FPS worse after latest stable update - BIS seriously why_

[R0adki11 3949]

Obviously you don't expect every person with issues to go post about in the forums. If you look at the community hub, reviews, comments, videos, you will see a lot of complaints about performance (especially MP)

Personally in my experience i have never found any issue with MP. Last night i was getting 60 FPS in a MP mission with 10 vs 10. Perfectly playable and no issues, vehicles and all sorts of weapons were been used.

[MavericK96 0]

I apologize the hostility, I've had a bad day.

You actually quoted the post with my hardware, here, and once again, I'm not saying Arma runs as good as it could(should), but I'm getting a feel that many of the people who have problems with it, either don't know how to properly maintain their system or have unrealistic expectations on how Arma should run in their machine, or both.

About visuals, Crysis and Metro sure are masterpieces of atmospheric scenes and take full advantage of their engines what comes to eye candy, yet Armas realism is the thing that pleases me most of the trio, it's just so real.

Although, when something explodes in Arma I tend to look the other way because yea, yuck.

Well, the fact that Arma runs around 50fps with my setting sure surprised me, I would've never thought it'd run so good with a rig this old.

I define fine so that the game pleases my eyes and runs smooth enough to be able to aim and shoot properly.

Fair enough. :) Seeing your specs, though, it all makes sense...I am willing to bet that the sole reason you are getting that framerate is due to that fact that you are overclocked to 4.7 Ghz, which is not easily achievable for most processors. Because ArmA uses multicore/multithreading so poorly, having a massive clock speed like that is the only thing that actually improves performance. However, as I said, that's not really doable for a lot of us. The industry is going towards more cores rather than faster clock speeds, and as such so have most other game developers. ArmA is getting left in the dust in this respect...that's kind of where I'm coming from.

I personally don't think it's unrealistic to run ArmA 3 at 60 FPS with high/ultra settings (VD at a reasonable level of course) on a high-end machine, if in fact multicore utilization was better.

For instance, I tend to run at 1920x1080, most things Very High or Ultra but things like Terrain and (I believe) Objects turned down, at around 3000 VD/2000 Object VD. I regularly get dips into the low 20s in MP missions with only 10-12 people, and really not a ton of AI. Turning down settings (other than making VD ridiculously low, like 1000 or less) has any real effect on performance. I can have AA maxed, everything on Ultra, and I will get the same performance as with everything on Low and no AA. That, to me, indicates a large problem with the engine. Even in ArmA 2, with clearly inferior graphics, I get the same issues - low performance, low CPU/GPU utilization for no real reason, and extremely poor core load balancing (75% load on first core, 25% or less on other cores). And this is at almost 4 GHz, which a lot of people aren't even running. My processor is also fairly dated, but I am able to max out games like Metro: LL and Crysis 3 and get better performance than ArmA 3, because those games are utilizing all of my cores 100% as well as my GPU.

Edited November 18, 2013 by MavericK96

[dnk 13]

To Mister Andry, I can only say that my point on that matter has been made by now as well as can be made.

Do note my tone herein to be one of civility and pleasantness, after a quite delectable dinner of turkey and bacon.

NEWSFLASH: Calling someone out on their BS is now considered Animosity, more at 11.

Seriously, how is it animosity to point out the flaw in logic?

I will hold up the mirror only...

"Hey our engine is crap"

"naive masses"

"That whole statement is so stupid"

"It's also stupid"

I'm not sure what to call this other than "animosity", by the definition of:

.......ill will or resentment tending toward active hostility : an antagonistic attitude

And I do not see, nor have ever claimed, a "conspiracy to destroy BI". What I do see are many individuals acting similarly, out of their own flawed reasoning and expectations.

[nikiforos 450]

New patch update - Same or slightly worse performance ... Excellent BIS:beeeers:

Maybe they will optimize sometime in the near "future"

Edited November 20, 2013 by Nikiforos

[nicolasroger 11]

I didn't saw any degradation of performance at all. No noticeable gain in FPS too. I just don't see where the problem is right now?

This patch is great.

[nikiforos 450]

Well I said same or slightly worse performance . Altis benchmark gives me 2 fps less than before.

[MavericK96 0]

I gotta say, I like that Steam makes it easier, but I miss the old way of doing beta patches...at least then, you could switch between betas for benchmarking/testing purposes. As is, unless you extensively test the build essentially every day, the next day performance could change drastically and you wouldn't be able to go back and verify your findings against the previous build.

[nikiforos 450]

I can also confirm the micro freezes that you mentioned. Same performance though as before.

[ramius86 13]

On stratis my gpus are working over 90% , almost 98-99% both. On altis 40-50% both. Dont know exactly if this or previo is update but now on stratis ( dont play this much ) I got more than 100 fps with all video settings at max, altis always 30-40 max . Before on stratis ( dont know if 1.04 or this ) I was around 60-70 fps. Not bad

[nabbl 10]

No real difference on Altis...

Couldn't test Stratis though.

[nikiforos 450]

What a joke BIS , I get worse performance with the latest patch. Instead of improving and optimizing the game it get worse.

[krazikilla 5]

What a joke BIS , I get worse performance with the latest patch. Instead of improving and optimizing the game it get worse.

Same.

Since the last patch it got pretty unplayable for me. With todays patch it got unplayable :)

[2fast4u 10]

After todays patch fps slightly increased for me, even in multiplayer ;]

[Dwarden 1126]

not all performance changes are in stable yet, some are only in 1.09 DEV branch

+ new performance 1.08 server binary is already used on our stress test servers and by quite some admins ...

so if you have blazing FPS on those servers you can blame me later

[Drakenof 11]

Terrible performance, like always. With this patch or another.

I wonder how people with 3K$ computers feel when this game runs like shit no matter what they do.

War simulator, they said. It's funny, since the most you can simulate out of this game, without ending at 23 FPS, is 30v30 skirmishes. In multiplayer. With a good server, of course, otherwise it's even worse.

Sometimes i feel scammed with A3 but then i realize that BI, just like me, don't really know what they're doing. And i just end up laughing in despair.

Edited December 11, 2013 by Drakenof

[nikiforos 450]

Dwarden I respect you and your company and I'm a hardcore fan but please do something here. I would also like to make it clear that I always talk about single player performance and not multiplayer.

The latest two stable patches decreased performance in editor by 5-7 FPS. Im not talking rubbish I always compare FPS on the same spots on Stratis and on Altis.

Edited December 11, 2013 by Nikiforos

[ratszo 17]

Tried my benchmark under load..., no change in frames +/-.

Found 'hang time' spawning in quicker --very noticeable in MP.

But i don't have a ssd.

[bruhmis 10]

I now have roughly 300% worse performance than before after the latest update, and this is the fourth time in a row that this has happened. it's not the actual update contents that are causing it, the process of updating just breaks my game every single time. I'm so sick of only being able to play the game 30% of the time and constantly having to spend hours upon hours figuring out what BIS has fucked up this time. for the amount of time between updates you'd think they'd be able to avoid this on stable build but every time without fail, broken game is the result. I'm currently getting 20 FPS in single player on medium settings, 50 FPS on the absolute lowest including sampling at 50% and shadows off. why does this keep happening

[nuxil 2]

i agree that the fps isnt the best in this game. but claiming its getting worse by each update it just trolling.

i can clearly see fps improvments done the last updates.

time to look at your hardware for issues instead , since you where able to mesure that its gotten 300% worse.

[Vigil Vindex 64]

What I don't understand is how BIS can work on Arma 3 and not notice the performance issues. What happens day to day, do people just ignore it? Are they fine with it? Or do they actually think the performance is fine? What specs are they running? There is no details at all, all just general stone walling and PR rhetoric. We need facts and figures, specifications and details, from BIS' end. I am getting bored of feeling like a Q&A tester that pays to work on finding bugs and problems with the game when I should be playing and having fun.

[bruhmis 10]

i agree that the fps isnt the best in this game. but claiming its getting worse by each update it just trolling.

i can clearly see fps improvments done the last updates.

time to look at your hardware for issues instead , since you where able to mesure that its gotten 300% worse.

yes, because obviously my CPU has a built in module that monitor's when arma 3 updates then purposely downgrades itself for that specific game every time. I don't even understand how you can think your logic makes sense.

[ratszo 17]

A 300% decrease is less than credible.

Maybe we can help you improve performance if you post settings and specs.

I'm 110% sure of that.

[bruhmis 10]

A 300% decrease is less than credible.

Maybe we can help you improve performance if you post settings and specs.

I'm 110% sure of that.

I get 50 FPS and under on the absolute lowest settings including sampling at 50% and shadows off, compared to solid 60 FPS near max settings before the update broke the game. 60+ FPS maxed to 50 and lower at settings that make the game look like an early alpha of half life 1 is indeed approximately 300% worse. if there was any possibility of my specs being related to updates breaking the game I would post them, though there clearly isn't and historically the ARMA community blames specs for literally everything including problems hardware cannot possibly be related to.

[ratszo 17]

I get 50 FPS and under on the absolute lowest settings including sampling at 50% and shadows off, compared to solid 60 FPS near max settings before the update broke the game. 60+ FPS maxed to 50 and lower at settings that make the game look like an early alpha of half life 1 is indeed approximately 300% worse. if there was any possibility of my specs being related to updates breaking the game I would post them, though there clearly isn't and historically the ARMA community blames specs for literally everything including problems hardware cannot possibly be related to.

Fair enough.

For troubleshooting, try some easy thing to do:

-"Verify cache" thru Steam.

-A full defrag. and restart.

Also can look at the Feedback tracker to add a bug report or make a new report:

http://feedback.arma3.com/view_all_bug_page.php

Hope someone else has a better idea, good luck.

[nuxil 2]

yes, because obviously my CPU has a built in module that monitor's when arma 3 updates then purposely downgrades itself for that specific game every time. I don't even understand how you can think your logic makes sense.

my logic? what the **** are you babbling about.

you are comeing in here and claiming that the game on your pc has a 300% decrease in performance over the last updates without providing a single evidence.

no performance logs etc. you are just making up random number.