When will the nVidia Arma 3 optimized drivers come?

[bangtail 0]

Huh? I said "Your first sentence said:" right before quoting you. I know you said that. That was my point. You quoted him directly, and then insinuated that he held the belief that the game must run at 100% usage, when he made no such claim in the text you quoted.

Ok, it wasn't clear to me what you meant so thanks for clarifying that.

Cpu usage is around... 20-25% ... And I'm talking about the whole cpu usage...

I quoted what he said which directly pertains to his 'beliefs' concerning CPU usage. ^^

I'm going to go ahead and put you on ignore so as to end this unnecessary exchange but I do hope you get the game working to your satisfaction.

Edited September 26, 2013 by BangTail

[tonygrunt 10]

Concerning CPU usage, you should measure with per core usage and not by total. With HT CPUs the extra virtual cores are never used by Arma 3 so the best you would expect for maximum total CPU usage is 50% and that's with running all cores (6 in i3930k) at 100% which is never going to happen.

So for your 20-25% total CPU usage if you are running with HT it translates to 40-50% CPU usage.

Also you can't just always throw extra cores to solve a problem, don't expect to just throw 1 or 2 Xeon E5-2697 v2 12 cores/24 threads CPUs and scale accordingly.

[ramius86 13]

Ok, this discussion is uselless as I think ;) Too many people that don't know each own system and haven't seen the data collected through sysproc and others tools about the arma 3' usage that didn't show nothing about this hw bottleneck ( not in cpu, not in gpu, not in ram, not in fsb, not in pcie, not in transfer data overall usage, simply nowhere ).

Btw someone simply ignore my example about Headless Client ( released less than 1 year ago ) , why?

Hey wait, if my hw is bottlenecked by arma ( and is so really heavy used ) how it's possible I can EVEN launch another instance that work togheter with the main process to process AI data and other stuff ( and still remain a LOT of hw not used ) that will gain fps and run the game smoother ?!?

How it's possible?

Hey, maybe, something wrong in your theory :rolleyes:

Hell, A3 is by no means perfect, but as I said to you previously, deal with it or move on (it will improve as the patches roll out).

There's more space for tweak fixes and optimizations than you think , let's only wait and don't always say "hw bottleneck" please!

What I said some posts before yours? :confused:

Cheers

[clydefrog 3]

Right now H/W is behind the curve for Altis, relative to 1080p/60fps minimum de jour...

So you're saying that the game is fine and it's just hardware isn't good enough for it yet? Very funny. Arma 3's engine can't make proper use of current hardware so what makes you think it will utilise future hardware properly. So we need better hardware? What like CPU's with even more cores that Arma has no use for? The problem isn't that hardware isn't good enough, the problem is the game isn't using it to its potential.

I also don't remember them putting "massively overclocked CPU and GPU that don't even exist yet" in the recommended system specs, somebody correct me on that if I'm wrong .

Edited September 26, 2013 by clydefrog

[bangtail 0]

Ok, this discussion is uselless as I think ;) Too many people that don't know each own system and haven't seen the data collected through sysproc and others tools about the arma 3' usage that didn't show nothing about this hw bottleneck ( not in cpu, not in gpu, not in ram, not in fsb, not in pcie, not in transfer data overall usage, simply nowhere ).

Btw someone simply ignore my example about Headless Client ( released less than 1 year ago ) , why?

Hey wait, if my hw is bottlenecked by arma ( and is so really heavy used ) how it's possible I can EVEN launch another instance that work togheter with the main process to process AI data and other stuff ( and still remain a LOT of hw not used ) that will gain fps and run the game smoother ?!?

How it's possible?

Hey, maybe, something wrong in your theory :rolleyes:

What I said some posts before yours? :confused:

Cheers

Of course the there is always room for optimizations, but SLI works fine (as it has done in every OFP/ArmA title).

Secondly, I never said there wouldn't be improvements, but I wouldn't count on the 'night and day' differences you seem to be expecting based (erroneously) on CPU/GPU usage.

And since you conveniently ignored it, I quoted it for you.

I agreed with you twice that there was room for, and would be, optimizations, what I didn't agree with was your assessment of CPU/GPU usage pertaining directly to performance in A3 (which you reiterated again in your quoted text FTR).

As an aside, I don't see what any of this has to do with the stated subject of this thread, so lets try to get back on topic :)

Edited September 26, 2013 by BangTail

[ramius86 13]

I'm only more positive about GPU/cpu usage cuz I saw the big difference in the server'side ( and also when they switched to multi (bi) core utilize ) . Imagine only if in a future they could merge up more thrads/core usage in one istance ( I repeat : headless client ) also for client side.. There's space available for optimizations in updated systems ( hw )

[Enrico 1]

Hi!

I was following this Thread from the frist page and i would like spend just a few words about it.

When i buy something, and it doesn't work very well,for example a TV,i must not explain, to the manufacturing production brand, how to fix it.

That's their problem and their profession .... not mine.

I think that it's sufficient to say where is the fault, or the problem.....in this case whit ArmA III,is consolidated a poor optimization engine....dejà vù?:o

I am happy then the folks can explain so many things about how work the CPU--GPU--SSD--in this game,and this is very interesting, because,be informed is always a good thing,but to teach how should make the them job,, or even worse,to use words too much.....aggressive...it's not the right way,not for me!

As a customer i wont a game, playable, to be able to have fun time without getting angry when i am playing,species in MP !!..This seems to me a very reasonable request!..over which a just right!

I am ready also to invest money for upgrade my PC,no problems about it,but in this moment, that's not the solution...so!!

Like so many Fans here i follow BIS from 2001...and i am aware of the problems about this title involves...but accepting it to normal routine like a blind fan...it's another thing!!

I am sure that the Bhoemia staff they are working hard about it!..and i will wait a termination patch, in a reasonable time!...not after 4-5 months..of course!!..otherwise i will be forced to play with ArmA II OA+ACE+ACRE...but it would be a shame ... as well as a disappointment!!

...that's all!

**..Somebody here say that ...( after all they work for money, as we all do )...correct!...for us it's a game, and we paid for it, for them it's a business...and they live whit it!!..the one can't do without the other!!....especially a Software House!

This answer by hgfdsa to the Developer Maruk explain better my opinion and,,,i agree 100%.

I apreciate that you are taking the time to explain the situation.

This however is irrelevant for the customers. The fact is that the game is running very poorly on many (if not majority) of PCs. We can all explain why and why not or how the game is what it is but the end user is simply disappointed with the product (in the performance term) and that is just not good enough.

The other fact is that it has been an ongoing trend with the ARMA series and hasn't been fixed. This again is not good enough.

I really like Arma 3 and it had/has much potential but this is simply something i personally can't tolerate as a customer. Nor should you as a developer.

Speaking clearly and direct does not mean to be rude or impolite.

Regards

Edited October 14, 2013 by Enrico