such are tied to the rendered Frame Time or FPS. For example as your fps in ArmA drops, the speed with which animations run and things like your fire rate are sync'd with that and in turn slow down as well leading to the feeling that the game is really laggy or unresponsive.

[postal vending machine 10]

The rough or unsmooth feeling in ArmA is because animations and such are tied to the rendered Frame Time or FPS. For example as your fps in ArmA drops, the speed with which animations run and things like your fire rate are sync'd with that and in turn slow down as well leading to the feeling that the game is really laggy or unresponsive.

Oh that's smart. If I'm interpreting what you're saying right, it doesn't matter if you're on a lower or higher frame-rate (game-play wise) as the game keeps pace to your FPS? So we should be able to play as well at 25 FPS as at whatever, with the downside of clunky visuals? Does it work the same way in Multiplayer? Maybe I've completely misinterpreted what you've said, in which case I'm a bit of a dreamer (and an idiot).

Returning to my first question, what kind of FPS is considered "just fine" for ArmA 3? Should I just keep to my 30 FPS lock and try to get used to it?

[Minoza 11]

Personally I try to get 60, but everything between 40 and that is pretty much ok for me. I can bare occasional drops to 35-30 but if it's often I easily get frustrated. So, it is completely individually I'd say, you might be fine with less.

[postal vending machine 10]

Personally I try to get 60, but everything between 40 and that is pretty much ok for me. I can bare occasional drops to 35-30 but if it's often I easily get frustrated. So, it is completely individually I'd say, you might be fine with less.

Thank you! :) I'll see how 40ish FPS goes for me.

[Sneakson 1]

Hello, I can see some people discussing motion blur.

Quality motion blur and post-processing does create an apparently higher framerate!

That’s why I could play Crysis in 20 fps some years back and not even care but would never play Counter Strike that low.

I recommend everyone to use all post-process settings.

On my Q9550/560 Ti build post-processing did a big negative on my framerate in the Alpha but in the Beta I’ve tried it a lot and it actually doesn’t seem to have absolutely any effect on framerate any more though I could use some additional confirmation on how it works on other systems and other users.

The common complaint about post-processing such as motion blur is that it actually decreases framerate because it’s too resource heavy but if it doesn’t there isn’t really any particularly logical reason that I know of to have it turned off.

Some people say â€if you shoot the blur you won’t hit because that’s not really where a player is†but assuming you’re running the game in 40-60 fps that’s a ludicrous statement.

Motion blur does reduce temporal aliasing and even spatial aliasing to some small extent and that’s why all the world’s movies can run in only 24 frames per second but you’ve never experienced any choppiness when watching a movie, right?

A lot of work is currently being put into motion blurring which has become commonplace since around Crysis in 2007 and even more work is being put into upcoming TXAA, temporal anti-aliasing.

So crank that motion blur up to a realistic level and the movements will be that much smoother even though the framerate is the same!

By the way 20 fps is an absolute minimum for playability. 30 fps is where console games are but for various reasons that may be less playable on a PC actually. 40 fps minimum is what I recommend with an average about 50 unless you can go 60 with v-sync to make it not screen tear.

As for 120 Hz all 120 Hz monitors are TN monitors with worse image quality than many non-TN monitors and even though 120 Hz will mean a lot smoother movements that will only be in some situations compared to a good image quality monitor which always has good image quality.

Consumer 120 Hz non-TN monitors are probably still some years away but in two or three years if you see a 4K 120Hz non-TN monitor there’s no excuse not to upgrade as long as your hardware is strong enough which most computers today wouldn’t be because of somewhat obvious reasons.

[ric 1]

Consumer 120 Hz non-TN monitors are probably still some years away but in two or three years if you see a 4K 120Hz non-TN monitor there’s no excuse not to upgrade as long as your hardware is strong enough which most computers today wouldn’t be because of somewhat obvious reasons.

2 or 3 years? ...rubbish there here already :))

http://store.sony.com/c/XBR-X900A-4K-Ultra-HD-TV/en/c/S_84_4KTV $24,999.99

Sneakerson do get us some screen shot of you playing ARMA 3 after you have this hooked up .... ;)

Product Features

Immersive, 84" (diag.) screen with 4K1 resolution - 4 times more detail than 1080p

4K X-Realityâ„¢ PRO Picture Engine with up scaling capability to 4K1, 10

Powerful, cinematic sound totaling 50 watts4

Custom Install ready for simple integration with leading control systems

Immersive 3D5

Motionflowâ„¢ XR960 technology

Movies, music & apps with Sony Entertainment Network3

View, share and edit those precious photo memories in 4K1 resolution using PlayMemories Studioâ„¢ software on your PS3â„¢ system.6

SimulViewâ„¢ technology presents twice the fun: 2-player games with no split screen7

Stream HD entertainment wirelessly with built-in Wi-Fi®3

PC and tablet content on your TV with Intelligent Connect8

Media Remoteâ„¢ app to control your TV with a smartphone9

Video

84-inch screen

4K (3,840 x 2,160) Resolution

4K X-Reality PRO with up-conversion

Motionflowâ„¢ XR 960

Dynamic Edge LED

Local Dimming

Full HD 3D

Sony Entertainment Network/Media Remote/DLNA®/Wi-Fi® Direct /SKYPE™

Wireless LAN built in

[mobile_medic 43]

http://www.amazon.com/Seiki-Digital-SE50UY04-50-Inch-120Hz/dp/B00BXF7I9M/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1376519035&sr=8-1&keywords=4k+tv

[ric 1]

http://www.amazon.com/Seiki-Digital-SE50UY04-50-Inch-120Hz/dp/B00BXF7I9M/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1376519035&sr=8-1&keywords=4k+tv

WOW Thats cheap, but gaming at 4k is a no go :( ...for now, still i would love to have that TV :)

http://www.amazon.com/review/R2JYDQZPWVTH7R/ref=cm_cr_pr_viewpnt#R2JYDQZPWVTH7R

[windies 11]

Oh that's smart. If I'm interpreting what you're saying right, it doesn't matter if you're on a lower or higher frame-rate (game-play wise) as the game keeps pace to your FPS? So we should be able to play as well at 25 FPS as at whatever, with the downside of clunky visuals? Does it work the same way in Multiplayer? Maybe I've completely misinterpreted what you've said, in which case I'm a bit of a dreamer (and an idiot).

Returning to my first question, what kind of FPS is considered "just fine" for ArmA 3? Should I just keep to my 30 FPS lock and try to get used to it?

No, what I'm saying is that in the RV engine, all animations are sync'd to your FPS so that no animation can actually happen faster than your current FPS irregardless of if it "Should happen faster.

As an example, you have two computers running ArmA 3, one gets 30fps and one gets 60fps. If you played the reload animation on both systems at the exact same time, the one at 60 fps would finish much faster than the one at 30 fps. Because of the fact that A lot of your movement is limited by the animations in the RV engine, for example you can't interrupt animations except in specific circumstances, it leads to a feeling of sluggish or laggy fps.

[Sneakson 1]

Actually I meant PC monitors. And by "consumer" I partly meant affordable too. In some years it should be standard.

But that Seiki is affordable. Still I’m going to wait a couple of years for the graphics cards to run a game in that resolution and 120 fps to become affordable too.

Also not sure if there are any downsides to gaming on a TV besides it being enourmous so you couldn't play it at a desktop.

[spidypiet 17]

As an example, you have two computers running ArmA 3, one gets 30fps and one gets 60fps. If you played the reload animation on both systems at the exact same time, the one at 60 fps would finish much faster than the one at 30 fps. Because of the fact that A lot of your movement is limited by the animations in the RV engine, for example you can't interrupt animations except in specific circumstances, it leads to a feeling of sluggish or laggy fps.

depends on the animations framerate ,if you play the game with 15 fps and the animation is set on 24 frames per second you will drop 9 frames a second

however if you play with 60 fps the animation still will be 24 frames a second and your game and animations will run smoother not faster

[Leon86 13]

Consumer 120 Hz non-TN monitors are probably still some years away.

catleap 2B extreme gets to 100+ hz.

[Sneakson 1]

catleap 2B extreme gets to 100+ hz.

Lemme guess: Korean overclocking monitor? :p I heard it doesn't alyways work that well in practice.

We’re never going to see true, nice quality 120 Hz IPS monitors as far as I’m aware because all the big manufacturers have completely cut R&D on IPS tech in search for other panel types to replace IPS that will deliver both good image quality and 120 Hz more easily.

Anyways right now I would recommend sticking to whatever you've got for one-three years because what we'll have then is most likely affordable 4K 120 Hz IPS computer monitors small enough for desktops.

[Vadim89 10]

Hi guys,

In the end of June i wrote those comments in the feedback tracker (if not interested just read my second commend here in the forum):

I think like many people said before me. We just have to wait. Either we are wrong and Bohemia is going to fix this or not.

I just would like to know what it means, now that the status is "assigned". It is also on high priority, this would lead me to think that they are working hard on it. But I also can imagine, that they trying to keep people calm.

What does assigned exactly mean? That they will solve this issue? If yes before the game will launch? I would like to have more communication from Bohemias side to better understand the situation.

To explain my point of view. I bought the supporters eddition. Because I really love to play a game which is realistic, and which forces the people to play as a good functioning team. Only game which can compete with Arma in this regard, is the Project Reality Mod in my opinion. I´ve also played Ofp, Arma1 and Arma2.

Im not trying to be annoying or anything, but I think it´s understandable that I simply demand more info from you Bohemia guys. Im the last one who tries to bash you or anything, but in my opinion this GPU/CPU bottleneck topic is the most important one. No matter what your game may offer, the most important and basic thing is, that it´s possible to play it with acceptable fps in regards of your pc system of course.

So please I´m asking in awareness and full respect for all what you did. Please provide a detailed status update regarding this topic. And dont talk about performance, I want concrete details on the bottleneck issue. Is this really a problem which wasnt fixed so far? If yes will you or will you not be able to deal with it?

My Specs: Radeon 7950 3 gig

Amd 8 cores 3.2 ghz 16 gig ram.

Game uses Max 50% gpu for me (measured with msi afterburner)

Everything maxed out i get 15 frames. Once i turn down obj distance to 1000 i get 25 frames. If i turn it up to 1,2k again 15 fps.

On max settings 29% gpu usage. On low settings 40-50%

---------- Post added at 14:17 ---------- Previous post was at 14:11 ----------

Part 2:

Today almost 2 months later, I became older but not smarter in this regard. The game is still running slow for me, and to be honest im not satisfied how this is handled by Bohemia. Im participating in the Beta program, but the patches never affect my performance.

Im not a hater, but I´m not playing it. The performance is so bad, that I just dont want to play. It´s so frustrating for me, because I dont know if this will be improved or not. Please don´t tell me that it´s a Beta and I have to wait. I paid for the supporters edition, and the least thing I deserve is to get information on whats happening. Either I was to stupid to find valuable information (if this is the case I´m very sorry), or Bohemia has a very bad service in this regard (only concerning the gpu bottleneck topic). Its just very noticeable, how well Bohemia comunicates on all topics, but this one. Please, I just want to know if this will be fixed or not, until know its only politics. Providing answers explaining that you are "working on it" is not enough. This is not the defintion of good customer service. Please Bohemia help me out here.

Thank you and best regards,

Vadim

[mobile_medic 43]

Seems to me fps is slightly worse overall since the last patch. Also getting gpu usage drops (and fps drops that accompany it) in more areas than I did prior to this patch. Another day closer to release. Another day with no info. And, another half a step backwards in performance it seems.

[k3lt 3]

Simulation tasks can now potentially use one more CPU core

Nice try Bohemia, too bad it doesn't.

Btw. how can you even put something like that in changelog, "potentially" is the key word.

You dont test the commits you implement in the game? And hope it will fix something?

I'm confused.

Edited August 16, 2013 by k3lt

[spanishsurfer 58]

A lot of anger on here...I'm running a custom rig and the game runs really well. This last patch has bumped up my FPS even more, I am running the game on a mix of ultra and very high.

Now I just need to get all these Teetimes players to switch to Benny CTI and Arma 3 will be epic. BTW, Benny CTI is running a massive amount of AI throughout the whole map and the server is running like a champ!

[xXxatrush1987 10]

A lot of anger on here...I'm running a custom rig and the game runs really well. This last patch has bumped up my FPS even more, I am running the game on a mix of ultra and very high.

Now I just need to get all these Teetimes players to switch to Benny CTI and Arma 3 will be epic. BTW, Benny CTI is running a massive amount of AI throughout the whole map and the server is running like a champ!

Headless client FTW, sadly its used just a bit by multiplayer missions... community complains about performance instead of their lack of mission making skill...

[Vigil Vindex 64]

HC is a poor solution until it is easier to use, and is properly implemented and documented.

[jumpinghubert 48]

So crank that motion blur up to a realistic level and the movements will be that much smoother even though the framerate is the same!

.

thanks for the hint. I can confirm its much smoother without fps loss.

[mobile_medic 43]

Headless client FTW, sadly its used just a bit by multiplayer missions... community complains about performance instead of their lack of mission making skill...

You do realize this is a single player problem as well? And, that it is reproduceable on an empty map in editor, and in some of the BIS made showcase missions as well?

[The Firestarter 10]

For a week or two I had those extremely low FPS in MP. In missions like Wasteland or King of the Hill I had 9-12 sometimes 15 FPS. In Domination missions the FPS where around 20. While I always had similar FPS on Wasteland and King of the Hill, Domination was playable, not great but playable. Up until one of the updates around a week ago, when even Domination became unplayable.

My Specs are i7-3770K, 8GB, SSD and GTX680 AMP!. A clanmate of mine has a similar system. He has a GTX670 OC with the came CPU and amount of RAM and he also has an SSD. Two days ago we both joined a Domination server with the same driver and game settings (1 exception, he accidentally set his object draw distance to 3k instead 1,5k like I did. I only noticed that later). We stood at the same position looking down the same road and he had much more FPS despite his settings being much higher (as we know object draw distance is a big difference).

Some days before that I made some tests in the editor and noticed strange FPS drops. My FPS where between 50 and 65, sometimes even 70. I was in an empty Agia Marina with an MH-9 in front of me. Disabled PIP, because that cost me 30 FPS... After a while I noticed that the FPS sometimes went even below 30 and a moment later it went up again. Without anything happening on the screen. So I tried to figure out how I was causing this. Once I restarted the mission and looked at the FPS counter which was at say 45 (I don't remember the exact numbers anymore) Then I simply turned around 360°, suddenly the FPS went down to 25 and stayed there and I couldn't bring it up again. Changing settings didn't do much. The FPS seemed to be capped somehow, just like in MP. My CPU and GPU where dozing away. It just stayed there until I restarted the game or the mission. Sometimes alt tab and back into the game was enough. This happened several times but I couldn't see a trigger for that. I also noticed that I couldn't get up the 55, 60 or even 70 FPS anymore.

Another strange thing I noticed (SP and MP) was that after making a screenshot with steam/fraps the FPS counter went up for some seconds and dropped again. You actually could feel how the game suddenly became much more fluid and then it was gone again. Same thing happed every time I made a screenshot, except when my FPS where in a range where it was supposed to be. In those cases the FPS counter behaved like expected, a small brief drop in FPS.

I know most of the stuff I wrote was nothing new to this thread and I hope the rest was not too confusing. I know I was confused!

Today I tried an attempt to mitigate this problem by overclocking my CPU. By coincidence I disabled Speedstep in the UEFI (read something in a guide about it).

So after this I joined a Wasteland server. Lo and behold! 40-50 FPS.

First I thought it was yesterdays update (tested with the dev build). Before downgrading to the normal build and redownloading I decided to check Speedstep first. Joined a full Domination server, made some screenshots, enabled Speedstep again, joined the same server and there I had those 25 FPS again. Now in hindsight those strange FPS drops in the editor made kind of sense as my CPU simply stayed at 1.6GHz with Speedstep activated.

Here are some screenshots I made. http://imgur.com/a/4VDcZ

As you can see those are pretty high settings and I was facing the Island while standing in the base. So more then 35 FPS was difficult at that moment.