GTX780 in SLI, do I have unrealistic expectations?

[Coflash 10]

Hello... so far I have played the Alpha/Beta for around 60hrs (only single player). I am running GTX780s in SLI with a 2600K at 4.4ghz yet my frame rate is very choppy. I am running a fresh install of Windows 8 with the latest drivers for everything. I also have my OS on an SSD, and another SSD for my games. The games one is a Crucial 256GB. I have tried overclocking to no avail. This system only exists because of ARMA3, but it has allowed me to max out such games as Metro LL and Crysis 3. Here are my settings:

http://www.coflash.com/stuff/options01.jpg

http://www.coflash.com/stuff/options02.jpg

http://www.coflash.com/stuff/options03.jpg

(I have since disabled SSAO and a few other things... no difference)

I came from a single GTX580 and performance hasn't improved at all (apart from the fact I can run at 1440p as opposed to 1080p now). This seems VERY odd. Even if SLI isn't utilised, it seems poor for a single card like the GTX780.

I know "it's a Beta", but I also know it's a BI game (I've been playing since OFP, A2 still runs poorly as well) and that will probably have horrible performance well into its launch. I feel like the "It's an Alpha/Beta" etc excuse is going to be used until the "They'll patch it!" excuse becomes valid, so I was wondering if we could get some proper answers. There are times I run into single digit FPS. This sort of performance shouldn't even make it to the Beta stage.

I will mention it does seem fine when I am by myself or with a few squad mates... it's smooth as; as soon as you introduce some enemy AI or a helicopter then it goes to hell.

At the end of the day I'm just wondering what I can do to make the experience a little more fluid. It seems that no matter what I disable it still runs like crap. I am by no means an expert in all of these graphics options so any help is appreciated.

Thanks

Edited June 29, 2013 by Coflash

[devast8ndiscodave 10]

Disable Vsync ingame, force triplebuffer and vsync with d3doverrider.

[Fuse 1]

Are you sure it's your GPU that's the bottleneck? Most people reach a point where their GPU will not be fully utilized because the engine is bottlenecked at the CPU. This is why you see no change in performance from most of the settings; only a few (such as draw distance) directly hit the CPU.

That said, I've got a 2500k @4.8 and a GTX 570 and it sounds like I'm getting much better performance than you are. What missions are you playing?

[jumpinghubert 49]

Are you sure it's your GPU that's the bottleneck? Most people reach a point where their GPU will not be fully utilized because the engine is bottlenecked at the CPU. This is why you see no change in performance from most of the settings; only a few (such as draw distance) directly hit the CPU.

That said, I've got a 2500k @4.8 and a GTX 570 and it sounds like I'm getting much better performance than you are. What missions are you playing?

thats correct. To see the dependencies its useful to log cpu- and gpu-usage. Helpful to optimize the settings too.

[Insanatrix 0]

What you really need is a 2600k @ 10ghz to truly get the ArmA experience. Sarcasm aside, Most of the graphics options won't affect performance except for Shadow detail, Object detail, and View distance. Outside of that you're pretty much SOL and just have to deal with it, at least that's what I've been told.

[ric 1]

What you really need is a 2600k @ 10ghz to truly get the ArmA experience. Sarcasm aside, Most of the graphics options won't affect performance except for Shadow detail, Object detail, and View distance. Outside of that you're pretty much SOL and just have to deal with it, at least that's what I've been told.

if i got my cpu close to absolute zero i wonder how high i could over clock it :) ;)

[Hud Dorph 22]

I run with 2600k@4.4Ghz and a single gtx780 and get very smooth gameplay all over.

You could try install a3 on your other ssd.

[ZoneTrooper 10]

Dorph;2428514']I run with 2600k@4.4Ghz and a single gtx780 and get very smooth gameplay all over.

You could try install a3 on your other ssd.

Yeah everyone gets smooth FPS in singleplayer,try to play some round DOM,CTI,Wasteland in Multiplayer have fun with 30 FPS or less.Visit Magnon server its the only server where nearly all people have 40-60 fps on wasteland.

[Colonel-ONeill 11]

I know u said it mate this is in Beta only, but I give up to try achieve more FPS for the time being.

Regarding to the final game:

If my FPS will ever drop bellow 24 FPS in any circumstance than I will ask for a full refund and that's it for me as we are in the 21st century and these are the minimal requirements for any and all FPS game out there these days.

At the moment my rig is above the expected minimal hardware requirements so it's not up to us the fix the FPS problems.

be patients for the time being i think they will fix it, if not than we just have to accept it and react on it.

Edited June 30, 2013 by Colonel-ONeill

[pr0ph3tswe 1]

Yeah everyone gets smooth FPS in singleplayer,try to play some round DOM,CTI,Wasteland in Multiplayer have fun with 30 FPS or less.Visit Magnon server its the only server where nearly all people have 40-60 fps on wasteland.

i play on sa-matras wasteland version, runs very well, 40-60+ fps usually

not sure what else to say to op though, try to find a good server, and turn up all the gpu heavy settings, i can run shadows, particles and clouds maxed out, pip brings me to 30 fps even on low so i turn it off, other settings looks fine. i never ever drop to singel digits playing wasteland, on good servers i usually don't drop under 30 fps either unless mission has been up for ages

I know u said it mate this is in Beta only, but I give up to try achieve more FPS for the time being.

Regarding to the final game:

If my FPS will ever drop bellow 24 FPS in any circumstance than I will ask for a full refund and that's it for me as we are in the 21st century and these are the minimal requirements for any and all FPS game out there these days.

At the moment my rig is above the expected minimal hardware requirements so it's not up to us the fix the FPS problems.

be patients for the time being i think they will fix it, if not than we just have to expect it and react on it.

i agree to an extent, while it's not up to us to fix game related fps problems it's definitely up to us to do research to see what hardware runs better in what game :)

Edited June 30, 2013 by pr0ph3tSWE

[Colonel-ONeill 11]

i agree to an extent, while it's not up to us to fix game related fps problems it's definitely up to us to do research to see what hardware runs better in what game :)

Corsair PSU-850TX 850W

Corsair Cooling Hydro Series CH100

Gigabyte X58 UD3R r:1.6

Intel i7 920 D0 2.66Ghz

6GB Kingston HyperX Triple Channel RAM 2000Mhz

Gigabyte GTX 660Ti/2GB

OCZ RevoDrive 3 120Gb 5Gb/s

2x1TB Western Digital Black/RAID 0

HDD Seagate 3TB OEM

ACER GD245HQ/BenQ XL2420T

the only upgrade I would consider is a

TWO Intel hexacore processors running in tandem. Such a setup would equate to 12 physical cores and 24 CPU threads of computing power.

going all out, the SR-2 will accommodate 4-way SLI, up to 48GB of memory, USB 3.0, and SATA 6Gbps drives. Other features include 8-phase PWM, 8-channel audio, eSATA, a pair of GbE ports, and more.

and one badass system. ;)

or maybe it comes down to mobos and cpu`s and memory branches as u suggest it

[ric 1]

the only upgrade I would consider is a

TWO Intel hexacore processors running in tandem. Such a setup would equate to 12 physical cores and 24 CPU threads of computing power.

going all out, the SR-2 will accommodate 4-way SLI, up to 48GB of memory, USB 3.0, and SATA 6Gbps drives. Other features include 8-phase PWM, 8-channel audio, eSATA, a pair of GbE ports, and more.

and one badass system. ;)

your insane... :p

[WalkerDown 1]

Single 570, then two 570 SLI, then a 780, tried in combination with a 3.2ghz CPU and 3.8ghz CPU, at various screen resolution (up to 1600p) and with various gfx settings (from anything to min to everything almost maxed out). I've tried tenth of different online servers, including mine (I own three), barely noticed any fps variation, and it's incredible if you look at the different specs and all the other variables I've mixed in this months. I would have noticed that a core speed increasing would have ended into some more FPS (because of the engine problem with multi-core CPUs) .. but nothing ... the fps overall remained low: you start with some high fps (in the range of 85s).. then they start to oscillate (with 20 fps or lower), stuttering all over the place. I've read ppl talking about: low specs, cpu core speed, bad servers... anything, but none have proven to run this game "smoothly".

[Colonel-ONeill 11]

Single 570, then two 570 SLI, then a 780, tried in combination with a 3.2ghz CPU and 3.8ghz CPU, at various screen resolution (up to 1600p) and with various gfx settings (from anything to min to everything almost maxed out). I've tried tenth of different online servers, including mine (I own three), barely noticed any fps variation, and it's incredible if you look at the different specs and all the other variables I've mixed in this months. I would have noticed that a core speed increasing would have ended into some more FPS (because of the engine problem with multi-core CPUs) .. but nothing ... the fps overall remained low: you start with some high fps (in the range of 85s).. then they start to oscillate (with 20 fps or lower), stuttering all over the place. I've read ppl talking about: low specs, cpu core speed, bad servers... anything, but none have proven to run this game "smoothly".

yeah I have that funny feeling, this has nothing to do with is it is up to the developers to fix it :-)

[qbert 10]

This sounds like all software to me. Even on my peasant level 7850/AMD Phenom II x4 3.4Ghz the game runs smooth across the board (for the most part) at around 40-50FPS highs, 25-30 lows

Getting choppy FPS sounds like it could be view distance, but it sounds like you messed with your settings already.

Have you tried installing the DX9/DX10/DX11 drivers? I've noticed that having different configurations of DirectX can result in better/worse performance. Also the card you have is fairly new right? It could be possible that the drivers haven't been perfected.

[xXxatrush1987 10]

@ colonel-ONeil: with single 780gtx you can get decent fps according to this side:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Arma-3-PC-236876/Specials/ArmA-3-Beta-Test-Benchmarks-1076533/

text german but benchmarks in english, but they used an oced 4770k so this is quietly ideal.

if you can wait for ivybridge 2011 cpus, for gaming i would recommend a single cpu board optimised for ghz(i7 4960x@4.5ghz) and with hyper threading off + a single 780gtx oc. i hope your servers a dedicated machines, all with intel i5/7 cpus, because if you run dedi and client on the same machine the mobo bandwith is too slow, ending in stuttering at high fps. and all amd cpus are just by far too slow to host anything decend.

@ WalkerDown: as said before, sli support is just not there from nvidia so multi gpu stuttering is common. to support a gtx 780 you need at least i5/7(with ht off) at 4.5ghz+ fast ram(~2000mhz+) and a sata 6gb/s ssd.

to both, i run very smooth fps(no stuttering) with a i72700k(ht off ;) )@ 4.4ghz+ 7970GE+2133mhz ram+ samsung 830 ssd.

even online if the server is well hosted(over 30 fps) which is the most common bad performance cause, not to mention just bad programmed missions(wasteland/rp missions mostly)

[Colonel-ONeill 11]

@ colonel-ONeil: with single 780gtx you can get decent fps according to this side:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Arma-3-PC-236876/Specials/ArmA-3-Beta-Test-Benchmarks-1076533/

text german but benchmarks in english, but they used an oced 4770k so this is quietly ideal.

if you can wait for ivybridge 2011 cpus, for gaming i would recommend a single cpu board optimised for ghz(i7 4960x@4.5ghz) and with hyper threading off + a single 780gtx oc. i hope your servers a dedicated machines, all with intel i5/7 cpus, because if you run dedi and client on the same machine the mobo bandwith is too slow, ending in stuttering at high fps. and all amd cpus are just by far too slow to host anything decend.

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Arma-3-PC-236876/Specials/ArmA-3-Beta-Test-Benchmarks-1076533/

ArmA 3 beta in review: The benchmarks

For our measurements, we restrict ourselves to the ultra-details to 4x instead of 8x MSAA and leave downsampling disabled. As a second step, we use high quality settings, including FXAA - it flickers a little but complete while in motion, this type of smoothing costs only little power. Scene serves us as the infantry mission with a dense forest, which is also seen on the screenshots of the optical comparison.

With Ultra details, including 4x MSAA with FXAA and A2C only a Geforce GTX 780 comes on a green branch, the titanium is in front. AMD's Radeon HD 7970 GE follows at some distance and similar fast as the GeForce GTX 770 and GTX 680, followed by the regular HD 7970 and the HD 7950 Boost. After that shows the usual power structure, below a GTX 660 (Ti) makes the highest quality level not fun anymore. With high detail changes to the order anything for it doubles the frame rate by the bank - even a GTX 460 or Radeon HD 6870 still provide about 30 fps. The only oddity is too slow Geforce GTX 660, whose performance we currently can not explain.

I have a GTX 660 Ti wow?

[WalkerDown 1]

Sorry guys, but 25 is s*it .. i'm aiming for 60+ fps (and never drop about it) .. anything lower that this is not acceptable for top-end configurations, the problem atm is: no matter what configuration you have, there's no way to obtain such result online, even with a 5ghz CPU and 3 titans. There's even ppl that are used to play @120hz ... and you're talking about "I run smooth at 25fps" .. lol.. I think you don't know what 60 and 120fps is.

[teach 1]

Maybe I missed it but you do have a 64bit OS with at least 8GB ram with that beast of a PC correct? If not, theres your likely problem.

[grillob3 11]

Sorry guys, but 25 is s*it .. i'm aiming for 60+ fps (and never drop about it) .. anything lower that this is not acceptable for top-end configurations, the problem atm is: no matter what configuration you have, there's no way to obtain such result online, even with a 5ghz CPU and 3 titans. There's even ppl that are used to play @120hz ... and you're talking about "I run smooth at 25fps" .. lol.. I think you don't know what 60 and 120fps is.

+1 :)

[Leon86 13]

60 fps all the time in an online wasteland mission is currently not possible.

[Colonel-ONeill 11]

60 fps all the time in an online wasteland mission is currently not possible.

how the hack u get 60fps?

what is ur secret? lol

[pr0ph3tswe 1]

how the hack u get 60fps?

what is ur secret? lol

think you need to re-read what he posted :p