NoPOW 59 Posted January 24, 2015 Altis/Stratis benchmarks show an avg. decrease of 10 FPS for the latest build (ceteris paribus). If this is indeed due to a new anti-piracy implementation, I'd say way to go to frustrate paying customers... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nikiforos 450 Posted January 24, 2015 (edited) @ Pd3 Yes I agree with Greenfist, revert to 1.36 and hope for a miracle or for a workaround in the meantime. Sometimes BIS feels like the Grinch who Stole Christmas and happiness from people Edited January 24, 2015 by Nikiforos Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pd3 25 Posted January 24, 2015 You mean updating the game? You can revert back to 1.36 if you don't mind the incompatibility with up-to-date servers. I was not aware, that's less disheartening then. You know, actually, I'm still doing an assessment, but I'm actually not seeing the anticipated reduction in performance that I thought was coming. In fact in general it seems as if performance is a bit more "stable", I was getting into the 60s with Fred's malloc and LPmanager but that would fluctuate greatly, and I mean to the point where I was like: "Hey where did all my FPS go". His optimizations were certainly better than default ARMA around the time I downloaded/installed them. However That was a couple updates ago for me now, and I'm noticing that performance is stable, I don't crack 60, but I also don't seem to suffer performance wise when things are getting a little more crazy in terms of on-screen/environment activity. Hell, Dragonfyre is actually working BETTER, and I haven't yet found any circumstance where it has performed worse than when I was running his memory allocator. So there's that, I actually think I will stick with this for the time being, I actually don't do much MP gaming, however I am enjoying the "stability" of performance as it seems to be at present. So, upon a little more testing, I am adopting a "wait and see, but this looks good" - attitude. Just, ARMA devs, please, if you do anything else to the game, don't make it run worse than this. Please. I can deal with this, but just don't update it and make it run worse. ---------- Post added at 09:52 ---------- Previous post was at 09:49 ---------- Also how exactly do I revert to a specific version, pardon my noobiness in that respect, I honestly wasn't even aware it was an option. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nikiforos 450 Posted January 24, 2015 (edited) steam - right click on Arma3 - Properties - Betas - Enter beta access code to unlock private betas and put this in : Arma3Legacy136 Above select the beta you like to opt into . Edited January 24, 2015 by Nikiforos Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pd3 25 Posted January 24, 2015 steam - right click on Arma3 - Properties - Betas - Enter beta access code to unlock private betas and put this in : Arma3Legacy136 Above select the beta you like to opt into . Thanks much. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rebelvg 281 Posted January 24, 2015 If I download the CFFexplorer and flip the switch in arma3.exe can I still play online without triggering BE or VAC? I'm interested in this too. What anti-cheat technology are you talking about? Is it about battle eye protected servers or about buffer overflow attacks or something like that? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Defunkt 431 Posted January 24, 2015 If I download the CFFexplorer and flip the switch in arma3.exe can I still play online without triggering BE or VAC? I'd be very surprised if you could as this would render the measure they've implemented completely pointless. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KeyCat 131 Posted January 25, 2015 (edited) You are right Defunkt, wouldn't be much meaning if you could! Tested some more last night and this time MP (TacBF) which I until now have been able to play pretty OK. Now with 1.38 I have 7-10 fps (i.e unplayable) while in firefigths and stuttering like nothing before. With 1.36 I had ~16-20 fps and no noticable stuttering in same scenario so approx a ~50% cut for me as well. Played around lowering settings etc. but no go so this means I'm "grounded" until a) this is fixed by BIS or b) I upgrade my machine :/ Of course I can not be 100% sure it's the lack of large pages + malloc alone causing this, it could be other changes in 1.38 but never the less - it sucks! My HW: E8500 C2D @ 4.3 GHz 6 GB RAM @ 1066 MHz GTX 980 with 4 GB RAM Windows 7 SP1 64-bit PS: I know my CPU is old and kind of "missfit" for the new GPU, a new one is inbound but not until ~fall-winter this year. /KC Edited January 25, 2015 by KeyCat Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pd3 25 Posted January 25, 2015 I thought my system was a bit on the old side for this game, it's unfortunate that you'll have to wait for an upgrade, painful I know. Mine's a quad core, so it's already on the old side, although it's a faster one I suppose, 980 black edition. I have 16 gigs of ram, and a crossfired 6970 setup. So I guess it's not "too" bad, but it's hardly bleeding edge anymore. I wouldn't rate it mid/high. Maybe mid range at best, as it's not even an i5. I can say that I was expecting poorer performance w/o the enhancements but I'm not seeing it. I'm wondering if one's computer can meet the basic performance budget that there are some benefits. It's sucky nonetheless for those who fall short, I know that feel. I'm no longer getting frames that are as-high, but performance seems generally more stable all around, which I can live with. The fact that Dragonfyre actually works without stuttering or delays is a miracle in of itself as it's script heavy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KeyCat 131 Posted January 25, 2015 (edited) IMO an update doesn't warrant a -50% decrease in performance, not saying it is -50% in every situation but it was in above scenario and 7-10 fps is unplayable for me even if I'm rather tolerant regarding fps - it's going in the wrong direction (for some). As said it is most likely something more than the LP+malloc change, hopefully a bug that they find and can fix. Heck even if my CPU is on the older side it has a pretty good clock at 4.3 GHz (which matter most in A3) and A3 doesn't use more than 2 cores most of the time if I read other threads about performance correctly. It uses max ~2.5 GB RAM so 6 GB is plenty for OS+A3 and the GPU is one of the fastest one you can buy today... PS: Reverting back to 1.36 is really not an option for me since the MP server I play on runs 1.38. I will try on another server tonight with similar scenario and similar number of people connected and see if it's the same. /KC Edited January 25, 2015 by KeyCat Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Horus 83 Posted January 25, 2015 (edited) ...My HW: E8500 C2D @ 4.3 GHz 6 GB RAM @ 1066 MHz GTX 980 with 4 GB RAM Windows 7 SP1 64-bit PS: I know my CPU is old and kind of "missfit" for the new GPU, a new one is inbound but not until ~fall-winter this year. /KC Before that, why not low-cost upgrade to quad core just to help that GPU :) Edited January 25, 2015 by Horus Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KeyCat 131 Posted January 25, 2015 (edited) Before that, why not upgrade to quad core just to help that GPU :) That was an option I considered when A3 beta was released but I upgraded from an even worse C2D to a E8500 since I could OC it quite a bit higher than a Quad and clock is king in A3, or at least it was ;) There are many variables to consider so lets wait and see if I'm the only one experiencing it or maybe it's a bug only affecting us with only 2 cores? /KC Edited January 25, 2015 by KeyCat Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Horus 83 Posted January 25, 2015 Your GPU and game will "see" big difference with that Xeon at @4Ghz :bounce3: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KeyCat 131 Posted January 25, 2015 LOL - did not noticed it was a Xeon but then we have another problem, my MB does not support it :) Anyway, lets try to slide back OT. /KC Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Horus 83 Posted January 25, 2015 (edited) That only depends on your MB chipset. Edited January 25, 2015 by Horus Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MavericK96 0 Posted January 25, 2015 Yep, had to revert this back, otherwise my game wouldn't even start after the latest update. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KeyCat 131 Posted January 26, 2015 @Maverik: Did you try reverting the registry key to 0? /KC Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
St. Jimmy 272 Posted January 26, 2015 @Maverik: Did you try reverting the registry key to 0?/KC That's what he said that he needed to revert the tweak. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KeyCat 131 Posted January 26, 2015 Ahh my bad and sorry for me being dense... seems to happen more often now with age :) /KC Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tonci87 163 Posted January 26, 2015 I don´t get why Arma 3 is running so incredibly bad for me, with or without registry tweak. In the empty editor I get something above 50 FPS, so it can´t be because of my GPU(wich is a beefed up HD5850, so not the newest thing), but slap in a few AI having a firefight and I´m glad if my FPS manages to stay above 30. That would make you believe that my CPU is weak or something, but I´m running a i7-2600k at 4,3GHz so it can´t be that either.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nikiforos 450 Posted January 26, 2015 I don´t get why Arma 3 is running so incredibly bad for me, with or without registry tweak.In the empty editor I get something above 50 FPS, so it can´t be because of my GPU(wich is a beefed up HD5850, so not the newest thing), but slap in a few AI having a firefight and I´m glad if my FPS manages to stay above 30. That would make you believe that my CPU is weak or something, but I´m running a i7-2600k at 4,3GHz so it can´t be that either.... I guess it's something with your settings . I can run the game much better and your CPU is actually better than mine. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MavericK96 0 Posted January 26, 2015 @Maverik: Did you try reverting the registry key to 0?/KC Yeah, sorry for not being clear. I actually just removed the entire arma3.exe entry (since I had to add it in the first place for the tweak), which has essentially the same effect as setting the key to zero. Just wanted to post in case anyone else was having the same problem after the 1.38 update. It took me a bit of digging to figure out why the game wouldn't even load. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DieSvP 10 Posted January 30, 2015 ... if you really need ASLR for your game (i doubt that), just make your own ASLR ...Write a little loader, that loads your binary at a random address, aligned to a large page boundary (VirtualAlloc with MEM_LARGE_PAGES), and integrate this in your already existing launcher. This way it would work with any OS including 8.1, 10 ... But this is a bit harder then it sounds first, so probably not really an option for BI. Ok BI are you working on this? Im checking this thread daily and it is very silent here. I don't have much problems with this game (maybe because of windows 8.1 and a 50% still works?) but my friends on windows 7 want the tweak working for them as it really makes a difference. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nikiforos 450 Posted January 31, 2015 I'm afraid it's a lost battle. Fred41 actually bringed me back to Arma 3 with this tweak and I was able to enjoy the game again. I guess he is dissapointed with BI and I understand if he turns his back on the game. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KeyCat 131 Posted January 31, 2015 I'm also hoping we somehow get large pages back, it helped me get some more frames in MP. /KC Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
