What I found about performance and I what I want to help fix it

[Game__On 10]

It wouldn't be such a problem even if this game could actually stress the cpu .

I mean if frame rate is falling with every little event, you could argue that it's because the cpu is in over it's head so to speak . But that is never the case ! CPU doesn't even get stressed, there's SO MUCH more power available in most computers.

So there are 2 BIG problems :

1) Frame rate drops with events, and does NOT come back when event is over.

2) Game is unable to use the resources that are available.

WHERE is the bottleneck ?

I'm honestly beginning to think that these problems will never get fixed and that these problems are just in the programming . This is NOT a "flamebait" by the way .

[Smurf 12]

The engine know they're dead or DayZ has took over the sauce too? :D

[kklownboy 43]

It wouldn't be such a problem even if this game could actually stress the cpu .

....

It stresses my CPU. And it stresses my GPU. How do you define "stress"? Hopefully not 100% usage. That would be fail. I see frames drop or rise when I OC, or UnderClock. I see 90%~ usage on one core at times, and alot of 70%, I also get good playable frames in SP, Editor. MP is a mixed bag, have to turn down the VD&ObjD allot, SASO and ATOC is off depending. But with the missions I usually play its more than playable with Ultra and 4x-8x AA. Depends allot on what Rez I play at to Stress my HW. Also played some missions that just suck for frames/performance. But you do understand, even with the late addition of the Campaign, they sell more copys to the SP crowd than the MP/PVP crowd. Which drives some different choices on improvements.

The RV engine has some very cool stuff relative to Cry2.3 or Frostbite that those engines can never do. EVER. And if you play enough you may just find out what those are. But I get it, if plays like crap for you, and all you can do is pick at "performance indicators" instead of finding some fun with the game. maybe its time to move on, and come back when its more to your liking. Cause all this is just noise, that doesnt help anything.

[roshnak 41]

If your CPU isn't running at 100%, then it is not being used as efficiently as possible, so yes, if your processor isn't running at or near 100%, then it is not being utilized to it's fullest potential. It would also be helpful if you defined "playable framerate" because that isn't the same thing for everyone. Some people are fine at 30 FPS, while some people get uncomfortable below 40 and almost everyone is fine with 60 or higher (although there are studies that show some people being able to detect flicker up to like 200 FPS).

You can't really say what Cryengine and Frostbite can never do. Just like BIS, those devs are capable of modifying their engines to suit their needs.

I also find it interesting that you are telling people to quit playing the game in a thread where people are posting constructive analysis of performance problems...

[James111333 10]

If your CPU isn't running at 100%, then it is not being used as efficiently as possible, so yes, if your processor isn't running at or near 100%, then it is not being utilized to it's fullest potential. It would also be helpful if you defined "playable framerate" because that isn't the same thing for everyone. Some people are fine at 30 FPS, while some people get uncomfortable below 40 and almost everyone is fine with 60 or higher (although there are studies that show some people being able to detect flicker up to like 200 FPS).

You can't really say what Cryengine and Frostbite can never do. Just like BIS, those devs are capable of modifying their engines to suit their needs.

I also find it interesting that you are telling people to quit playing the game in a thread where people are posting constructive analysis of performance problems...

What he said!

I would say that either one of the core components should be being stressed at 100% or the FPS should be hitting a pre defined level (ie 60) and the cpu or gpu usage throttled to reflect the unused hardware horsepower.

[nicolasroger 11]

Can we try to keep this on topic?

OP did some great tests and we even had a Dev reply to the topic. We should try to isolate the problem even more.

OP: Can you do a repro mission about what you said (FPS not fully recovering when the fight is over and bodies are deleted?)

[krazikilla 5]

Both :D

[NordKindchen 12]

NIce write up.

I expect the Devs to look into this.

[klamacz 448]

Devs are looking into this already, please keep the offtopic away.

[mamasan8 11]

These are just guesses/things to maybe check.

When bodies get deleted, does gear also get deleted?

Does any of that, bodies/gear end up below ground. We can't see them but they might be drawn still?

[klamacz 448]

These are just guesses/things to maybe check.

When bodies get deleted, does gear also get deleted?

Does any of that, bodies/gear end up below ground. We can't see them but they might be drawn still?

Nope, both body and it's gear are removed when body is deleted.

[nicolasroger 11]

I tried to do a simple repro mission to test what the OP was saying: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=201283727

It is just a simple mission where about 70 Ai move have a search and destroy waypoint. You can kill them with radio trigger alpha (0-0-1)

Then you can hide there body with Bravo radio trigger (0-0-2)

Initiale FPS was tested in editor because I don't know how to make them spawn dynamicly (abou 70 fps on my setting).

So at first the fps is about 34 FPS for me. Then I kill them using the trigger, it drops to 7FPS (for about 5 sec) while the ragdoll effects kick in. Then the FPS jumps back to about what it was when all the AI was alive and running (about 35 FPS). So, at least for my specs, the dead bodies use has much ressources then the alive AI.

I finaly end up activating radio trigger Bravo to hide all the bodies. I need to wait some seconds for them to sink completly into the ground, then my FPS jumps back up to 70 FPS (about what it was in the empty editor at the same spot).

So I can't totaly reproduce what the OP is saying. I can only confirm that bodies eat up as much ressource as alive AI for me. Maybe it is simply my graphic cards wich is having trouble rendering the bodies? I simply don't know. You can see my spec in my signature ( by the way, it is pretty much exactly the recommended spec for the game).

Edited December 6, 2013 by nicolasroger

[barakokula31 10]

You can see my spec in my signature.

Which you didn't show here.

[nicolasroger 11]

Well now I am surprised, it looks like editing the post deleted it. I hope you can see it under this post.

EDIT it still dissapeared!

oh well here it is:

GPU: GeForce GTX 650 ti 2 Gb

CPU: AMD Phenom II X4 940 at 3.0 GHz

Mobo: MSI k9n2 platinum

Memory: 4 Gb

Hard drive: SSD 120 Gb

[barakokula31 10]

Well now I am surprised, it looks like editing the post deleted it. I hope you can see it under this post.

EDIT it still dissapeared!

oh well here it is:

GPU: GeForce GTX 650 ti 2 Gb

CPU: AMD Phenom II X4 940 at 3.0 GHz

Mobo: MSI k9n2 platinum

Memory: 4 Gb

Hard drive: SSD 120 Gb

Do you have any startup parameters?

Is your OS 32 or 64 bit?

Is the mission on Altis or Stratis (can't test right now)?

[nicolasroger 11]

64 bit OS

I have no startup parameter, but I launch in window mod.

Mission is on Stratis for now

[barakokula31 10]

64 bit OS

I have no startup parameter, but I launch in window mod.

Mission is on Stratis for now

Oh, and I forgot the most important things, what are your settings and resolution?

[ratszo 17]

Do you have any startup parameters?

Is your OS 32 or 64 bit?

Is the mission on Altis or Stratis (can't test right now)?

Yeah, 4gig installed is lean.

On 32-bit isn't it: 3gb used, minus - os & running processes used ram, equals = total available ram?

[nicolasroger 11]

I play at 1440x900 (wich is why I play in window mode, so that the game doesn't look blury)

But the best way to see if it is hardware related is for other people with better rig to test it no?

[Furret 0]

If anyone is running the profiling tools Dr Hladik mentioned, could they possibly upload any output for the rest of us to view?

[mamasan8 11]

Yeah, 4gig installed is lean.

On 32-bit isn't it: 3gb used, minus - os & running processes used ram, equals = total available ram?

Windows uses 1 Gig minimum, more likely 1,5 Gigs of RAM.

Press Ctrl+Alt+Del, pick Task manager. Go to Performance-> Resource Monitor-> Memory if you want to see it.

Check the 'In Use'.

Btw, Firefox loves to eat memory. 300 megs is standard with 1 window open. Quite crazy in my book.

[Greenfist 1863]

Windows uses 1 Gig minimum, more likely 1,5 Gigs of RAM.

My Windows (x86) uses 700 mb with all the normal stuff running. Disabling everything not needed would probably lower it to 500. So 2,7GB available for Arma, which can't even use all of it, right?

[13islucky 10]

My Windows (x86) uses 700 mb with all the normal stuff running. Disabling everything not needed would probably lower it to 500. So 2,7GB available for Arma, which can't even use all of it, right?

It's strange that you have that, because my system has been using up to 4.3GB with all the other stuff running when playing ArmA. I've also been getting lots of warnings like 'close this application to save memory' and I've crashed for the first time since the beta.

[brightcandle 114]

In the Editor, single player character placed NW of Pythos looking South at this moment is 55 fps and the following trace as of todays dev branch (07/12/13) 17:30 CET:

http://pastebin.com/Hehvc0J8

Adding 80 AI only marginally decreases FPS in the same location and direct to 50 fps at this moment, AI has no behaviour added, just added 20 standard fireteam groups produces the following trace:

http://pastebin.com/ARdt00x6

I would love to capture the multiplayer scenarios, alas I can't get the community I am in to change to development for this purpose. I need a stable compatible build with profiling in built. The current development branch version wont connect to our game server so I can't profile those multiplayer games, but I am happy to if you can get me a stable compatible build with diag_captureFrame in it, just let me know how to get it.

Just as a check I also did the airfield check looking towards the terminal where I typically get 77 fps and I am getting 55 fps as well:

http://pastebin.com/wLY52AL8

So the profiling is having a significant impact on the baseline performance and obscuring the difference between the two scenarios, I suspect there are very few places I can get better than 60 fps on that build of code. So its only worth looking into the very low FPS scenarios like with the multiplayer scenarios so for that unfortunately I need a profiling stable build.

Edited December 7, 2013 by BrightCandle

[dr. hladik 231]

report: Dead bodies optimization is in progress.