Low CPU utilization & Low FPS

[Sneakson 1]

After today's patch... still all the same issues. No noticeable change or improvement. No surprise.

Maybe you missed that the campaign is now complete? It's something.

[LSD_Timewarp82 21]

It´s a drop on hot stone... I bet 90% of all Players would prefer Perfomance Patches

[mobile_medic 43]

especially considering I will never make it to the last episode of the campaign considering the first mission of the 2nd release runs like... you know what. And, I'm not going to stutter my way through it at 17-24fps just to see what comes next. Kinda saps the fun factor.

[nikiforos 450]

Performance for me is worse than before the update :( We are talking about 2-3 less FPS.

[Stefan_S 10]

@duke49th, your response is quite rude, what makes you think i not already tried to replicate his problem and to no avail ? ...

contrary to your opinion, i read this and other threads on daily basis to actually collect such problems ...

Please fix this.... I want to play so bad... but my performance is utter garbage.

Why is this so difficult? A year of complaining... no fixes.

[Duke49th 1]

especially considering I will never make it to the last episode of the campaign considering the first mission of the 2nd release runs like... you know what. And, I'm not going to stutter my way through it at 17-24fps just to see what comes next. Kinda saps the fun factor.

Performance for me is worse than before the update :( We are talking about 2-3 less FPS.

You guys are funny^^ I talk about 17-24 fps during regular gameplay...and 1-3 fps during the drops^^ (But I talk about MP - where the server calculates the AI...so thats what Im personal wondering why my fps drops so dramatically from >50fps on an empty map down to sometimes 10fps if the AI is just on the map (even it is on the other side of the map) - the hard fps drops came from some vehicles shooting and hitting the ground. Very easy to reproduce aswell - as long as you dont drunk too much Vodka^^

But hey...your fps drops after a while just for walking on an empty map...doing nothing..just walking. So Im not really wondering why performance is such a big thing again in Alpha 3.

Just read the changelog of the last stable patch and you get an idea why there will be no fixes and improvements of the mos important things ;)

I give you a hint:

Added: New sound for church organs

Any more questions? :D

Why is this so difficult? A year of complaining... no fixes.

Wrong question...should be "Why do you guys care more about Steam archievements and useless content instead of fix bugs which were reported many month (sometimes 13 years) ago?"

Edited March 22, 2014 by Duke49th

[omerc 10]

You guys are funny^^ I talk about 17-24 fps during regular gameplay...and 1-3 fps during the drops^^ (But I talk about MP - where the server calculates the AI...so thats what Im personal wondering why my fps drops so dramatically from >50fps on an empty map down to sometimes 10fps if the AI is just on the map (even it is on the other side of the map) - the hard fps drops came from some vehicles shooting and hitting the ground. Very easy to reproduce aswell - as long as you dont drunk too much Vodka^^

But hey...your fps drops after a while just for walking on an empty map...doing nothing..just walking. So Im not really wondering why performance is such a big thing again in Alpha 3.

Just read the changelog of the last stable patch and you get an idea why there will be no fixes and improvements of the mos important things ;)

I give you a hint:

Added: New sound for church organs

Any more questions? :D

Wrong question...should be "Why do you guys care more about Steam archievements and useless content instead of fix bugs which were reported many month (sometimes 13 years) ago?"

Have some respect...

[JDBaughman 10]

TBH i knew this was going to happen.

We had same problem with arma 2 devs said they could not optimize it due to engine limitations arma3 suffers same fate I guess.

And I said from the start ARMA3 was a cash cow for Dayz seeing as DayZ is getting more love at the moment I assume I was right.

Well BIS I am gutted just bloody say if this will ever be optimized if not let us move on please :(

ok that's BS. "can't optimize due to engine limitations". Its line of code. "engine limitations" my ass. They just don't care. and they are throwing their money down the drain on DayZ. They should have put that game up on kickstarter and let the community fund it. That way, if it sucked, it would lose funding. but if it was good, then the community would support it as well as investers. I like DayZ, but I'd throw it away in a heartbeat for ArmA 3. I have been playing this game since the OFP days back in 2001... Do the Math. And still play with a lot of those guys to this day. THAT's how dedicated the community is to this game. PERIOD. Bohemia Interactive is really screwing its community over with the lack of concern or care they are taking into their product. Releasing the game with the few vehicles they have, and putting a different paint scheme on one and calling it another is ridiculous. It is not ArmA 2 on steroids, but they did put JUST ENOUGH effort into it to hook people in. It's obvious the community is getting sick of it. They are slowly failing on the civilian side by losing their die hard fans. It's the diehard fans that run things like Armaholic, or people like dslyecxi with ShackTac... You just don't find that in any other game... PERIOD. I never have anyways... and what is Bohemia going to do when their community stops supporting them and they lose all their free marketing via the community? Because it looks like many of it's fans are looking elsewhere... =[

I'm getting off the podium and going back to the editor... FML

also I'm not a rookie, just forgot my password to my old account... not that it matters... just throwing that out there.

Edited March 23, 2014 by JDBaughman

[aviatormoser 6]

From what I gathered:

Arma 3 will not use more than the total processing power of two CPU cores. This bottlenecks our GPUs; hence the low GPU usage. This is not being fixed because it would probably take a major rewrite of the engine, and that is something BI is not interested in doing.

[bravo 6 0]

It´s a drop on hot stone... I bet 90% of all Players would prefer Perfomance Patches

I for one would prefer a Performance Patch instead campaigns!

[Duke49th 1]

Have some respect...

Respect is what you need to earn and nothing you get for free.....and espacially nothing you get for being ignorant to your customer.

Edit:

ok that's BS. "can't optimize due to engine limitations". Its line of code. "engine limitations" my ass. They just don't care. and they are throwing their money down the drain on DayZ. They should have put that game up on kickstarter and let the community fund it. That way, if it sucked, it would lose funding. but if it was good, then the community would support it as well as investers. I like DayZ, but I'd throw it away in a heartbeat for ArmA 3. I have been playing this game since the OFP days back in 2001... Do the Math. And still play with a lot of those guys to this day. THAT's how dedicated the community is to this game. PERIOD. Bohemia Interactive is really screwing its community over with the lack of concern or care they are taking into their product. Releasing the game with the few vehicles they have, and putting a different paint scheme on one and calling it another is ridiculous. It is not ArmA 2 on steroids, but they did put JUST ENOUGH effort into it to hook people in. It's obvious the community is getting sick of it. They are slowly failing on the civilian side by losing their die hard fans. It's the diehard fans that run things like Armaholic, or people like dslyecxi with ShackTac... You just don't find that in any other game... PERIOD. I never have anyways... and what is Bohemia going to do when their community stops supporting them and they lose all their free marketing via the community? Because it looks like many of it's fans are looking elsewhere... =[

I'm getting off the podium and going back to the editor... FML

also I'm not a rookie, just forgot my password to my old account... not that it matters... just throwing that out there.

To clear this out a bit more:

BIS wouldn't be where they are now if they hadn't the hardcore fan base. Thats a fact and nobody can deny it! "We" excused so much issues and deficencies over the years and continued to buy their games and most of the fans even the DLC's.

We said so many times, hey...they will change their minds and behaviour and going to fix it.

But not. They dont give a damn fuck on the hard fan base that supported the games for over 13 years now. They're going to straight piss them in their faces and call it a feature.

No wonder that some of the highest skilled modders stop their work now. Some excellent websites have been shutdown already. Where is ACE3? Where is SLX? Where is PMC? Where is AMS? See...thats what I mean...and those are only some few mods/sites with their devs turning their back on BIS.

And when the casual gamer stop playing their buggy shit and EA or another big publisher is bring out a similar game with less bugs and more nice graphics...BIS can close their doors. Because the hard fan base is gone.

The gaming industry is not shrinking..its still growing.

Some of the players are kind of "guilty" aswell. All those Altis life and DayZ Mod player killing this game too. (not really guilty...but one factor)

But thats the point where the Devs/Management have to choose...pleasure some casual gamers that dont care BIS and go away after some time....or caring the fan base that wants to stay with ArmA and BIS and not play it only casual.

Sorry...due to my english skills I cannot express myself the way I like..but I think and hope you understand me..

Edited March 23, 2014 by Duke49th

[stk2008 14]

Yep BIS have totally forgot about the people that made this game successful all they care about now is DayZ.

Im very pissed I to have supported this series since OFP days damn when the OFP demo was released I played it none stop for days.

Arma 1 and 2 where really good Arma 3 would be if we could actually play the bloody thing other than is slide show mode.

Ive uninstalled Arma 3 im getting pissed of checking the dev builds to only find they have fixed stupid problems like

Corrected Font color

Added texture

I mean WTF BIS we dont give a shit nor do I care about the campaign sort the engine out so we can actually play it first.

Why build a house on unstable footings when it will inevitably fall down sooner or later.

[papanowel 120]

It seems that I must be one of the few happy guys. Before 1.14 when I was playing a MP games (mostly our coop missions), my fps were dropping faster during the mission. Now it's smooth and I can really enjoy the game, my fps are stable and getting higher than before.

The game is taking the right direction, like for the previous title we will need patience.

@Duke49th, RHS is coming to Arma 3, Noubernou confirmed about ACE3... It's simply take more time to modelize something good. Some other nice looking mods are on the way too(CSLA, SOC,etc.).

[tonschuh 3]

Haswell Real World Performance: DDR3-1600 is Not Enough

The prevailing wisdom in the enthusiast community has been, for generations, that DDR3-1600 is the sweet spot and that faster memory offers at best extremely limited performance improvement and that at worst, it’s snake oil. There’s an element of truth to that; AMD’s Bulldozer architecture and its derivatives see arguably minimal benefit from faster memory, and Ivy Bridge and its predecessors actually were just fine at DDR3-1600. So the idea that the paradigm might have shifted is tough to swallow because it goes against wisdom that’s been ingrained for years, a veritable lifetime in our industry.

Except that it has. DDR3-1600 is quite simply no longer enough for modern chips outside of Ivy Bridge-E and Vishera. That Kaveri benefits from faster memory (at least on the GPU side) is a foregone conclusion that was confirmed by our testing. AnandTech already exhaustively detailed performance scaling with different memory speeds on Haswell, and I’ve studied the effect of memory speed on Battlefield 4’s performance. Between our work and AnandTech’s extremely thorough research, you’d think there would finally be a pervasive understanding of the benefit of faster memory on Haswell, but that hasn’t been the case.

I originally went into this testing specifically trying to determine whether or not overclocking would increase the strain enough on Haswell’s memory controller to justify higher speed memory. In testing, I discovered fairly conclusively that DDR3-1600 essentially leaves performance on the table even at stock clocks.

For testing I ran Intel’s Core i7-4770K at stock speeds and overclocked to 4.5GHz. A 32GB (4x8GB) kit of our Dominator Platinum DDR3-2400 was used to scale from DDR3-1600 CAS 9 to DDR3-2400 CAS 10. Test system specs are as follows:

- Intel Core i7-4770K CPU

--- Stock Speed (3.5GHz nominal, turbo to 3.7GHz on four cores or 3.9GHz on one core)

--- Overclocked (4.5GHz, 45x100 BClk, 4GHz Northbridge

- Gigabyte G1.Sniper 5 Motherboard

- 4x8GB Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR3-2400

--- DDR3-1600 (9-9-9-24 CR2)

--- DDR3-1866 (9-9-9-24 CR2)

--- DDR3-2133 (10-11-11-31 CR2)

--- DDR3-2400 (10-12-12-32 CR2)

- NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Overclocked (980MHz nominal, boost to 1150MHz, 7GHz GDDR5)

- 240GB & 480GB Neutron GTX SSDs (for Adobe testing)

I very deliberately chose a mixture of synthetic and real world benchmarks. Cherry picked synthetics can admittedly overstate the importance of higher speed memory; I wanted tangible, demonstrable, practical benefits.

Overclocking the CPU itself had virtually no effect on memory bandwidth, producing results essentially within the margin of error. We’re just going to measure the raw amount of bandwidth made available to the i7 as memory clocks increase.

There’s a very steady increase in bandwidth going from step to step, but read speed tapers off moving from DDR3-2133 to DDR3-2400. This isn’t surprising; Kaveri also started to get shaky around DDR3-2400. Discovering Haswell’s memory controller’s “breaking point†may be worth looking into in the future. Nonetheless, we’re seeing roughly 18% improvements in raw memory bandwidth at each step until DDR3-2400.

Now we’ll see if that translates at all in the two synthetic benchmarks I’ve included. First up is the x264 HD 5.0 benchmark, which absolutely hammers the CPU.

This benchmark is almost entirely CPU limited, but there are trends to point out: overclocking increases the effect memory bandwidth has on performance (proving the initial hypothesis), and the jump from DDR3-1600 to DDR3-1866 is the most significant. The second pass sits almost entirely on the CPU and absolutely hammers it, but the first pass is able to eke out small gains.

The next synthetic is the built-in benchmark in 7-Zip. WinRAR has long been a stronghold of fast memory, but I haven’t used it in ages; 7-Zip is free, fast, and it works.

7-Zip shows modest but steady increases in performance as memory speed goes up, with an unusual jump at DDR3-2400 at stock. These aren’t the kinds of massive gains you might see in WinRAR, but they’re definitely present.

Where things really get interesting are with my two big practical benchmarks: Adobe Media Encoder CC and StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm.

Both of these benchmarks were run with CUDA acceleration enabled in Mercury Playback Engine, and both of them see substantial improvements in running time. The AVCHD encode is able to shave off about 10 seconds, while you can save a full minute with the HDV encode. In fact, on the HDV encode, running the stock CPU with DDR3-2133 or DDR3-2400 instead of DDR3-1600 actually gets you pretty close to the 4.5GHz overclock with DDR3-1600.

The Hail Mary in the group is StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm. Testing was done at 1080p with all of the settings maxed out, so it at least looks the same way it might on your home system. This is also one of the few games that could theoretically benefit from a framerate higher than 60fps, and any kind of demonstrable performance benefit on the CPU/memory side is valuable.

If you run the i7 at stock with DDR3-2400, it’s basically as fast as a 4.5GHz i7 with DDR3-1600. Bump the 4.5GHz chip’s memory to DDR3-1866 and it starts to soar. Getting roughly 10fps out of something as simple as faster memory is staggering.

When we take a look at the performance results holistically, we see our real world benchmarks are able to eke out a minimum of 5% improved performance by going up to DDR3-2133; even going up to DDR3-1866 still nets a solid jump. DDR3-2400 still has plenty to offer in some cases. Add overclocking to the mix and the performance gaps widen even more.

As far as I’m concerned, the conclusion is simple: DDR3-1600 isn’t enough for Haswell, and it leaves performance on the table. This testing was done with DDR3-1600 CAS 9, when DDR3-1600 CAS 11 is actually exceedingly common and thus even slower. If we’re willing to overclock every component in our system to extract as much as five or ten percent more performance, it seems absurd at this point to cheap out on memory. You can get 16GB of DDR3-1866 CAS 9 for nearly the same price as 16GB of DDR3-1600 CAS 9 on our web store, and DDR3-2133 CAS 10 or CAS 11 isn’t much more than that.

With Haswell I continue to be convinced that DDR3-1866 is the new entry level, and that DDR3-2133 is really the sweet spot. Performance improvements from DDR3-2133 to expensive DDR3-2400 are less consistent, and Haswell’s IMC itself starts to get a little shaky there. I may do more testing in the future to determine where the IMC’s limit is; my experience was that under some circumstances, there’s a slight performance regression from DDR3-2400 when you get to DDR3-3000 (which is an absolutely ridiculous speed). In the meantime, the conclusion remains clear: for modern and especially high performance Haswell and Kaveri systems, DDR3-1600 isn’t enough.

Source: Click

:)

[Sneakson 1]

Yes, there was a memory thread not long ago.

[Llano 11]

It seems that I must be one of the few happy guys. Before 1.14 when I was playing a MP games (mostly our coop missions), my fps were dropping faster during the mission. Now it's smooth and I can really enjoy the game, my fps are stable and getting higher than before.

The game is taking the right direction, like for the previous title we will need patience.

@Duke49th, RHS is coming to Arma 3, Noubernou confirmed about ACE3... It's simply take more time to modelize something good. Some other nice looking mods are on the way too(CSLA, SOC,etc.).

Patience? Isn't 12 years enough?

[LSD_Timewarp82 21]

Haswell Real World Performance: DDR3-1600 is Not Enough

http://www.corsair.com/~/media/Corsair/Blog/2014-02/HaswellRealWorld/HRW-AIDA64.jpg

http://www.corsair.com/~/media/Corsair/Blog/2014-02/HaswellRealWorld/HRW-x264-1.jpg

http://www.corsair.com/~/media/Corsair/Blog/2014-02/HaswellRealWorld/HRW-x264-2.jpg

http://www.corsair.com/~/media/Corsair/Blog/2014-02/HaswellRealWorld/HRW-7zip.jpg

http://www.corsair.com/~/media/Corsair/Blog/2014-02/HaswellRealWorld/HRW-AVCHD.jpg

http://www.corsair.com/~/media/Corsair/Blog/2014-02/HaswellRealWorld/HRW-HDV.jpg

http://www.corsair.com/~/media/Corsair/Blog/2014-02/HaswellRealWorld/HRW-SC2.jpg

http://www.corsair.com/~/media/Corsair/Blog/2014-02/HaswellRealWorld/HRW-StockPercent.jpg

http://www.corsair.com/~/media/Corsair/Blog/2014-02/HaswellRealWorld/HRW-OCPercent.jpg

Source: Click

:)

Hmmm, so many Benchmarks but not a single chart which shows Arma3.. Dont get me wrong, i by myself overclock my hardware since years, my Rams runs @ DDR-2200 @ 9-11-9-24 in 1Timing mode. I couldnt measure a performance gain as i was comparing DDR3-1600 and DDR3-2200. Maybe it was late and i was too long awake but i couldnt see it^^

[Sneakson 1]

Hmmm, so many Benchmarks but not a single chart which shows Arma3.. Dont get me wrong, i by myself overclock my hardware since years, my Rams runs @ DDR-2200 @ 9-11-9-24 in 1Timing mode. I couldnt measure a performance gain as i was comparing DDR3-1600 and DDR3-2200. Maybe it was late and i was too long awake but i couldnt see it^^

Ofcourse not. It's a statement from Corsair and has nothing to do with ARMA3 in specific.

I've seen several guys benchmark RAM around here recently and finding a 10-20% difference between 1600 and 2133-2400.

May depend on your CPU, mobo, even the graphics card could block out any performance gain since you're running a quite strong SLI.

I've been considering an upgrade 1600->2400 and check once and for all. If I did it then I could show 100% if it's bullshit or not since I'm on Haswell and according to Corsair 1600+ RAM is only effective on Haswell.

[jumpinghubert 48]

Hmmm, so many Benchmarks but not a single chart which shows Arma3.. Dont get me wrong, i by myself overclock my hardware since years, my Rams runs @ DDR-2200 @ 9-11-9-24 in 1Timing mode. I couldnt measure a performance gain as i was comparing DDR3-1600 and DDR3-2200. Maybe it was late and i was too long awake but i couldnt see it^^

crossposting at its best :p...........here we go:

locked ram timings, helo´s bench, all ultra, 1920x1200, 3000view distance, 3000object distance, 200m shadow:

3570k

cpu 4.5Ghz/ram 1600Mhz: 36 fps

cpu 4.5Ghz/ram 2400Mhz: 42 fps

cpu 4.5Ghz/ram 2666Mhz: 43 fps

cpu 4.8Ghz/ram 1600Mhz: 37 fps

cpu 4.8Ghz/ram 2666Mhz: 45 fps

cpu 4.84Ghz/ram 2694Mhz: 46fps (Bclk @100.9)

sorry, made only 1x run

@ 11/14/13/35/1T

http://geizhals.de/patriot-viper-3-b...k-a962829.html

[LSD_Timewarp82 21]

crossposting at its best :p...........here we go:

locked ram timings, helo´s bench, all ultra, 1920x1200, 3000view distance, 3000object distance, 200m shadow:

3570k

cpu 4.5Ghz/ram 1600Mhz: 36 fps

cpu 4.5Ghz/ram 2400Mhz: 42 fps

cpu 4.5Ghz/ram 2666Mhz: 43 fps

cpu 4.8Ghz/ram 1600Mhz: 37 fps

cpu 4.8Ghz/ram 2666Mhz: 45 fps

cpu 4.84Ghz/ram 2694Mhz: 46fps (Bclk @100.9)

sorry, made only 1x run

@ 11/14/13/35/1T

http://geizhals.de/patriot-viper-3-b...k-a962829.html

Thx for that, it confirms my results. Conclusion: many applications reacts to an overclocked Ram, Arma3 is not one of these applications. What a suprise^^

[jumpinghubert 48]

Thx for that, it confirms my results. Conclusion: many applications reacts to an overclocked Ram, Arma3 is not one of these applications. What a suprise^^

obviously you aren´t able to make simple conclusions :p

[MavericK96 0]

I think the conclusion is, if you want to spend a bunch of money on high-speed RAM to gain at most 10 FPS, go for it. :p

Checked my utilization during normal gameplay...~30-60% GPU, ~50-60% CPU (across all cores at least) mostly...during times when framerate drops, so does utilization.

[mobile_medic 43]

And, when you hit an area of the game that crumples the engine, it won't matter how fast your ram is...

[nikiforos 450]

Exactly Mobile_Medic but some people seem to forget that.

[tonschuh 3]

Hmmm, so many Benchmarks but not a single chart which shows Arma3.. Dont get me wrong, i by myself overclock my hardware since years, my Rams runs @ DDR-2200 @ 9-11-9-24 in 1Timing mode. I couldnt measure a performance gain as i was comparing DDR3-1600 and DDR3-2200. Maybe it was late and i was too long awake but i couldnt see it^^

As @JumpingHubert already pointed out, ARMA-3 usually benefits from faster RAM.

I only pointed out, that if you go down the Haswell-Path, that you should not go for 1600MHz-RAM-Kit's, as you would waste some of your CPU-Power via RAM-Bottleneck.

I'm not saying that you need or have to go down the Haswell-Path to be able to play ARMA-3, but some people don't build / upgrade a rig only for one game or one purpose.

Beside that, if I'm able to get some extra fps by simply going for faster RAM, then I would do it, as that would be still one of the cheapest upgrades. A new CPU / MoBo / GPU plus evtl. a new PSU is by far more expensive.

:)

Edited March 25, 2014 by TONSCHUH