Yet Another Arma Benchmark

[Senfo 28]

4770k@3.5ghz, GTX 1060, 1920x1080 (100%), Win10 64bit on current stable 1.66

 

44.6 fps
Settings are Ultra with shadows disabled, particles low

Lower end 3 FPS, upper end 75 FPS, no external mods loaded

33.8 pure Ultra settings
lower 3 FPS upper 50 FPS

[Valken 622]

@ creep nice. OC the CPU and see if you can go further.

[road runner 4344]

12 minutes ago, Valken said:

@ creep nice. OC the CPU and see if you can go further.

How does one go about overclocking their CPU, I already have AI Suite, but a little bit cautious to use it.

[loopdk 92]

OC is done in the BIOS to work best.

 

what mother borad and CPU are you using:D

Creep, do you have scrrenshoots.... i dont get that high wit a I5 running 4900 and 2 x 980Ti and arma on a m.2 disk....

[Valken 622]

@ Road Runner

 

Hardcore way is to go into your BIOS, then set the settings there.

Easy and temporary way is the use your AI Suite software in windows and set it there. Once your system reboots, it resets itself.

 

I now use software way because I work too much to keep cpu pegged at maximum settings.

 

The easy way would to run the AI Suite (I assume you have an ASUS Motherboard), and set ALL the cores to the same clock speed as the MAXIMUM your cpu will turbo to. 

 

For me, my 4790k turbos to 4.4 GHZ (for like 1 core). I set it all cores. Check your manual, then run YAAB.

 

If it is stable you can then UP the CPU multiplier. For me its 44 x 100 MHZ (bus speed). So I set the  cpu multiplier to 45 for 4.5 GHZ (45 x 100). Then test again.

 

By this point if you want to push further, you need to start increasing voltages (slowly) and maybe get a better cooling than stock (I have a low end water cooler).

 

You need to watch your temperatures and I would pick a stable OC for ARMA.

 

You SHOULD notice the biggest difference just by setting ALL cores to the same speed when  at TURBO ~ 4.2 to 4.5 GHZ depending on your cpu default settings because ARMA will use the other cores at full speed as well, plus your GPU will use the other cores for basic driver work.

 

IF you push it further, you will start to see the difference at lower settings (max FPS) or highest settings (the minimum should be raised).

 

For me, It was not worth spending more money or time just to squeeze and extra 100 or 200 MHZ out of my cpu. 4.5 GHZ on all cores is a good daily balance for me.

 

 

[Senfo 28]

Yeah I wanted to OC it someday, but I have a stock cooler on it and i dont wanna damage the CPU

However, the "turbo" gets it up to 3,8GHz I think, but since this isnt the base clock it doesnt really matter (ofc it does but not for benchmarking)

After playing around a bit, I came to the conclusion that

turning down particle effects

shadows (distance and quality) 

as well as some dynamic lighting stuff (quality)

does it for me (av. 39 FPS)

I can even leave everything else ultra

 

I will test some stuff like the Razer booster and stuff like that tomorrow, maybe I can tweak a more stable rate out of the game

Edit nvm did it today:





<<

 

testing it with a 1.7 km object viewdistance yields an av. fps of 38

[yxman 90]

Seen this thread revived, benched with newer nv driver.

 

4770k stock 3.5ghz boosted 3.9ghz (no oc)

gtx 970 sc @1380/7010mhz (376.33)

16gb ddr3 @1600mhz

samsung 830 256gb

 

result:

 

used settings:

 

[road runner 4344]

15 hours ago, Valken said:

@ Road Runner

 

Hardcore way is to go into your BIOS, then set the settings there.

Easy and temporary way is the use your AI Suite software in windows and set it there. Once your system reboots, it resets itself.

 

I now use software way because I work too much to keep cpu pegged at maximum settings.

 

The easy way would to run the AI Suite (I assume you have an ASUS Motherboard), and set ALL the cores to the same clock speed as the MAXIMUM your cpu will turbo to. 

 

For me, my 4790k turbos to 4.4 GHZ (for like 1 core). I set it all cores. Check your manual, then run YAAB.

 

If it is stable you can then UP the CPU multiplier. For me its 44 x 100 MHZ (bus speed). So I set the  cpu multiplier to 45 for 4.5 GHZ (45 x 100). Then test again.

 

By this point if you want to push further, you need to start increasing voltages (slowly) and maybe get a better cooling than stock (I have a low end water cooler).

 

You need to watch your temperatures and I would pick a stable OC for ARMA.

 

You SHOULD notice the biggest difference just by setting ALL cores to the same speed when  at TURBO ~ 4.2 to 4.5 GHZ depending on your cpu default settings because ARMA will use the other cores at full speed as well, plus your GPU will use the other cores for basic driver work.

 

IF you push it further, you will start to see the difference at lower settings (max FPS) or highest settings (the minimum should be raised).

 

For me, It was not worth spending more money or time just to squeeze and extra 100 or 200 MHZ out of my cpu. 4.5 GHZ on all cores is a good daily balance for me.

 

 

Indeed I have an ASUS mate, I am sitting here looking at all the numbers and I think it's easier to fly the space shuttle!!

[Senfo 28]

For gigabyte mainboards there is a good straight forward tool for OCing in their appcenter

[kremator 1065]

Just wanted to stop by and thank Greenfist for this !  Sitting on 47.7FPS with everything on ultra.  Now testing out my standard mods (Dynasound + ES, Blastcore Phoenix, C2) to see what drop.

 

Edit:  Very little drop with all those added in :)

[Valken 622]

@road runner It can be daunting but you can try the EZ OC method. It should be a one click solution. Boot into windows, don't run anything and run the AI Suite. There should be an auto test to set a basic OC.

 

I did some tweaks and my best FPS is now 38-39 FPS with Ultra textures but everything else on low.  NO MOD. 64 bit is better than 32 bit and the performance build is worse than the current DEV 1.67 build.

 

With mods it drops down to 28 FPS!  LOL. I need a new GPU I know.

[road runner 4344]

1 minute ago, Valken said:

@road runner It can be daunting but you can try the EZ OC method. It should be a one click solution. Boot into windows, don't run anything and run the AI Suite. There should be an auto test to set a basic OC.

 

I did some tweaks and my best FPS is now 38-39 FPS with Ultra textures but everything else on low.  NO MOD. 64 bit is better than 32 bit and the performance build is worse than the current DEV 1.67 build.

 

With mods it drops down to 28 FPS!  LOL. I need a new GPU I know.

Yeah, I'm finding the 64 bit looks smoother but I lose 20% FPS

[vengeance1 50]

I must be missing something, when I run the mission it just quits and says "Mission Complete" and never starts?

[Greenfist 1863]

1 hour ago, vengeance1 said:

I must be missing something, when I run the mission it just quits and says "Mission Complete" and never starts?

The benchmark is actually the mission's intro. So you're somehow skipping it and going straight to the mission which is just the ending. 

Maybe there's a mod that automatically skips the intro...?

 

[vengeance1 50]

1 hour ago, Greenfist said:

The benchmark is actually the mission's intro. So you're somehow skipping it and going straight to the mission which is just the ending. 

Maybe there's a mod that automatically skips the intro...?

 

Ok, I'll have to figure that out, thank you.

 

Vengeance

 

[kremator 1065]

Make sure that it goes into Missions vengeance1.  Don't touch anything until it completes.

[vengeance1 50]

2 hours ago, kremator said:

Make sure that it goes into Missions vengeance1.  Don't touch anything until it completes.

Thanks Kremator! I was playing it in MP "Doh".  Although got to say I thought my box I built would do better than 34FPS on Ultra.  Liquid cooled i7-4960x 4.5 GHz OC, 64 bit Windows 7, GTX1080,  64GB RAM (16GB usable).  Not very impressed with the GTX1080.

[Valken 622]

@vengeance1 Is the game installed on a SSD? If not, try moving it there then running it. It should improve a bit and also what are your RAM speeds?

 

ARMA is MOSTLY limited by CPU IPC so clock speed per core, then RAM speed (it loves high bandwidth RAM but you have quad channel so that should be really good) and then a fast SSD or RAMDISK since it streams the assets in. Everything else should scale.

 

Try my current settings to test if you can improve:

 

Under ARMA LAUNCHER PARAMETERS

 

enable extra threads and select all 3

enable hyper threading

enable no logs to prevent some jitter

 

Under your video settings, try my settings first, then run the benchmark at least twice since the first time will cache the game contents:

 

 

After you have ran YAAB twice, note your FPS and then while still in the mission, PRESS ESC, SETTINGS and change your video settings.

 

I found out the OBJECT quality affects GPU a lot (weak 3D geometry engine) so I lowered that yet I still have ultra textures so everything looks sharp up close. 

 

The TERRAIN eats up GPU VRAM and some geometry as it is mainly the amount of grass and quality. I think you can up this slowly without affecting your performance.

 

Then you can try Shadows and Skies.

 

I would not bother with PIP on anything but low if you have textures at Ultra. It looks just as sharp and frees up performance.

 

You can play with any shader based setting as that barely affects performance since your gpu has plenty of those. Water shader should be at high to look good. I bet you can set that at Ultra with no issues. DOF, BLUR up to your taste.

 

Lastly, you can play with AA settings for a balance.

 

But please try to run YAAB with my settings to compare. This was the best I can do without going lower and yet still have a good performance. I average 38 FPS with these settings in YAAB in 64 Bit Dev 1.67. In 32 bit it drops down to 36.5 FPS. With the new performance build 64 bit, I get even lower so I am sticking with the current Dev 1.67 build from Steam.

 

[kremator 1065]

9 hours ago, vengeance1 said:

Thanks Kremator! I was playing it in MP "Doh".  Although got to say I thought my box I built would do better than 34FPS on Ultra.  Liquid cooled i7-4960x 4.5 GHz OC, 64 bit Windows 7, GTX1080,  64GB RAM (16GB usable).  Not very impressed with the GTX1080.

Hmm something isn't quite right as I'm getting 47FPS with all Ultra settings (3k VD).  My rig is air-cooled i5 6700K 4.6GHz, 16GHz RAM, GTX1080SC, WIn10 64bit.  Oh and Arma3 is running on an M2 SSD :)

 

I'd look at upgrading to win10 mate :)

[vengeance1 50]

Thanks guys (Valken, Kremator) Yes I have a SSD Drive, I am running all four cores at 4.5Ghz.  I'll try the settings Valken recommended and launcher settings.

 

Vengeance

 

Update: I tried Valken settings, 34.4 FPS.  But doesn't look good with no AA

Kremator do you really think Win 10 will make a difference? What are your settings?

[nikiforos 450]

5 hours ago, kremator said:

Hmm something isn't quite right as I'm getting 47FPS with all Ultra settings (3k VD).  My rig is air-cooled i5 6700K 4.6GHz, 16GHz RAM, GTX1080SC, WIn10 64bit.  Oh and Arma3 is running on an M2 SSD :)

 

I'd look at upgrading to win10 mate :)

Are you sure? Maybe i5-6600K ?

[kremator 1065]

Sorry it is an i5-6600k.

 

Yes the upgrade to win10 is worth it.

[Valken 622]

@kremator @vengeance1

 

It is about right with the cpu due to the AI load. You guys can just start increasing the AA and other settings with your 1080 while keeping the same average FPS.

 

That will give you relatively maxed out settings and performance.

 

Nothing we can do until ARMA engine becomes better at multithreading the AI.

[oldbear 390]

Still looking for the "Recommended Minimum" for Arma3, I will add low end YAAB results :

 

 

The tested rig was based on a Pentium G4500, without discrete GPU , only using  Intel® HD Graphics 530.

Mobo GA-B150M-DH3

RAM Crucial 2x4 Go DDR4-2133

SSD Samsung 250 Go M.2 850 EVO

 

The game is of course played in "Low" and is running quite well even with 2000 m Visibility on Stratis, not so bad on Altis but is "killed" by Tanoa.

 

But here are the YAAB results of a "Minimum recommended" rig.

On the previous platform, an i3-6100 has been installed and a GTX 750 Ti slotted in.

 

 

In game the performance level is quite right even on Tanoa.

 

 

Edited January 2, 2017 by oldbear
Adding i3-6100 ...

[dr_fish 17]

Hey guys, just wanted to point out that we've used Yet Another Arma Benchmark in our i7 7700K review. Thank you, Greenfist for such a handy tool. We used it to show off the impact of various RAM speeds on Arma performance. It's crazy how much that matters to Arma III, you just can't pick up those frames any other way.