lordprimate 159 Posted November 22, 2014 (edited) Hello BIs forums, I just upgraded my Mobo and CPU to an AMD9590 and Asus crosshairv formula z .. this coupled with a water cooler and 2x Sapphire 7950HD's.. I saw an increase of about 10 fps average. coming from an FX6100 i was pretty bummed at the performance of the 9590.. but that is not the point of this thread. I know intel has better single core perf.. so lets say OFF that topic... the following is the real meat of this post.... I have been doing some tests with my video cards.. as they are very open to overclock, i have downloaded MSI Afterburner. I created some profiles for easy switching between an OC profile's and default. I started my testing in AC:U(Assassin's Creed:Unity). from base to my highest over clock setting i saw and increase of an average of 10-15 fps. and a nice stable FPS at that.. so i moved on to arma.. Same profiles just different game... HERES THE REAL KICKER.... I didnt see ANY difference in performance with any over clock profiles...... ARMA performed the EXACT same on all three over clock settings... THE FUCKING SAME.... as if the extra speed of the video cards didnt matter... and using MSI i can clearly see that ARMA 3 is only using 30-40 percent of my 9590.... WTF... The next step is to start OCing my 9590 a lil to see what results i can get in ARMA... I was sure that my video cards being as outdated as they are are the bottle neck in playin ARMA ... edit________________________________ maybe this should moved into the low cpu utilization thread sorry for the mispost!! Edited November 22, 2014 by Lordprimate Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
scruffy 22 Posted November 23, 2014 So you are still CPU limited, at least in the situation you tested and with your current settings. What to do with your shiny new graphic cards now? Time to change some settings that only affect GPU performance. Try playing with 200% 3D resolution, it looks great :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Misfit Leader 2 Posted November 23, 2014 The game is mainly using 2 cores out of 4, 6 or 8 available depending of the CPU. So until they can manage to optimize the threading (which is not easy as far i know) you won't see much improvement. The only thing that can improve is core efficiency and clock. I guess the better CPU is Intel 4790K for ArmA 3, best IPC & speed out of the box without doing anything. Myself and i, are waiting to see Intel Skylake & AMD Zen which should get better by fall 2015/early 2016. Until then, good luck with the bad frame :p Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pr0ph3tswe 1 Posted November 23, 2014 you should have done some research.. even first generation sandy bridge i5 runs arma better than that cpu if you have enough gpu power to handle the game ocing the gpu won't make any difference as it's cpu limited Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
forteh 11 Posted November 23, 2014 I just upgraded my i3 530 @ 4.62ghz to an i5 750 @ 4ghz and gained a 50% increase in fps on the same settings (1080p, all very high, 2k view 1500 objects, fsaa 2x, fxaa ultra, blurs turned off). Bog standard gtx660 running very high with about 40% load and 1400mb vram utilised, cpu power is where it's at! The upgrade cost me 40 quid for the processor and let's me crank the view distance up to 4k now :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
