Low CPU utilization & Low FPS

[Leon86 13]

I would only recommend 32bit windows on systems with only 2GB memory.

[Zipet 11]

1 more into the list on low fps no matter what settings i use.

VD is set on 2500.

Only the resolution is demanding. full HD 1920x1080

anything els is on low and thous settings that can be set to off is off. AA. Vsync and so on if off

gpu use arund 300mb

cpu use is around 10% to 15% what the...

is my spec really that bad for Arma 3??? it was the same thing with Arma 2

i have absolutly no clue how to increase my fps at all i have tryid a few things

edit in config with the "GPU_MaxFramesAhead=1;

GPU_DetectedFramesAhead=0;" no changes.

i also tryid cpu count thingy on both 4 and 8 no changes.

so im open for any hints.

No changes on fps what so ever same settings both on Stratis and Altis same fps issue. my fps keeps going from 10fps to 32 at top. Avage 27-30 fps

Spec.

Cpu - AMD FX-8350 at stock speed 4ghz and turbo on 4.2ghz

Gpu - Gigabyte GTX 670 2gb stock clocks 1058mhz and Kepler boost on 1175mhz

Ram - 1833 Kingston 12Gb

Psu - 750W

Sata Harddisk 1Tb and another on 1tb NO SSD

Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit

[ric 1]

32bit is not recommended for arma3.

you do see the irony in your statement right? there is no 64bit EXE for A3.

---------- Post added at 15:36 ---------- Previous post was at 15:33 ----------

1 more into the list on low fps no matter what settings i use.

VD is set on 2500.

Only the resolution is demanding. full HD 1920x1080

anything els is on low and thous settings that can be set to off is off. AA. Vsync and so on if off

gpu use arund 300mb

cpu use is around 10% to 15% what the...

is my spec really that bad for Arma 3??? it was the same thing with Arma 2

i have absolutly no clue how to increase my fps at all i have tryid a few things

edit in config with the "GPU_MaxFramesAhead=1;

GPU_DetectedFramesAhead=0;" no changes.

i also tryid cpu count thingy on both 4 and 8 no changes.

so im open for any hints.

No changes on fps what so ever same settings both on Stratis and Altis same fps issue. my fps keeps going from 10fps to 32 at top. Avage 27-30 fps

Spec.

Cpu - AMD FX-8350 at stock speed 4ghz and turbo on 4.2ghz

Gpu - Gigabyte GTX 670 2gb stock clocks 1058mhz and Kepler boost on 1175mhz

Ram - 1833 Kingston 12Gb

Psu - 750W

Sata Harddisk 1Tb and another on 1tb NO SSD

Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit

that is measured across ALL your cores, go into task manager while the game is running and set affinity to core 0 and 1 then you will see the real usage.

[jumpinghubert 48]

@zipet

please try shadows to high or very high instead of low or norma, it changes usage from cpu to gpu. Whats your object view distance?

[Zipet 11]

@zipet

please try shadows to high or very high instead of low or norma, it changes usage from cpu to gpu. Whats your object view distance?

with shadow on high and very high same issue 25-30 fps. view object distance is set on 1511

[Leon86 13]

you do see the irony in your statement right? there is no 64bit EXE for A3.

That doesn't mean there's no benefit to running a 64bit OS.

[xXxatrush1987 10]

That doesn't mean there's no benefit to running a 64bit OS.

and without this little benefit 64bit os users would have the same probs that 32bit os users have right now.

but i think with he first big addon 64bit native code musst be done or the constant expansion of the sandbox ist stopped.

when just the map with even low viewrange just goes down 1/2fps on 32bit os the max on 32bit os is reached, there is no mission making possible this way.

[KeyCat 131]

Thanks! I'll keep my cool then.

I set this rig up just for Arma 2 and 3 actually, and though about the 64/32 version choice, but found nothing that said that 64 was preferred, rather the opposite (nothing in System Requirements either on Arma 3 site or on Steam... are these official or non-official recommendations?). Oh well, I'll have to set up a 64 version maybe instead if things don't improve.

I highly recommend you to switch to Windows 7 64-bit if you have the option and 4+ GB RAM. Not just for ArmA 3 but you will se more and more games requiring 64-bit OS. For example the DCS series is soon going 64-bit only as well as the upcoming Star Citizen and probably several more that I don't know about.

/KC

[mobile_medic 43]

and without this little benefit 64bit os users would have the same probs that 32bit os users have right now.

but i think with he first big addon 64bit native code musst be done or the constant expansion of the sandbox ist stopped.

when just the map with even low viewrange just goes down 1/2fps on 32bit os the max on 32bit os is reached, there is no mission making possible this way.

This happens on Stratis as well. And, it happens on 64-bit os as well. (at least losing half, or more, of your fps on certain areas of just the map)

[jumpinghubert 48]

with shadow on high and very high same issue 25-30 fps. view object distance is set on 1511

thanks for response. Try to log the cpu-frequency ingame to look if cpu is idling.

[Zipet 11]

thanks for response. Try to log the cpu-frequency ingame to look if cpu is idling.

took a screen shot on my task manager have no idea what els to log the cpu frequency but i did keep a close eye to my cpu speed. at all times at 4091,16Mhz no drops at all. http://s21.postimg.org/6atyg87h3/cpu_graph.jpg

[windies 11]

I highly recommend you to switch to Windows 7 64-bit if you have the option and 4+ GB RAM. Not just for ArmA 3 but you will se more and more games requiring 64-bit OS. For example the DCS series is soon going 64-bit only as well as the upcoming Star Citizen and probably several more that I don't know about.

/KC

DCS is already 64 bit and I don't even think they have a 32 bit binary anymore. They used to upkeep one and then stopped because the demands of their program were too high.

[Sneakson 1]

1 more into the list on low fps no matter what settings i use.

VD is set on 2500.

Only the resolution is demanding. full HD 1920x1080

anything els is on low and thous settings that can be set to off is off. AA. Vsync and so on if off

gpu use arund 300mb

cpu use is around 10% to 15% what the...

is my spec really that bad for Arma 3??? it was the same thing with Arma 2

i have absolutly no clue how to increase my fps at all i have tryid a few things

edit in config with the "GPU_MaxFramesAhead=1;

GPU_DetectedFramesAhead=0;" no changes.

i also tryid cpu count thingy on both 4 and 8 no changes.

so im open for any hints.

No changes on fps what so ever same settings both on Stratis and Altis same fps issue. my fps keeps going from 10fps to 32 at top. Avage 27-30 fps

Spec.

Cpu - AMD FX-8350 at stock speed 4ghz and turbo on 4.2ghz

Gpu - Gigabyte GTX 670 2gb stock clocks 1058mhz and Kepler boost on 1175mhz

Ram - 1833 Kingston 12Gb

Psu - 750W

Sata Harddisk 1Tb and another on 1tb NO SSD

Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit

Turn down your visibility!

Try settings in my signature.

[Zipet 11]

Turn down your visibility!

Try settings in my signature.

right now im sitting with the visibility on 500-500-50 not much fun playing the game with a chopper when you cant see that far and no matter if i set it on 500 to 11000 same fps at 25 to 30.

[KeyCat 131]

DCS is already 64 bit and I don't even think they have a 32 bit binary anymore. They used to upkeep one and then stopped because the demands of their program were too high.

DCS still works on 32-bit but not very well. Anyway it's off topic so lets get back to A3.

/KC

[call_911 10]

Yeah sadly thinking my ArmA days since ArmA1 are over, low performance ai shoot at u, you lag out, than u die. 8(

[mobile_medic 43]

DCS still suffers from the same general issue of cpu under-utilization (one core for sound, and one for everything else), which can cause gpu usage (and fps) to crap out at times. Fortunately, it happens far less for me in that game. But, it seems to take an awful lot of ai on the map with business to go about, and being in the general area of a large number of them for it to begin to impact my performance. I've encountered it twice so far in the last week after getting back into the DCS world series again. When, it did happen, it was pretty short-lived, and then back to normal. Running full on maxed out with view distances out to 15k. I am just getting back into it, but the issue cropping up is limited thus far in DCS world, where in Arma 2, and Arma 3, it is persistent.

It is a very rewarding experience, and feels a lot more robust performance wise. Of course, it is not apples to apples. One thing I do enjoy about ED, is that they appear to continually work on improving their engine. New rendering engine on the way, and proper multi-core support (beyond 2) is planned for the future. More aircraft on the way from 3rd party developers, and a lot of the former IL-2 team is apparently now working on a complete WW2 European theater with a new map that will be using the new rendering engine (EDGE). It is refreshing when contrasted with the (lack of) feedback and progress over the years on the issue here. In a nutshell, I'm much more optimistic about the future of the DCS series.

And, 100+ ai in a coop mission can be very doable in DCS, where an empty map is enough to kill performance in Arma. I'd love to try out my new trackir on arma 3 (particularly, infantry), but I just can't bring myself to run around on an empty map anymore, and it's not worth the additional setup time for what will ultimately be a very limited game play experience (for me). Plus, I hate the flight model of the helicopters on Arma :) (and, I love flying helicopters)

And, the mission editor is far more intuitive, and requires far less scripting. Simple tasks like loadouts/payloads can be done with drop downs and creating a custom loadout that will always be available in any future mission you create. Also, very refreshing.

A friend and I flew a mission last night in the A-10c. Rendezvous with air support who took out a sam site. Then we moved in and took out enemy armor at an ammo depot in the valley. Gave the ok for allied helicopters to come in and drop off troops while we provided over-watch, and then RTB :) Probably 40 AI in the mission overall. Not a single performance issue. 60fps smooth sailing. Had a great time.

Anyway... Off-topic :)

Arma... Oh, how I want to love you... An engine that just keeps getting older, while the demand on it keeps getting higher... So much hardware horsepower just begging to let this game live up to its potential. One of these days, someone will take the best of DCS and Arma, and actually build it on a foundation that is not as old as the glory days of PC gaming.

[Ezcoo 47]

Arma... Oh, how I want to love you... An engine that just keeps getting older, while the demand on it keeps getting higher... So much hardware horsepower just begging to let this game live up to its potential. One of these days, someone will take the best of DCS and Arma, and actually build it on a foundation that is not as old as the glory days of PC gaming.

I fully agree. I believe as well that this will happen in near future (within years). I've even found myself thinking about it often recently, and I know that I'm not the only one... I've even begun to consider a career as game developer and eg. done some calculations of the costs (eg. global addon sync with proper addon handling to avoid duplicates etc. made with content delivery network) and plans of project control and business itself.

Here in Finland, there's an university of applied sciences that is dedicated to game development. From there graduates pretty much every kind of developers that you'd need to make a game – engine programmers, game designers, 3d modellers, environment artists, game producers, dedicated sound producers etc. and they even train them from the beginning to prepare them to run independent business, even a game studio. Additionally, Finnish game developers have very good reputation around the world, so getting investments would be relatively easy (this does not mean that it would be easy, just relatively easy). For example, a (smallish) indie game studio with developers that had just graduated got over $10 million worth of investments recently... Not a small pile of cash for new game studio.

If I happened to select career as game developer, I would definitely do my best to form a new game studio that would aim to create pretty much what Mobile_Medic describes; taking "the best of DCS and Arma" and building it "on a foundation that is not as old as the glory days of PC gaming" which means basically proper multicore support and 64-bit engine. I've done some research about the topic, and got the impression that it would actually be potentially possible especially with agile development method, if you just didn't try to create everything yourself (read: no need to reinvent the wheel) and to try to make everything perfect especially in the beginning. And if that seems possible to even a noob in software development like me, I just wonder how many professionals with much higher knowledge about the topic have thought the same. That's why I think that a competitor to Arma series is just a matter of time. As much as I love this game series and Bohemia in general, I think that the engine is very close to end of its lifetime without radical and deep changes in the core. And (it hurts me a little to say this) because it seems that they're not happening, I hope that we get another option for Arma in near future. Maybe I will be responsible of it, maybe (and much more likely) I won't, but I hope and believe that it will happen soon.

[windies 11]

Competition is good for the consumer because it means that neither company can afford to be lazy and lose customers and potential profit. ArmA lacks any direct competition so basically it's a take it or leave it scenario and BI can get away with not supporting or implementing things like 64 bit or better multi threading and parallel processing support because you basically have no other option to turn to. I wish that there was more competition for ArmA because in the end it would mean a better product.

[war34d 10]

Competition is good for the consumer because it means that neither company can afford to be lazy and lose customers and potential profit. ArmA lacks any direct competition so basically it's a take it or leave it scenario and BI can get away with not supporting or implementing things like 64 bit or better multi threading and parallel processing support because you basically have no other option to turn to. I wish that there was more competition for ArmA because in the end it would mean a better product.

+1 Totally agree with you, and this is not the first time they are giving us an unoptimized or unfinished game. How complicated it can be for a developer to realize that the engine they are using is not the best for their game. All i wanted they simply should have told us the truth that the minimum requirement to run the game is intel i7 or 8 core amd processor. Even than in large MP server its unplayble.

I lost my all hopes and i can never recommend this game to any of my friend. Arma has always been my favorite game but its what you said "No competition = lazy developers" they know we have no choice but to buy it.

[doveman 7]

I swear it's got worse with a recent dev build (I was using the non-dev until maybe a week ago though).

Now, on various servers I get between 8-15fps and whilst some SP missions seem to give me about 40fps, I just tried the mission Op. Magic Carpet and was getting below 10fps with that as well.

Phenom II X4 955 @3.5Ghz, 16GB DDR3 1333Mhz, 6950 2GB

I'm only using viewdistance 1600, object distance 800 and have a lot of stuff turned down/off like clouds, ATOC, etc. GPU is only using up to 25%, so it's obviously the CPU bottlenecking.

Think it was better when I was using the non-dev build before I switched about a week ago but I didn't test much so I'm not sure.

Here's my graphic settings:

language="English";

forcedAdapterId=-1;

detectedAdapterId=0;

detectedAdapterVendorId=4098;

detectedAdapterDeviceId=26393;

detectedAdapterSubSysId=587667335;

detectedAdapterRevision=0;

detectedAdapterBenchmark=92;

displayMode=0;

winX=16;

winY=32;

winWidth=1024;

winHeight=768;

winDefWidth=1024;

winDefHeight=768;

fullScreenWidth=1920;

fullScreenHeight=1200;

refresh=60;

renderWidth=1920;

renderHeight=1200;

multiSampleCount=4;

multiSampleQuality=0;

particlesQuality=0;

GPU_MaxFramesAhead=1;

GPU_DetectedFramesAhead=1;

HDRPrecision=8;

vsync=0;

AToC=0;

cloudsQuality=0;

pipQuality=0;

dynamicLightsQuality=0;

PPAA=6;

ppSSAO=0;

ppCaustics=0;

tripleBuffering=0;

ppBloom=0.9973262;

ppRotBlur=0;

ppRadialBlur=0;

ppDOF=0.9973262;

---

tripleHead=0;

anisoFilter=12;

textureQuality=3;

shadowQuality=3;

sceneComplexity=300000;

shadowZDistance=100;

viewDistance=1552.0331;

preferredObjectViewDistance=801.4892;

terrainGrid=25;

fovTop=0.75;

fovLeft=1.1999999;

[verstand3n 13]

lucky you!

I got a Phenom II X4 965 @3.5Ghz(non-oc), 8GB DDR3 1600Mhz, 6950 2GB (also unlocked to 6970).

I use the "Standard" preset setting for graphics with vsync disabled. But no matter what I do my fps is always 15-30 fps. I can even set the game graphics preset to Ultra and still have 15-30 fps.

afterburner tells me 70-80% of load on my gpu and of my cpu's cores while playing. attached is a recent screenshot.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1453545/arma3_2013_09_05_12_28_19_732.bmp (6075 kB)

[doveman 7]

lucky you!

I got a Phenom II X4 965 @3.5Ghz(non-oc), 8GB DDR3 1600Mhz, 6950 2GB (also unlocked to 6970).

I use the "Standard" preset setting for graphics with vsync disabled. But no matter what I do my fps is always 15-30 fps. I can even set the game graphics preset to Ultra and still have 15-30 fps.

Why am I lucky when you get about twice the fps I do with roughly the same components? :confused:

[verstand3n 13]

you said sp missions give you 40 fps. My screenshot shows the helicopter sp scenario giving me 30 fps. Unfortunately the 30 fps are a max value for me, usually I am between 15 and 25-30 :-(

I must say I believe our rigs (especially the phenom) are outdated for arma's requierments but as long as my system is not utilized to it's max I refuse to upgrade my hardware ;)

[jagdtiger74 10]

I actually had some issues too, with my system (I5 OC, 7970Ghz 6GBVRam) and i found the following guide:

Link

some settings when turned to ultra or high actually shift load from CPU to GPU. Also moving up the sample rate helped a lot.

Hope it helps