Content without Performance isn't playable.

[Vigil Vindex 64]

We need evidence and benchmarks to diagnose the issue

 

I really hope BIS get around to making an official benchmark like A2+OA. It will really help with troubleshooting and testing if BIS provide an officially supported and consistent test that we can use to give meaningful feedback and data. DxDiag.txt and a text dump from the benchmark of the results and graphics settings would be really great for submitting to threads like this, and probably help define the minimum and recommended hardware requirements in reality.

[brightcandle 114]

I have no doubt Tanoa is slower, up to 30% slower at times and its heavier on the CPU than Altis is. I did a comparison video a week back which shows when the game is CPU and GPU limited and also the difference in performance between the two terrains is quite dramatic:

 

[I give up 152]

There is no surprise.

Foliage always have been the gpu killer with arma 3. Just for instance, the gpu has more usage in Stratis forest than in Kavala.

About the called cpu bottleneck in Towns, here I disagree.

While in forest what we have is heavy foliage, basically there are no textures loaded in to ram, this means that the gpu (and consequently the cpu) do not need to wait for ram, here the graphics are rendered on the fly.

In Towns we have several Gigabytes (textures) loaded in to ram, being refereshed, being flushed, loaded again and repeat this in to infinite. This takes time and since the cpu is considerably faster than whatever ram,  the cpu ( and consequently the gpu) has to wait for ram, that's why the operation of these 2 pieces of hardware (cpu and gpu) is limited.

There you have your bottleneck. 

Memory management.

[PuFu 4591]

 

There is no surprise.

Foliage always have been the gpu killer with arma 3. Just for instance, the gpu has more usage in Stratis forest than in Kavala.

About the called cpu bottleneck in Towns, here I disagree.

While in forest what we have is heavy foliage, basically there are no textures loaded in to ram, this means that the gpu (and consequently the cpu) do not need to wait for ram, here the graphics are rendered on the fly.

In Towns we have several Gigabytes (textures) loaded in to ram, being refereshed, being flushed, loaded again and repeat this in to infinite. This takes time and since the cpu is considerably faster than whatever ram,  the cpu ( and consequently the gpu) has to wait for ram, that's why the operation of these 2 pieces of hardware (cpu and gpu) is limited.

There you have your bottleneck. 

Memory management.

the above is partly true. The issue is that a lot of the textures are loaded directly from the HDD in a continuous manner. There is little buffering going on for textures, hence there is really no reason to have A3 in 64bit (allowing the use of my 16 or 24gb respectively ram available). this is also the reason why a SSD will improve not only the stuttering but also FPS, more than any other game out there

[I give up 152]

Textures are buffered frm HDD when we have pagefile enabled (which is also memory). With pagefile disabled its all about ram.

HDD is only used when we load the island for the first time.

 

Edit,

 

About 64 bit, not sure if would do any better. Basically we already have it with "32 bit breaking barrier", still and probably because with 64 bit would have to be the executable to handle with memory load and management, some improvement could come, but would not solve the thing. Arma due to its architecture will always have this situation, in my opinion.

 

In fact was due to heavy load on memory (and the consequences of it) the reason for "32 bit breaking barrier". 

The thing is with Arma 2 and  because DirectX 9 the textures were considerably "smaller" and consequently the loading, flush, refresh, processing timings, etc, also were considerably smaller, so there was no issue.

With Arma 3 and because DirectX 11, these become "huge" requering a large space on memory (either pagefile or ram) and consequently the tinings for its management are largely increased and there is no way for a management under acceptable timings in a way that has no impact cpu and gpu operations.

 

If you want to see the difference between in memory load between A2 and A3, just use "cup" (or similar) and load Takistan (or Chernarus) using Arma 3, check memory (pagefile or ram) load and usage.

Then load Takistan (or Chernarus) using Arma 2 and  check again.

You will see that Arma 3 (under the same scenario) will double the memory usage.