FPS problem.

[anno1505 1]

Hello I'm only getting about 16-17 FPS on ArmA 3, I got the same amount of FPS on ArmA2 aswell! No matter what I did it was kept at 16-17 FPS.

CPU: AMD Phenom x4 810 Processor 2.60 GHz.

RAM: 6 GB.

GPU: GeForce GTX 560 Ti.

Launch options: -noSplash -cpuCount=4 -high -maxMem=6144 -exThreads=7.

My options in ArmA.

Anyone got any clue on what I should do to improve my FPS?

[nikiforos 450]

Do you get 16-17 frames in single player or in multiplayer?

[anno1505 1]

I get 16-17 in multiplayer and about 50-60 in the editor. Singleplayer It would be somewhere about 20-25

[pr0ph3tswe 1]

I get 16-17 in multiplayer and about 50-60 in the editor. Singleplayer It would be somewhere about 20-25

any specific multiplayer missions? most wasteland missions for example runs horrible, some servers lock view distance server side and so on, which will affect fps a lot

[anno1505 1]

I get about 16-17 in all of the multiplayer missions, it's so weird that I get about the same FPS as I do in ArmA 2. Not sure what's wrong :@

[pr0ph3tswe 1]

http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/arma-iii-alpha-test-gpu/testovaya-chast.html

there you can see some cpu, and gpu benchmarks, cpu ones are at the bottom, review is in russian but you can see the graphs anyway :p

not sure how accurate the tests are but you can see a general fps difference, i think the cpu benchmark was done in helicopter showcase so 20-25 singelplayer would make sense i think

look for the phenom 2 x4 940be, your cpu is slightly slower than that one

multiplayer will be heavier on the pc depending on mission, if the server is using locked view distance or not, so i'm not sure if there is anything "wrong" with your pc, just a badly optimized cpu heavy game. 16-17 does sound a bit low even for that setup though

[anno1505 1]

If I got it right the 940 should give you a average of 28 FPS, I should get a lower FPS but a 10 fps diffrence sounds like quite alot, also it was exactly the same thing in ArmA 2, I couldn't get over 16-17 FPS.

It's weird since I've seen people play the game with a even worse setup than what I have in my PC and they can run ArmA2/3 without any trouble.

[pr0ph3tswe 1]

If I got it right the 940 should give you a average of 28 FPS, I should get a lower FPS but a 10 fps diffrence sounds like quite alot, also it was exactly the same thing in ArmA 2, I couldn't get over 16-17 FPS.

It's weird since I've seen people play the game with a even worse setup than what I have in my PC and they can run ArmA2/3 without any trouble.

next step to take is making sure all drivers are up to date, if not already done. amd chipset, gpu etc

also you can increase all non cpu taxing settings to medium at least i'd say, textures, shadows, hdr, anisotropic filtering to 16x

[ZoneTrooper 10]

Right now it doesnt matter what kind of PC you have,you can have a 700€ PC or you can have a 5000€ PC with 2 GTX Titans and a Intel Core i7 3960X with 6 Cores and overclocked to 4,2 GHz and 16 GB ram,you will have the same FPS like the 700€ pc in Multiplayer.Arma 3 uses just 40-60 Percent of the CPU also just 1 core,and the graphics card also isn´t under power all the time.Right now it doesn´t matter if you choose low,standar,high,very-high,or Ultra the FPS in Singleplayer remains the same,in Multiplayer it also doesnt matter wich setting you choose,the only thing that is letting the performance drop so hard ist the VISIBILITY Overall and Object.In singleplayer you can put them on my CPU Core I7-860 on nearly 3400 overall and object 2900-3200 there i get round about 30-70 FPS with a GTX 680 4GB ram and 8GB ram.In Multiplayer you only can adjust view distance with the scrole of the mouse wheele,there you have a option that is called player menu,choose it and then you will see a option like near,medium,far,insane these are the options with that you can reduce or increase the visibility of your character,if you choose them in Options it will have no effect.You can try it near and medium are the best option so far but Far and especially insane kills everyones FPS doesnt matter how strong his CPU is.It is just not optimized,and if they are going to release it with using just 1 core of potential 4 or 6 cores well then you can paint it out how it will run if you play multiplayer on a 270 square kilometers map,for a example stratis is just 20 square kilometers.

[anno1505 1]

http://i.imgur.com/s3gPoB6.jpg (225 kB)

I have it on the lowest possible settings on the view distance and object view distance. I was able to turn back 500 meters more when I scrolled>Player menu>Settings.

After that I gained 2 FPS, now I'm able to play the game at 19 FPS but I'm still lagging in towns etc :/

Edited June 29, 2013 by anno1505

[TSAndrey 1]

MP is not optimized. As long as you are getting good FPS in SP/editor you are fine.

[anno1505 1]

Well I'm only getting good FPS in the editor, I sometimes manage to drop frames when I play SP and playing alone isn't always that fun.

[anno1505 1]

I can't figure out what to change to make my FPS increase since I have my view distance and object distance at the minimum. Anyone that has any ideas?

[ZoneTrooper 10]

On Multiplayer the only effect that works is over the mouse wheel player menu and then set the viewdistance on near/medium.Also it could be your CPU 2.60 ghz ist just a joke today,ok i also have 2.8 ghz on my Core i7-860 but the game run pretty good so far.

[no use for a name 0]

Unless you overclock or buy a cpu then you're pretty much SOL. That's why in an empty map in the editor you can still get 40+ because there's no CPU load. When you start adding AI then your CPU struggles

[mobile_medic 43]

wonder how much longer this thread will last :/

[Insanatrix 0]

wonder how much longer this thread will last :/

I dunno, I'm starting to believe the hyperbole at this point. :rolleyes:

[TSAndrey 1]

I can't figure out what to change to make my FPS increase since I have my view distance and object distance at the minimum. Anyone that has any ideas?

Disable PPAA and decrease Dynamic Lighting to standard. But as we told you, the game is not optimized.

Btw. Putting Shadows on Standard instead of Low, will actually increase your FPS, since it will move from CPU to GPU!

[pawelkpl 29]

Overclock your CPU !

[pr0ph3tswe 1]

Overclock your CPU !

yeah, though if you're not familiar with overclocking then read some guides and take baby steps :)

[ric 1]

Disable PPAA and decrease Dynamic Lighting to standard. But as we told you, the game is not optimized.

Btw. Putting Shadows on Standard instead of Low, will actually increase your FPS, since it will move from CPU to GPU!

if he keeps turning off and disabling features the next thing he is going to see in the mission editor will be a big blond with a crew cut saying"im not gonna fight you..im gonna kick your ass"... :)

[BlackBalsam 10]

My fps plummits from an 80 in singleplayer on high, to a miserable fucking 16 in 50 player multiplayer. This is just ridiculous.. Does the game render what all 50 players are doing exactly on the map at all times ? It should be cut down to only updating inside your viewing distance. I dont care who picks their nose on the other side of the map. Is there any explanation ?

[pr0ph3tswe 1]

My fps plummits from an 80 in singleplayer on high, to a miserable fucking 16 in 50 player multiplayer. This is just ridiculous.. Does the game render what all 50 players are doing exactly on the map at all times ? It should be cut down to only updating inside your viewing distance. I dont care who picks their nose on the other side of the map. Is there any explanation ?

bad computer, bad server, bad scripting?

lower view distance, lower object and terrain quality, etc

[k3lt 3]

lower view distance, lower object and terrain quality, etc

Except it does not change anything in multiplayer /r/shittyadvice

[Krimlo 10]

I feel your pain on the low FPS. In Alpha I had great smooth FPS. Now most servers give me around 20-25 FPS. I have to find those 'High FPS" servers to play at all. As for single player some missions aren't a problem, but others lag like hell.

My specs:

CPU: Intel core i5 2500K 3.3ghz

RAM: 8gb DDR3 1600

GPU: ATI Radeon HD 4850 (I know this is where my problem most likely is) I plan on getting a GTX 650Ti soon as I believe that should be enough.

I just feel like Beta is kind of more messed up than Alpha was. I mean the same problems exist with more added to it.