Arma 3 CPU vs RAM performance comparison 1600-2133= up to 15% FPS gain

[LSD_Timewarp82 21]

I use SLI myself so i can answer your question: ther is absolutley no performance gain with SLI in Arma 3. Other Games scale good with SLI. But Arma is for sure one of the games which "poo" on the used hardware, no matter what, frames wont rise until the Engine of the game will get some updates. I wouldnt buy SLI for Arma, for other Games it´s legit.

 

There doesnt exist an official SLI Profile, i for example use the SLI DX11 Bits of "Max Payne3", makes the game less stuttery when using SLI

 

And i would buy the 32Gb Ram, cause it would be 2 klicks in Bios for me to make the Ram run easy the 3000Mhz ^^

[LSD_Timewarp82 21]

i have tested arma 3 with 2x7870s (i had a second one laying around for some time)....and i definately had way more stuttering when i zoomend in than with one card. Since Arma 3 would certainly not challenge one 980ti, even in 4k i guess, i think you do'll better without the second card active. But you wouldn'd buy a second card for arma only i guess. You'll find out soon enought whether it runs smoothly with two cards.

 

Concerning the adativesync monitors. You are absolutely correct, freesync works above 40fps only at the moment, gysnc above 30. So its not really relevant for arma right now. If the technology improved fps above 20....then we might actually find it usefull for arma i think. 

 

You need to use the SLI DX11 Bits from Max Payne 3 to avoid this stuttering as i mentioned in my post

 

Edit: sorry for doubleposting ^^

[mac1 1]

lsd thanks for the advise - think I will go for SLI for the other games that use it - and anyway it can always be disabled when there is no game...

for the memory just to be clear the 3000 memory would or should give me the best performance? on the 32gb not sure it would be used by any games>?

[LSD_Timewarp82 21]

It´s good to have Ram (for the Future) who cares if Games will use it. Its good to know that Ram is available when needed, especially on Resolutions like 4K ;)

[R3vo 2654]

lsd thanks for the advise - think I will go for SLI for the other games that use it - and anyway it can always be disabled when there is no game...

for the memory just to be clear the 3000 memory would or should give me the best performance? on the 32gb not sure it would be used by any games>?

 

8 Gb is enough, 16 Gb is save for the future. If you do video editing, you would want 16 Gb +

[LSD_Timewarp82 21]

8 Gb is not enough when he wants to play in 4K... Some Games are eating RAM for breakfast when playing in 4K

[R3vo 2654]

Are you talking about VRAM or RAM?

I've never heard about RAM being important for 4k gaming, but I'm open minded to learn new things.

[LSD_Timewarp82 21]

I talk about vram actually ,sorry this misunderstanding :) It´s late, i should get sleep for a couple of hours ^^ (ich glaub da haben wir aneinander vorbeigeredet ^^)

[R3vo 2654]

Okay, I see. But still, how do you intend to get more than 8 Gbyte of VRAM? The only way would be to buy a Titan X which has 12Gbyte. ( Keep in mind that VRAM does not stack in SLI or Crossfire).

[Heinvonderwild 0]

i can run the game perfectly by using a gtx 550ti lol in the end i cant run ultra or high without going on the editor if i run Ultra or High on the editor i get 60 fps In multiplayer i get like 30 fps :(

[I give up 152]

( Keep in mind that VRAM does not stack in SLI or Crossfire).

False.

I have triple CrossfireX and I have available the VRAM of the 3 cards (which makes 12 GB of VRAM)

And Arma 3 can use it all, in ultra and in some situations can use around 10 GB of VRAM,

[R3vo 2654]

You're getting it wrong. You have 12Gbyte of VRAM, yes. But that doesn't mean every card has access to those 12 Gbyte. If you use 10 out of your 12 Gb, then each cards uses 3Gb of it's 4Gb. That's because every card needs to store the textures etc. for itself, because it can't access the VRAM of the other two cards.

 

If you still have doubts, you should definitely google some of those things.

 

With Dx12 however, stacking of VRAM will eventually maybe be possible, but we're still not there yet.

 

 

Edit: Googled a bit and found a video. This guy explains it very well.

 

[I give up 152]

You're getting it wrong. You have 12Gbyte of VRAM, yes. But that doesn't mean every card has access to those 12 Gbyte. If you use 10 out of your 12 Gb, then each cards uses 3Gb of it's 4Gb. That's because every card needs to store the textures etc. for itself, because it can't access the VRAM of the other two cards.

 

If you still have doubts, you should definitely google some of those things.

 

With Dx12 however, stacking of VRAM will eventually be possible, but we're still not there yet.

Whatt the hell are you saying? Are you just guessing or what?

You should follow your own advice (about Google) or you can get 3 cards and do it yourself (like me) instead of trusting in the awesome info provided by the wikipedia.

[xon2 102]

sorry bratwurste....ram does not stack up in sli/crossfire. I had a 7870 cf setup for testing purposes and i had only 2gb per card available. And theoretically speaking, why would vram stack in multigpu usage at the moment? Pracitally all applications us aternate frame rendering in sli/cf mode, hence each card needs the exact same textures etc in its own ram.

[mac1 1]

_{@brat - don't know a huge amount about this area but I am pretty sure vram doesn't stack bat the moment but R3 is right with DX12 it will be possible which should unleash the true potential of SLI.........}

 

_{@lsd thanks for your advise - but just to be clear by choices 16gb@3000mhz or 32gb@2666mhz was DDR4 memory for the PC (nothing to do with the gpu memory) - and from your comments I am guessing the higher the MHz  the better the performance (fps) I should get on Arma3? - please correct if I am wrong? - think the 4k monitor (60hz not 144hz) I will be using will have g-sync just wondering if this works well with arma3?}

[R3vo 2654]

"The fast the memory the more fps"

 

That is partially correct. The FPS increase becomes very subtle at higher Mhz.

 

From 1333Mhz to 1866Mhz, would most likely give a huge boost, going from 2666Mhz to 3000Mhz, probably not that much. But I think that was thoroughly discussed at the beginning of this thread.

[St. Jimmy 272]

reading this thread with interest as am just spec-ing up my new PC which will be based on a 6700 i7 - I have 2 questions as I will use to play ARMA3 as well as

a few other games:

 

 

1)My 2 choices for memory are below - assuming from the thread the 16gb 3000 memory should give me the better performance on ARMA3?

16GB (2x8GB) Corsair DDR4 Vengeance LPX Black, 3000MHz, CAS 15-17-17-35, 1.35V

32GB (2x16GB) Corsair DDR4 Vengeance LPX Black, 2666MHz, CAS 16-18-18-35, 1.2V

2)For the GPU will likely go for x2 980ti in SLI mainly because I will be using it with a 4k monitor - but just wondering if I will get much performance gain from the SLI in ARMA3 or if there is even an SLI profile for the game?

The 3000MHz is faster because its timings are also lower. The difference would be ~1fps.

 

 

What benchmarks say it's ~0,4fps per timing and ~0,5fps per 133MHz. So there's the guide for buying the right RAM.

 

Per timing example: From 17-17-17-37 to 15-15-15-35 gives 0,8fps. If the timings are like 15-17-17-35 then you can imagine or "round up" it's/to 16-16-16-36

Per MHz example: From 2400MHz to 2666MHz gives 1fps.

 

 

That "theory" applies in these benchmarks pretty well http://www.hardware.fr/articles/940-5/cpu-ddr4-vs-ddr3-pratique.html and also it shows that at least currently there's zero difference between DDR3 and DDR4 when they're on the same level.

 

Can't say anything for AMD guys. It's likely very different.

[LSD_Timewarp82 21]

The Performance gain in other Games is mostly higher, only Arma manage it to stay below 1 Fps improvement ^^

[I give up 152]

sorry bratwurste....ram does not stack up in sli/crossfire. I had a 7870 cf setup for testing purposes and i had only 2gb per card available. And theoretically speaking, why would vram stack in multigpu usage at the moment? Pracitally all applications us aternate frame rendering in sli/cf mode, hence each card needs the exact same textures etc in its own ram.

And how much you wanted to have per card? Are you saying that with SLI/Crossfire the second card should add more VRAM to first card or vice/versa? Should be like adding one more RAM module?

 

Also the stack definition (the one we see over the web) is completely wrong when applied at this subject. That's what I am saying. Look at nonsense threads over the web where people just do not have a clue about what their are saying.

SLI/Crossfire working principles are not supposed to stack (according to your definition of stack) VRAM or anything else and honestly dont even know why people talks about it or why should "stack".

 

When we combine multiple GPUs (obviously all the GPUs must have the same characteristics) they will operate in parallel with the workload being distributed equally by all of them, this with applications that have support (and profile) for it.

Means,that we have all combined VRAM available for use, being the usage distributed between the cards.

 

The same applies to clocks however the clocks subject is a bit different, if with combined VRAM we can use it all, with clocks is not possible to take full advantage of it. That's why when we compare performance between single and multiple GPUs, the second gives less than 50% of performance increase and the third less than 30%.

 

And btw, DX12 is not related with this subject simply because this is a matter of hardware architecture, consequently with DX12 nothing will change in these matters.

 

Now please, some one can be kind enough to explain what is "VRAM stack" or the purpose of it with SLI/Crossfire tech? 

[St. Jimmy 272]

The Performance gain in other Games is mostly higher, only Arma manage it to stay below 1 Fps improvement ^^

Actually in many other games the difference is closer to 0. Arma is one of the few games where the min. fps can be increased with better/faster RAM.

[LSD_Timewarp82 21]

Who cares. Arma performs like shit. Point.

[St. Jimmy 272]

Who cares. Arma performs like shit. Point.

Well if you don't care why even bother commenting then... -_-

[mac1 1]

_{little off topic - but someone has suggested a 5820 CPU (seems it can run quad channel memory) might offer better performance in ARMA3 than a 6700 (both would be oc'd to 4.6)}

_{anyone got any opinion or bench they would like to share?}

[St. Jimmy 272]

_{little off topic - but someone has suggested a 5820 CPU (seems it can run quad channel memory) might offer better performance in ARMA3 than a 6700 (both would be oc'd to 4.6)}

_{anyone got any opinion or bench they would like to share?}

Well if he could bench the 5820K and share the results with specs and settings, then we might get answer quicker. I thought the 5820K doesn't even compare with 4790K.

[mac1 1]

thanks for the reply st.jimmy - however the person giving the advice was the PC salesman so he couldn't run the bench himself - however he did direct me to the below bench not for games but for other applications - which the 5820 did ok for......

 

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1549?vs=1320

 

however from what I am reading the 6700 is on balance a little better in games "on average" than the 4790 and 5820 if its using fast ddr4 memory - although have not seen any benches tests particularly testing ARMA3 - although  he also pointed out that my current intended 6700 build would use all available 6700 pci (e) slots 20 I think which he didn't think was a good idea?(note the build has a m2 ssd and sli so there is not even room for a standalone sound card - although the asus hero motherboard seems to have an on board sound....