No real FPS difference between LOW and ULTRA

[sancron 32]

Hello,

since i was do some tests with my Video Settings, i found maybe a bug? My PC Specs are

AMD Phenom II x6 1090T

AMD Radeon R9 270X Windforce X3 OC

16 GB DDR3 1333 RAM

And when i run the Test, Arma says i am able to play at Ultra, but i only have arround 20 - 28 FPS but when i Set to LOW i have 22 - 30 FPS. Is this a Bad joke? For me, there is no real difference between LOW and ULTRA Settings. So no real FPS Increase or decrease. So did i really need to buy me a nVidia+Intel Setup to Play Arma 3 with more then 30 FPS.

[warlord554 2065]

What's your view distance set at? Do you have a A3 game profile setup in your GPU settings, or is this all just using the game video settings? Had similiar things happen, my gpu software was overriding the game settings

[sancron 32]

I only use the ingame Settings, the Viewdistance is at 2000 and the Objects are on 1400. I don't have any special Setup on my Driver for the Game, all is set to Use Game Settings.

[opendome 91]

[oldbear 390]

@ sancron : In Arma3, with some over simplification, FPS are a CPU job and video quality a GPU job.

So to get the highest FPS rate you must get the most effective CPU, Arma3 wise, meaning probably a quad core CPU able to do an exceptional job on one core and that not the case of the AMD Phenom II x6 1090T.

Have a look at CPU hierarchy Real Virtuality Engine wise as revealed in this benchmark -in this caseArma2:OA- from Hardware.fr "Intel Core i7-4770K et i5-4670K review"

The R9 270X is a nice graphic card, just at the level allowing "Ultra" settings. I know, somewhere near me a MSI R7870 Hawk is running Arma3 that way.

So setting down the graphic settings with your rig is not a right move because it's mainly counter-productive, you will gain no FPS, get bad graphic quality and perhaps stress a bit more your CPU having to do some extra job such as shadows render.

I will suggest some ways so you can get a better game experience.

- let the "autodetect" do it's job for "Quality" settings

- disable Vsync in "Display" section

- use HardOCP recipe for AA&PP : "... best AA combo in this game, FXAA Ultra + 2X/4X or 8X FSAA and you will get the best texture quality, no blurring, crisp textures, and well anti-aliased objects and vegetation."

- play with the Visibility cursor. The video Overall Visibility setting is the only one you have to play with in VIDEO OPTION > GENERAL.

It has the highest effect on FPS, so you can tweak the settings between 3800 and 2000m.

To answer you last question "... did i really need to buy me a nVidia+Intel Setup to Play Arma 3 with more then 30 FPS."?

I have build an experimental rig base upon "i3-4130/HD 7770" in order to have my own opinion about Haswell performances. With such a rig I can play on "High" visibility 2500m stable over 30 FPS in Single player and in the 25/35 FPS range in MP on our Clan dedicated server.

So the future, is probably an Intel based setup ... no need to rush for NVidia!

I believe it will be interesting to have a look at upcoming game related Intel products.

[Th4d 10]

@ sancron : In Arma3, with some over simplification, FPS are a CPU job and video quality a GPU job.

So to get the highest FPS rate you must get the most effective CPU, Arma3 wise, meaning probably a quad core CPU able to do an exceptional job on one core and that not the case of the AMD Phenom II x6 1090T.

Have a look at CPU hierarchy Real Virtuality Engine wise as revealed in this benchmark -in this caseArma2:OA- from Hardware.fr "Intel Core i7-4770K et i5-4670K review"

http://www.armedassault.info/ftp/pics/news/pics1/Arma2-OA_i7-4770K_i5-4670K_90.jpg

The R9 270X is a nice graphic card, just at the level allowing "Ultra" settings. I know, somewhere near me a MSI R7870 Hawk is running Arma3 that way.

So setting down the graphic settings with your rig is not a right move because it's mainly counter-productive, you will gain no FPS, get bad graphic quality and perhaps stress a bit more your CPU having to do some extra job such as shadows render.

I will suggest some ways so you can get a better game experience.

- let the "autodetect" do it's job for "Quality" settings

- disable Vsync in "Display" section

- use HardOCP recipe for AA&PP : "... best AA combo in this game, FXAA Ultra + 2X/4X or 8X FSAA and you will get the best texture quality, no blurring, crisp textures, and well anti-aliased objects and vegetation."

- play with the Visibility cursor. The video Overall Visibility setting is the only one you have to play with in VIDEO OPTION > GENERAL.

It has the highest effect on FPS, so you can tweak the settings between 3800 and 2000m.

To answer you last question "... did i really need to buy me a nVidia+Intel Setup to Play Arma 3 with more then 30 FPS."?

I have build an experimental rig base upon "i3-4130/HD 7770" in order to have my own opinion about Haswell performances. With such a rig I can play on "High" visibility 2500m stable over 30 FPS in Single player and in the 25/35 FPS range in MP on our Clan dedicated server.

So the future, is probably an Intel based setup ... no need to rush for NVidia!

I believe it will be interesting to have a look at upcoming game related Intel products.

Dual cores as good as 8 cores cpu´s, truly shows how bad the multithreading is.

[oldbear 390]

@ Th4d : the bench shows that some CPUs are better than others for some tasks.

It can also revealed how much AMD has failed with it's so called 8 cores Bulldozer CPU ...

I am unable to enjoy MP with dual core [2 cores - 2MB L2 cache] Athlon II x2 250 @ 3.0 GHz but I enjoy MP fully with dual core [2 cores /4 threads - 512KB L2 cache - 3MB L3 cache ] i3-4130 @ 3.4 GHz, so I think that the game is taking benefice from 4 threads use and from other features such as CPU speed, L3 cache ...

[sancron 32]

Thanks i will test something. Personally i am a Fan of AMD/AMD Setup (Not a Fanboy that says AMD is the Way). Sometimes it's a question about how much it costs. I was show on my Hardware-Dealer and for a i7-4770K + Mainboard i need to pay arround 400 Euro. But i want to play Arma 3 smooth like Arma 2. I will try your Tips.

[pr0ph3tswe 1]

Thanks i will test something. Personally i am a Fan of AMD/AMD Setup (Not a Fanboy that says AMD is the Way). Sometimes it's a question about how much it costs. I was show on my Hardware-Dealer and for a i7-4770K + Mainboard i need to pay arround 400 Euro. But i want to play Arma 3 smooth like Arma 2. I will try your Tips.

you don't need a 4770k to play arma fine though, you can get away fine with a used 2500k + mobo for example, or any i5 sandybridge or later

[nikiforos 450]

Yes I have 2500k and I can run the game at the same level as people with 4770k with some overclocking.

[sancron 32]

since i pay only 10 Euro more for a i7 4770k i buy these. I only buy only one time, for a long time. And i don't buy used, i only buy new, snce i have my 3 year guarntee on these Products.

[Sneakson 1]

Thanks i will test something. Personally i am a Fan of AMD/AMD Setup (Not a Fanboy that says AMD is the Way). Sometimes it's a question about how much it costs. I was show on my Hardware-Dealer and for a i7-4770K + Mainboard i need to pay arround 400 Euro. But i want to play Arma 3 smooth like Arma 2. I will try your Tips.

Buy a 4670K instead. 4670K is 4770K without hyper-threading and hyper-threading is mostly useless for gaming and sometimes even make games slower.

Someone showed a 4770K to be somewhat better in a 4670K somewhere but I've tested disabling HT on my 4770K myself and strongly doubt there's a difference.

A 4670K + Z87 mobo should cost about €330 +/-.

[sancron 32]

Ok thanks for the hint, but i use the PC also for some Video and 3D Rendering, so HT is a nice Option. Personally i know that most games don't use HT Feature. But some Programs i use, support these features. So when i need to buy a Intel, i take a i7 to get the full range of features. That's the same, why i was buy a Phenom instead of a Athlon a few years ago.

[Instynct 1]

Don't buy an i7 4770k just for this game.

I still get 20 fps drops in multiplayer.

[Sneakson 1]

Don't buy an i7 4770k just for this game.

I still get 20 fps drops in multiplayer.

Hopefully that will get better eventually. Devs are on it.