Yet Another Arma Benchmark

[vengeance1 50]

Hmmm, that is interesting what kind of RAM speed do you need to see significant impact?

[Greenfist 1863]

10 hours ago, dr_fish said:

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.

You're welcome, I'm glad you found good use for it! And proved again how important the RAM speed is for Arma. 

 

5 hours ago, vengeance1 said:

Hmmm, that is interesting what kind of RAM speed to you need to see significant impact?

I'd say any increase is speed is meaningful, probably more so on lower speeds. Some time ago, I set my frequency from 1600MHz to 1866 and saw almost linear improvement in fps. (+10%)

Here's some other tests about it:

https://www.reddit.com/r/arma/comments/4qgxll/a_short_cpuram_speed_impact_analysis_in_arma_3/
 

 

By the way, if anyone has wondered why the result graph always shows a single big drop to around 3fps, I finally took a look at it, and it appears to come from skiptime command. So don't worry, there's nothing wrong with your system, it's just Arma handling time shifts.

[dr_fish 17]

13 hours ago, vengeance1 said:

Hmmm, that is interesting what kind of RAM speed do you need to see significant impact?

The biggest jump was from 2133 to 3000 - but there was another jump from 3000 to 3866. 3866 RAM is pretty expensive, but as I said, there's no other way to pick up those frames. On the 7700K, it was 46 FPS with 2133 and 56 FPS for 3866. Very impressive for just memory.

[domokun 515]

1 hour ago, dr_fish said:

The biggest jump was from 2133 to 3000 - but there was another jump from 3000 to 3866. 3866 RAM is pretty expensive, but as I said, there's no other way to pick up those frames. On the 7700K, it was 46 FPS with 2133 and 56 FPS for 3866. Very impressive for just memory.

I just checked prices of DDR4 in 2x8GB and right now, it seems that DDR4-3000/3200 is the sweet spot. Beyond that prices sky rocket and returns diminish. So anyone thinking of moving to Skylake or Kaby Lake should avoid low-speed (2133-2400) DDR4 and favour high-speed (3000-3200) DDR4 instead because the difference in price is minimal whereas the latter can offer 15-20% gains in performance.

Thanks BTW for your benchmarks. Sadly, there are fewer and fewer sites that use A3 to benchmark new CPUs and/or GPUs. Hardware Unboxed is another welcome exception.

[ampersand38 344]

Hi Greenfist, would it be possible to avoid the drop to 2-4 fps around 1/3 of the way through the mission? with that gone the minimum fps would be a lot more meaningful.

[oldbear 390]

Upgrade of Arma3 gaming rig featuring now "i7 7700K/GTX 1060/16 Go DDR4 2666 MHz/500 GB Crucial SSD"

 

 

The still annoying drop does affect overall high level performances.

I must add that the display being an old but still nice Iiyama 22" 1680x1050 helps a lot

[dr_fish 17]

We used YAAB for another story. This time it's about my upgrade from an i7-2600K to an i7-7700. Thanks again for the great tool.

[domokun 515]

17 hours ago, dr_fish said:

We used YAAB for another story. This time it's about my upgrade from an i7-2600K to an i7-7700. Thanks again for the great tool.

Any chance that you could run a few more benchmarks so that we  could compare:

a) 2600k @ 4.2 2133 MHz = 31 fps

b) 7700k @ 4.2 2133 MHz = ?? fps

c) 7700k @ 4.2 3733 MHz = ?? fps

d) 7700k @ 4.8 2133 MHz = ?? fps

e) 7700k @ 4.8 3733 MHz = 56.5 fps = +82%

All YAAB run @ 1080p @ Max except for FSAA

[dr_fish 17]

I added these results in the comments of my story last week:

 

i7-7700K @ 4.8 w/ DDR4-3733 - 56.5
i7-7700K @ 4.8 w/ DDR4-3200 - 49.6
i7-7700K @ 4.5 w/ DDR4-3200 - 48.8
i7-7700K @ 4.2 w/ DDR4-3733 - 48.1
i7-7700K @ 4.8 w/ DDR4-2400 - 46.4
i7-7700K @ 4.2 w/ DDR4-3200 - 45.5
i7-7700K @ 4.5 w/ DDR4-2400 - 43.9
i7-7700K @ 4.2 w/ DDR4-2400 - 40.2
i7-2600K @ 4.2 w/ DDR3-2133 - 31.0

 

I also tried this to see something about the impact of memory bandwidth vs latency:
Stock i7-7700K w/ 8GB DDR4-3733 - 47.4 (single channel)

 

[Sevenz (DayZ) 0]

@dr_fish

 

Thank you for your results, could you say me please if the visibilty's settings are custom or from a preset ?

 

Thank you

[dr_fish 17]

They are default, the only thing that wasn't "maxed."

[oldbear 390]

Do you mean the YAAB visibilty's settings ?

 

On 15/01/2015 at 11:56 AM, Greenfist said:

The view distance is fixed to 1500m.

 

 

 

[Greenfist 1863]

Update v0.99 (20-02-2017)
   - Minor fixes for UI and mission
   - You can now select multiple saved results with ctrl+mouse click to view their average score
   - Press P in the beginning to set the view distances to "standard" settings (VD 1600m, OVD 1300m).
     The 1500m view distance is no longer forced by default.
   - eliminated the big fps dop caused by the skipTime command. This was usually just single slow frame, so it doesn't change the result visibly.

Downloads:
Steam Workshop

Dropbox
 

Download the previous version (June 2016): Dropbox

[dpbvulkan 11]

Today came my new i7 7700K and I had to test it asap on ArmA. ^^ So I did the benchmark before with my FX6300 @stock and then today with my new i7 7700K Stock.

 

Gameoptions were all to Ultra and 3000m if I remember right, but 1080p.

 

FX6300   - 17.1

i7 7700K -  over 30.

 

For me that was a huuuge difference and suddenly I could play ArmA smooth and not always with around 20 fps ingame and could turn the visibility very high. ^^ Completely new gamefeeling. =)

[ramius86 13]

It's possible use this mission to test performance on a dedicated server? I mean, run mission on server and see how many fps I got on my client? ( testing 32 and 64 exe )
If I start mission on dedicated I got stuck at "receiving data"

[oldbear 390]

Here a YAAB screen showing results rather stable around 23 FPS and rather stable in the 20/25 area I can't fully explain :

The test involved a Pentium G4560 (2cores/4threads) using embedded Intel HD Graphics 610.

Graphics settings are on "Low", and Visibility is set to 1000m by the auto-detection.

 

I am wondering because in general YAAB appears demanding and more in phase with the in-game experience.

With the same rig, I am getting 14/22 FPS on Infantry showcase and 15/25 FPS on my own SP test mission on Altis

[Shaky-AK 0]

Pentium g4620
gtx 1060 6gb
ddr4 2400 10-12-12-28 (16gb 2x8gb)
m.2 sata 3 ssd (256gb)

Windows 10 32/64 pro
Power Settings: High Perdormance with game mode on

Parameters enabled:

64bit

cpu count: 2

extra threads (file, texture, geometry)

hyper threading
 enabled
video memory: 6144

no logs
Intel allocator

 

yaab results (vsync off):
27.0/30.6fps on ultra settings 
to 
36.6/42.9fps on low settings 
 

 

 

[Whargod 0]

39.7

 

Intel 5960X @ 4.5Ghz

2x GTX 980 Strix

64GB 3000 RAM G. Skill Ripjaws

 

1920x1080

 

Graphical settings at max except the HDR stuff which I keep at low.

[oldbear 390]

Here are some YAAB results on the Pentium G 4560 based test rig featuring now a RX 460 4Go

 

 

Note : displaying Arma3 on a 1440x900 monitor can help a lot.

 

I am still wondering about a Tanoa version of the test, APEX as a whole being more demanding than the previous Arma3 build with Altis.

[Gunter Severloh 3948]

My current setup, nothing to get excited about for what im running

but i can play none the less.

My current specs:

CPU - Intel Celeron G530 2.40ghz x 2
GPU - Nvidia Geforce GTX 750Ti
Hard drive - 1 Tb main drive & 500gb SD (used for backup and storage)
Ram - 8Gb

Mobo - Asus something not sure what i have
PSU - 850w
OS - Win 7 64bit

Monitor  - 1920 x 1080

======

Test was with standard settings, vsync off, all aa is off, textures is standard, everything else at low, no mods and I'm running Arma3 with Apex.

3 tests:

test 1

https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/862858849823321980/EB6CB04D821B3663C5770FD8CF6A8F3CE665F370/

test 2

https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/862858849823322217/D1FE2EBE55F5D11EC82AFF401C6D1E75DC091B2B/

test 3

https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/862858849823322403/A883EBA5E1B21195FB4C4F6BFCAAC7C43D5328E7/

In what i play i average 25-35fps, and thats running IFA3 with other mods, when i play modern arma3 with RHS mod, and Iraq-Syrian Conflict mod i get about 20-30fps

varies on the mission, most of fps is on a gameserver, in SP my FPS average would be 20-35, again depends on the map/mission.

 

Planning to upgrade based on Old Bear's suggestions on what to get, my next test will be with the new computer ;) cant wait!

[Rhyagella 4]

Mods saw a decrease of about 3fps, but my mods were just extra SP missions and a custom insignia. I was discouraged when I got the results. I thought for sure I wouldn't be able to run it even on low, but that was not the case. :)

 

My results:

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/share/?id=1133612332
 

My setup:

• CPU: i5-4690k @ 4.2Ghz
• RAM:16gb [no OC/default speed, I'll check speed and edit this]
• GPU: MSI R9 280 [no OC]
• MONITOR: 1920 x 1080p
• STORAGE: 1T WD Hard drive, 7400 RPM
• OS: Windows 7 64bit

I'm using the absolute latest drivers for my GPU, which is Crimson Radeon ReLive 17.8.2, and the default build for Arma 3. I can run SP very well on mixed Very High-Ultra, with some settings shut off because I personally don't like them or need them. Online, on good KOTH servers, I usually get about 40-50 FPS, sometimes even 70 if the server is really good.

Beyond that, I haven't made any changes to parameters beyond setting it to 64bit update.

[Mahatma Gandhi 29]

My setup:

• CPU: Ryzen R7 1700 @ 3.8GHz
• RAM: 16gb G.Skill FlareX @ 3200MHz [timings tuned a bit]
• GPU: XFX Radeon 470 [no OC]
• MONITOR: 1920 x 1080p
• STORAGE: 1T Hard drive, 7200 RPM; Samsung 850 128gb Sys
• OS: Windows 10 64bit
• PSU: Enermax Triathlor 300W

Results:

• Low Preset: 56.4 FPS
• Standard Preset: 48.2 FPS 

 

 

 

Personal impression:

 

Game runs very smooth even at Ultra Preset. Totally happy with the rig.

[computer 113]

Low preset (+ reshade)

i7 4770k
amd 7970


Thanks for the pentium tests @oldbear @Shaky-AK
I'm looking for a budget build. Just need to decide between a 7350k and G4620 :\

[oldbear 390]

Speaking about budget, you must get a look at the AMD contender.

I have build on purpose a test rig and you can read my short "review" here Play Arma3 with a R3 1300X - the Force awakens

Extract from this post some early YAAB results :

 

 

During these tests the DDR4 was running @ 2100 MHz, I was unable to get it boot despite the fact that this 16 Go 3000MHz Corsair pack was on the compatibility list released with last AGESA update.

After the very last BIOS update, the DDR4 was allowed to boot @ 3000MHz, so I get some performance enhancements [up to 35FPS] allowing to play with Visibility parameter set up to 3500m.

 

[Mahatma Gandhi 29]

Update: With further improvements on the RAM timings, I am at 60.7 FPS now with a Ryzen 1700 @ 3.8 GHZ CPU clock

 

Low Preset @ 1920x1080 @ Radeon 470 4gb - stock

 

 

Given the CPU clock, I think thats quite remarkably good!