Low CPU utilization & Low FPS

[tonschuh 3]

http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/8121/l0pw.jpg (218 kB)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

http://img826.imageshack.us/img826/3253/tsi9.jpg (213 kB)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/3691/9dux.jpg (211 kB)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

There seems to be slightly higher fps and the SP-Gameplay is smoother. I'm now able to play the Infantry-Showcase with high quality-settings and adaptive VSync enabled (VSync disabled in-game). This was tested with my 3770k only @4200MHz (4700MHz possible) and my 2x GTX680-SOC-2GB with LN2-Bios enabled, but no further OC (~30 further OC possible).

http://img191.imageshack.us/img191/5868/fehf.jpg (344 kB)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

I also adjusted the mouse settings as shown above. Poll-Rate 1000Hz / 5600DPI (8200DPI possible) / no Acceleration.

No Game-Crashes anymore for me in SP. I could finally finish the first red shooting course without any crashes. Benchmarks can now be repeated without any crashes as well.

I had a short go on an Altis-MP-Server and had no crashes there as well.

:)

Edited September 29, 2013 by TONSCHUH

[t4nk83 10]

I have seen minor improvement in MP, single player has never given me a problem. My average was probably 28-55 fps before patch now it is 34-59 fps

[antoineflemming 14]

I have seen minor improvement in MP, single player has never given me a problem. My average was probably 28-55 fps before patch now it is 34-59 fps

On what server on which two different times with how many players at what in-game location with what activity going on and for how long was the server running at each time? Because if the conditions aren't the same for the two times which you are comparing ("before" and "now"), then you can't really say for certain if it's a game improvement or just conditions on the server. And I say this especially since the improvement in FPS isn't that much.

[t4nk83 10]

On what server on which two different times with how many players at what in-game location with what activity going on and for how long was the server running at each time? Because if the conditions aren't the same for the two times which you are comparing ("before" and "now"), then you can't really say for certain if it's a game improvement or just conditions on the server. And I say this especially since the improvement in FPS isn't that much.

Server was =7CAV= Tactical Realism, they have both a day and night patch. It is an Ahoy World Invade and Annex Map, 40 Players. Times I am on are usually around 6:00pm pst - 12:00AM PST, the servers population is usually around 25-40 Players. Server resets every 4 hours. What more information would you like?

[Fushko 59]

Short answer: no.

Long answer:

Mantle is a new alternative to OpenGL and DirectX, so game renderers would need to be written (or modified) to make use of the Mantle API. This is neither an automatic nor even a quick or easy process.

As for SteamOS, we'll be facing the same problems we do on any other Linux derivate - OpenGL yay, DirectX nay. In other words, ARMA3 will not run natively on SteamOS.

Doesn't it work with DirectX?

[RSF TheCapulet 59]

Doesn't it work with DirectX?

Just because it's capable of using some of the same functions that DX does, doesn't mean that it's a simple copy and paste job. It may use the same flow, but it will be different, and it will need to be specifically made to work with mantle. And not only that, it'd mean that there would suddenly be two graphical pipelines that they have to develop, debug, and monitor. It's not cheap, and it's not easy.

[Fushko 59]

Just because it's capable of using some of the same functions that DX does, doesn't mean that it's a simple copy and paste job. It may use the same flow, but it will be different, and it will need to be specifically made to work with mantle. And not only that, it'd mean that there would suddenly be two graphical pipelines that they have to develop, debug, and monitor. It's not cheap, and it's not easy.

A man can dream...

[RSF TheCapulet 59]

A man can dream...

Yup, and I'm right there with you. I'd LOVE BI to develop with mantle. I'd love it even more if they start work on an OpenGL implementation too.

[jiltedjock 10]

Hi all,

as everyone knows you get a low framerate in MP even if you can run SP missions at stable 50-70 FPS on higher setting.

If i change the video settings in SP i see a direct impact on my framerate, but if i change them during a multiplayer session absolutely nothing will change. I always get 15-25 FPS there, it was the same in Arma 2.

That means that the multiplayer performance is affected by something else. The other performance-killer in this game is the AI-calculation. Many AI troops in the SP will have a heavy FPS hit. There are many AI's on MP, but they should be all calculated by the server.

Here is my question: Could it be true that my CPU is calculating the AI on MP without that this calculation will be used for anything? The CPU would have to do this work for the 20-40 AI's, depending on the mission. In SP such a number of artificial enemys would also result in such a low framerate, because the CPU would bottleneck the GFX.

This would also explain why we get good FPS on MP scenarios without AI.

That would certainly be the case if there was a problem with the localization ie the AI was being accidentally spawned on the clients, but I think you would see many other weird issues too if that was happening.

[stk2008 14]

lol thought i would test an online game LOL 9 fps its not my pc and there was 3 others playing it but could not be assed to ask them what FPS they where getting.

BIS WTF is going on arma used to be my best game you used to be my fave game dev but arma 3 is a pile of steaming cat shit mixed up with alcohol induced puke

[antoineflemming 14]

So, one of the most talked about suggestions for increasing performance is to change your max prerendered frames to 1. Well, I did that. And early on I thought this helped. But, I just saw a post on the steam forums actually where someone said that this only helps people with low end gpus and high end cpus. Never heard that before. So I changed the prerendered frames (gpudetectedframesahead or something like that in Arma3.cfg) to 10000, and while I didn't notice a great increase in fps, I did notice that it's no longer stuttering when it drops fps. I also had previously increase the paging file, but hadn't notice the "Adjust for best performance" option. So I changed that to programs instead of background services. Fighting AI still slows up the game, but it doesn't stutter as much. Not only that, it makes 18 fps feel really smooth (I'm usually around 25 average for squad on squad AI engagements). So, if you have an ok GPU and a not so great CPU (I'm at 2.2GHz and that's pretty much why Arma 3 doesn't run that great for me), then try these things and see if they help. Just one thing to note: Standard FXAA used to drop my FPS and cause a lot of stutter, but not anymore. If this helps, then great. If not, then sorry. But please don't take this as a one-fits-all solution.

[Leon86 13]

So, one of the most talked about suggestions for increasing performance is to change your max prerendered frames to 1. Well, I did that. And early on I thought this helped. But, I just saw a post on the steam forums actually where someone said that this only helps people with low end gpus and high end cpus.

It helps in any gpu limited situation, if you're not gpu limited the buffer (of default 3) is emptied more quickly than supplied so it cant build up, in that case you wont have any extra frames between game and screen contributing to input lag.

I always put maximum pre rendered frames on the lowest possible, in arma the forests are very gpu heavy with aa and atoc, with lots of pre rendered frames the input lag is terrible.

Lots of pre rendered frames is good for gpu limited benchmark results, as the gpu's will be at near 100% all the time, especially important for multigpu. no review site I've ever seen does any game input-output testing, so increasing pre rendered frames (and therefor mouse-screen lag) will get you better test results and more favorable reviews, even though playablility suffers.

[antoineflemming 14]

It helps in any gpu limited situation, if you're not gpu limited the buffer (of default 3) is emptied more quickly than supplied so it cant build up, in that case you wont have any extra frames between game and screen contributing to input lag.

I always put maximum pre rendered frames on the lowest possible, in arma the forests are very gpu heavy with aa and atoc, with lots of pre rendered frames the input lag is terrible.

Lots of pre rendered frames is good for gpu limited benchmark results, as the gpu's will be at near 100% all the time, especially important for multigpu. no review site I've ever seen does any game input-output testing, so increasing pre rendered frames (and therefor mouse-screen lag) will get you better test results and more favorable reviews, even though playablility suffers.

well it's the complete opposite for me. Increasing pre rendered frames greatly reduced the input lag and stuttering. Improved my playability. I've got a old GPU and CPU (Geforce 555m and i7-2670QM 2.20GHz). I'd previously lowered my max pre rendered frames to 1. But after raising it, my performance is better although fraps says FPS is the same. Either way, I'm still running on low-standard settings, so it's not great. But it makes low settings more playable for me. Most post-processing effects, including anti-aliasing, are on low or disabled (and they still cause stutter when on standard+). Textures on ULTRA, as is the texture filtering. Dyn lights on standard, same for HDR and FXAA. VD is at 1150, object distance 100m, shadow dist 50m. sampling 100%

Maybe your problem was running with AA and ATOC.

My CPU is more limited than my GPU, so I raised the amount of pre-rendered frames and it helped.

[windies 11]

A higher pre-rendered frame count will increase input lag at lower FPS because of the increased frame time at lower FPS and the fact the frames are already pre-rendered before they are displayed as well as can increase performance because it allows the GPU to render faster than the overall engine's FPS or simulation cycles. Consequently a lower pre-rendered frame count will decrease input lag at lower FPS but can decrease performance.

It's mostly how sensitive you are to input latency.

good article on frame time versus FPS and how FPS is somewhat misleading. http://www.mvps.org/directx/articles/fps_versus_frame_time.htm

[Leon86 13]

Maybe your problem was running with AA and ATOC.

No, it looks nice :)

And with max 1 pre rendered frame it's playable.

[RGG.DaFreak 10]

Hello guys this may was allready mentioned here but i didnt wanna read trough 100´s of reply pages but i found also another maybe for more people important thing in the energy profile settings of windows.

My PC was limited since i bouht it on energy saving mode and i can remember i once changed it but im not exactly sure.however seems cpu usage gets drastically limited when this isnt set to full usage.

So i had 20 average frames on a high end pc even dropping down to below 10 ingame it often also didnt matter which mission i was in it was just overloaded allready loading the terrain.

After i did set this to High power usage it boosted me immediately up 65-75 stable which is definitly also my system but if frames issues occure on your system definitly check this option.

I found it after messing around for 2-3 month :)

yyyyyyaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy!!

Edited October 8, 2013 by RGG.DaFreak
typo

[tonschuh 3]

Hello guys this may was allready mentioned here but i didnt wanna read trough 100´s of reply pages but i found also another maybe for more people important thing in the energy profile settings of windows.

My PC was limited since i bouht it on energy saving mode and i can remember i once changed it but im not exactly sure.however seems cpu usage gets drastically limited when this isnt set to full usage.

So i had 20 average frames on a high end pc even dropping down to below 10 ingame it often also didnt matter which mission i was in it was just overloaded allready loading the terrain.

After i did set this to High power usage it boosted me immediately up 65-75 stable which is definitly also my system but if frames issues occure on your system definitly check this option.

I found it after messing around for 2-3 month :)

yyyyyyaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy!!

Disable Core-Parking as well.

;)

[KrIxXuS 10]

Morning, RGG.DaFreak is right.. look at this guide... they are just a few of the Windows 7(64) tweaks i'm using although some will be obsolete they definitely make a difference to me... use at your own risk and don't blame me if you have to re-install windows! Been using the same tweaks(not all) for around 2 year's. It's a great guide worth bookmarking.

http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/showthread.php?63273-*-Windows-7-Ultimate-Tweaks-amp-Utilities-*

Going to test that Gpudetectednoobsahead thing a little later and see if it makes any difference for me, will post back later.

[RGG.DaFreak 10]

@TONSCHUH:Disable Core-Parking as well.

Ye did allready :P cant tell how much satisfying this game is now.

@KrixXus:n1 thank you will work trough this and show my community guys too.

Even my buddy runs now average 30-20 frames on a 6-7 year old Q6600.So this game is far from requiring a NASA PC.

I wonder how much people out there argue abou ARMA 3 performance and have just bad balanced system.

•ASUS Maximus Extreme V

•LGA1155 socket for Intel® 3rd/2nd Generation Core™ i7/ i5/ i3/ Pentium® / Celeron® Processors

•Intel® Z77 Express Chipset

•OC Key - The key to real time monitoring and overclocking!

•Subzero Sense - Find out how cold your board is

•VGA Hotwire - Hotwire your system

•Intel Thunderbolt - Blistering-fast Data Transfers

•1x Gainward GeForce® GTX 680 2048MB GDDR5 (256 bits)

•2 x 256GB SSD RAID 0

•Windows 7 Professional 64-bit (6.1, Build 7601) Service Pack 1 (7601.win7sp1_gdr.130801-1533)

•BIOS: BIOS Date: 10/05/12 12:10:32 Ver: 13.09

•Processor: Intel® Core i7-3770K CPU @ 3.50GHz (8 CPUs), ~3.5GHz

•Memory: 20480MB RAM

•Available OS Memory: 20420MB RAM

•Page File: 3972MB used, 36864MB available

•DirectX Version: DirectX 11

•User DPI Setting: Using System DPI

•System DPI Setting: 96 DPI (100 percent)

•DxDiag Version: 6.01.7601.17514 32bit Unicode

Lift off :P

Edited October 8, 2013 by RGG.DaFreak

[tonschuh 3]

@TONSCHUH:Disable Core-Parking as well.

Ye did allready :P cant tell how much satisfying this game is now.

@KrixXus:n1 thank you will work trough this and show my community guys too.

Even my buddy runs now average 30-20 frames on a 6-7 year old Q6600.So this game is far from requiring a NASA PC.

I wonder how much people out there argue abou ARMA 3 performance and have just bad balanced system.

•ASUS Maximus Extreme V

•LGA1155 socket for Intel® 3rd/2nd Generation Core™ i7/ i5/ i3/ Pentium® / Celeron® Processors

•Intel® Z77 Express Chipset

•OC Key - The key to real time monitoring and overclocking!

•Subzero Sense - Find out how cold your board is

•VGA Hotwire - Hotwire your system

•Intel Thunderbolt - Blistering-fast Data Transfers

•1x Gainward GeForce® GTX 680 2048MB GDDR5 (256 bits)

•2 x 256GB SSD RAID 0

•Windows 7 Professional 64-bit (6.1, Build 7601) Service Pack 1 (7601.win7sp1_gdr.130801-1533)

•BIOS: BIOS Date: 10/05/12 12:10:32 Ver: 13.09

•Processor: Intel® Core i7-3770K CPU @ 3.50GHz (8 CPUs), ~3.5GHz

•Memory: 20480MB RAM

•Available OS Memory: 20420MB RAM

•Page File: 3972MB used, 36864MB available

•DirectX Version: DirectX 11

•User DPI Setting: Using System DPI

•System DPI Setting: 96 DPI (100 percent)

•DxDiag Version: 6.01.7601.17514 32bit Unicode

Lift off :P

That's a nice rig, but do you seriously run your 3770k only @3.5GHz ?

Even I run my 3770k @4200MHz on normal days (4700MHz max. atm. , but I will swap in a view days my actual Thermaltake Bigwater 850 GT with a EK H3O HFX 240mm Liquid Cooling Kit).

With this MoBo you have to go for it !

;)

[jumpinghubert 49]

That's a nice rig, but do you seriously run your 3770k only @3.5GHz ?

Even I run my 3770k @4200MHz on normal days (4700MHz max. atm. , but I will swap in a view days my actual Thermaltake Bigwater 850 GT with a EK H3O HFX 240mm Liquid Cooling Kit).

With this MoBo you have to go for it !

;)

changed my waterblock: a ZERN from 2004 to a cuplex kryos delrin. 10°C less under prime load :)

[tonschuh 3]

changed my waterblock: a ZERN from 2004 to a cuplex kryos delrin. 10°C less under prime load :)

Yeah, Aquacomputer, my absolute dream-shop ! :bounce3:

I will possible go later on for a better block as well. Thought about this one for the time between: EK Supremacy Full Nickel CPU Waterblock

If I will be rich one day, then I will shop there and start off with the Aquaduct 720 XT mark V or something similar.

Hard work didn't do it yet, so maybe I should start playing lotto again.

:butbut:

[RyanBurnsRed 1]

I have the exact same concerns as the OP. The game auto detects the settings to Ultra, I get on average 20 fps. I lower the settings down to High and even Standard, and my fps does't change. I turn off AA, SSAO, and the fps actually DROPS further to 11!. I open up Precision and check my GPU and CPU usage. My GPU isn't even running at full capacity. The speed on my card is running at 880 Mhz on average and bumps up to 1150-1170 Mhz occasionally. The usage rarely hits 50%, instead it hovers around 40-45%. CPU usage is the same. All 4 cores barely touch 70%, most apart from core #1 stay between 20-30%, with core #1 being a little higher at 40% and touches 70% RARELY. This has to change. I thought Planetside 2 was bad, but this game is WORSE. I want to play it with at LEAST 40 fps, but I can't no matter how hard I try. Please fix this!

I read the entire first page of this thread and skipped here. I don't have the patience to read through 200+ pages of this thread, so if there is a solution somewhere in there, please quote it for me, because I don't want to play this game at 19-20 FPS!!!

This wasn't a problem in Alpha. I had a GTX 480 then, on very high settings I was at least getting 30 fps. Why is optimization worse AFTER release!?

Did it even change at all!? I'm frustrated by this. I finally find a good server to play on, and I have to put up with 19 fps on STANDARD graphics settings.

[mamasan8 11]

I don't think theres anything we can do, besides getting hired by BIS and coding an engine fix.

I just upgraded my computer. Had an athlon x2 at 3.2 ghz, upgraded to fx 8350 at 4ghz.

Differences in games I've tried:

Splinter Cell: Blacklist 20 fps-> 60 fps (no vsync)

Far cry 3: 20 fps-> 60 fps (still no vsync)

Arma 3: 10-15 fps -> 20-25 fps. This is both in MP and SP. I made a mission with 100 AI fighting in a town which I like to run.

Throwing hardware at the problem changes very little. In those other 2 games, my graphics card (hd7870) finally gets to work, it gets hotter than ever!

But in Arma 3? Almost idle. Same with CPU. Hardly ever over 40% utilization, on CPU/GPU. Temps are 10 degrees lower across the board than in any other game.

Even Planetside 2 runs much better and it used to run like shit for me.

[tonschuh 3]

http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/7236/x7an.jpg (662 kB)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/4761/81wd.jpg (1034 kB)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/658/lrop.jpg (970 kB)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/8760/4ftc.jpg (451 kB)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/4106/8ie7.jpg (905 kB)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/8397/2hcy.jpg (932 kB)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Swapped my Thermaltake Bigwater 850GT with an EK H3O HFX 240mm Liquid Cooling Kit.

I thought that I have a large case, but somehow it's always a bit to small.

Will have to clean the air-filters still, as I did the whole mod straight after work within ~6 hours and ran out of time.

4700MHz @64-75 Celsius when running Prime95-x64 (max Heat etc.) and 28 Celsius when idle.

:bounce3: