Hardware Issues: Tips/Tricks/Solutions

[Elcivor 0]

Yeah, that's HDR alright.. I have it too, when I look into the sun or a bit where the sun's in my screen everything gets a bit darker, so you cannot see targets at larger distances

[Lepardi 0]

...

The sun is in your eyes. Turn around and your eyes will adjust so it's not as dark.

Changing HDR Precision to 16 might improve it, dunno. But you lose the sun flare effect.

No, it's always like that when outside. No matter if you look away from the sun, it always looks dark and like it was evening. I don't like it. And I tried hdr precision 0, 8, 16 and 32. It is all the time looking the same.

http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVuPe6r

That for example, I could never run it that bright when it's sunny. It goes daaaaaaaark.

[Elcivor 0]

well, I buyed ArmA yesterday, I have played a bit on the 1.04 version: no problems at al..

then the first time I patched it to 1.08 I patched: international update 1.04 to 1.05 (maybe that's the problem.. I don't know) and then the international update 1.05 to 1.08 (I have the 505Games version) then I got crashes all the time.. evertime when I shoot at buildings or make many smoke

so, maybe it is because of that patch. I haven't installed it properly right now, I am doing it when I'm home(remember: GMT+1 )

but, when I had the CTDs evertime.. it was with an CreateIndex Buffer failed..

how is that possible? I mean, I have a videocard that supports minimum (128mb RAM, I know.. old.. but I can atleast enjoy the game as how it looks on minimum)

my Virtual Ram max is 4096 mb... and I have a 1.5 gig ram memory inside my case..

also: I have an older version of Catalyst Driver, because the newest one didn't work with 1.04(I don't know how it is on 1.08)

alright.. messy message, I know..

my sys spec:

AMD Athlon 2.0 GHZ 2400+

Asus Radeon 9600SE 128 MBram (I know.. old, but it did work with 1.04)

1.5 gig ram

Windows XP Prof

newest Directx 9.0

so.. what seems to be the problem.. before someone respond to this, I might test it with the right patches as it should have been patched.. if it has been fixed by then.. then its ok..

but I have a few questions: does the newest Catalyst Driver support ArmA 1.08?

and if I have a indexbuffer failed, it means that it has to do with the memory I have right?

and I have not defragged my pc in ages, could that be a problem too?

and also, sorry if I make grammer mistakes, I also have problems with my dutchxD

Editafterreinstal: alright.. I have reinstalled, patched correctly, its 1.08 what makes the problem.. I am going to use 1.05 or might use 1.08 if it can be fixed, else: I'll wait untill 1.09

[Elcivor 0]

do you guys know something?

bytheway, this time I did not receive a indexbuffer failed message

this time it was a:

"arma has encountered a problem and needs to close"

without connecting to a server... but.. I was just testing it to create a low as possible FPS I could get(shooting, throwing smoke grenades, normal grenades, other kind of explosions)

then that happened.. and I still can not believe I don't have enough vram.. because, why else would BI say the minimum you need is 128mb ram... eeh.. I even tweaked the game as much as possible

I use kegety's ArmA launcher: used 789 mb max mem

when I play I always have a higer ammount than 1gig ram

places some compatibility things on right click thingey

I always use the administrative rights on the game

deleted ArmA.cgf?(I don't know the extension, but that thing inside the my documents folder)

when it was created again I used: fsaa=0

I forced vsync off

forced triple buffering on

and some other ati tweaks for maximum performance instead of quality

etc etc

is it maybe I use Ati Catalyst Center 7.8?

edit and edit and editxD

maybe, if I have not enough Vram for 1.08, is it possible it would help lowering my FOV from 1200 to 1000? or lower than that?

I was already busy watching if I could change my 3d card..

well someone gave me a great reccomendation card that I can support

saving up for the Sapphire Radeon X1950 PRO AGP 512mb

[Odi.et.amo 0]

Believe or not, I have very similar problem, my game crashes every time.I've managed to solve the problem with the Createbuffer issue somehow(through changing some graphic option to low), but I still encounter crashing problem...i've tried to use =maxmem xxx command too, nothing...so I sended an e-mail to official suppport, and the've just responded with thing like "sorry for the problem, here's a free coupon for SprocketIdea), but you can try to contact them too.Just send three files: DxDiag.txt - ArmA.rpt - ArmA.bidmp and a description of your problem, maybe they could help you better than me...i made a topic in czech section on this forum, to solve those problems, but only solution they gave me was that =maxmem xxx command, so I'm really p****d off.

I apologize I'm not able to fully help you

and sorry for my English...

[Elcivor 0]

ha, your english is quite fine, but I see you could also manage the indexbuffer failed thing

[The_Captain 0]

AMD Athlon 2.0 GHZ 2400+

Asus Radeon 9600SE 128 MBram (I know.. old, but it did work with 1.04)

1.5 gig ram

Windows XP Prof

newest Directx 9.0

I have very similar specs on my 2nd arma PC, except I have an X800 instead of the 9600. I get the createindexbufferfailed too, but it happens much less when I turn resolution down to 800x600 or 640x480. Turning all settings down helped as well. I think I also increased amount of available AGP memory in the bios.

Hope that helps.

[Elcivor 0]

AMD Athlon 2.0 GHZ 2400+

Asus Radeon 9600SE 128 MBram (I know.. old, but it did work with 1.04)

1.5 gig ram

Windows XP Prof

newest Directx 9.0

I have very similar specs on my 2nd arma PC, except I have an X800 instead of the 9600. I get the createindexbufferfailed too, but it happens much less when I turn resolution down to 800x600 or 640x480. Turning all settings down helped as well. I think I also increased amount of available AGP memory in the bios.

Hope that helps.

yeah, I also use 800x600 anytime a game has low FPS, I don't mind the res.. I mind the performance..

I have changed my AGP memory right now(a few minutes ago) and am patching the game to 1.08 again... also, I am tweaking my system..

I don't know.. but.. what is the difference between the omega and the normal catalyst drivers?

EDIT: it works now

I even tested it to lower my FPS to 1xD and it still didn't crash

[Odi.et.amo 0]

WTF is AGP memory? sorry 'bout this, but I'm really not that far with my PC skills to make some changes in BIOS, so, could you please tell me about it for dumb ones(so only for me)??

[-Puma- 2]

WTF is AGP memory? sorry 'bout this, but I'm really not that far with my PC skills to make some changes in BIOS, so, could you please tell me about it for dumb ones(so only for me)??

i quess he means agp aperature size

[Hardtale 0]

Hi, just picked up an 8800GT and ran into the fog issue that from what I gathered is a DX10 card issue.

I thought at one point I read that there was a driver that worked around this but didn't pay that much attention since I was using a 7950 at the time.

Can anyone give me an idea of which driver version it was or was I just mistaken and need to wait on 1.09 patch from BI?

Currently using:

Version: 169.02

Release Date: October 31, 2007

Other than the fog Arma seems to be running fine.

[lee_h._oswald 0]

No driver can fix the fog bug.

You(we) have to wait for the patch.

MfG Lee

[bravo_01 0]

waiting and waiting......... yawn thought I would drop by and see if the fog bug was fixed yet

[Freisar 0]

This is my problem(see screen):

My conf

E4300

2gb DDR400

X1950pro  256mb agp, Cat 7.10, Last Dx.

Os XP32

http://img99.imageshack.us/img99....MG]

http://img131.imageshack.us/img131....MG]

I read solution in first page, but only probably solution is set old ati driver , but i can't place old driver if have problem in another games........ http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/banghead.gif' alt='banghead.gif'>

You can help me?

[Misfit Leader 1]

I got a problem with my 8800GTX with driver 169.09. The vsynch is disabled in both nVidia drivers & game profile for ArmA.

But in the game the vsynch looks like on (the framerate adjust to the max refresh rate of the monitor).

I don't know if it's a driver issue, or a game issue with nVidia hardware.

But that should prevent the game to run smooth if the vsynch is forced by the game. (i don't know how..)

[apex 0]

I got a problem with my 8800GTX with driver 169.09. The vsynch is disabled in both nVidia drivers & game profile for ArmA.

But in the game the vsynch looks like on (the framerate adjust to the max refresh rate of the monitor).

I don't know if it's a driver issue, or a game issue with nVidia hardware.

But that should prevent the game to run smooth if the vsynch is forced by the game. (i don't know how..)

Do you get more than 60FPS???

Sounds like a beta driver issue...

[Misfit Leader 1]

I can get to 60 fps if i choose 60Hz refresh rate ingame, or 75 fps for 75Hz.

I don't know if it is the beta driver, if it is related to nVidia (does ATI card have this bug too ?), or a problem with the game ?

[paragraphic l 2]

Just sounds like your driver is overriding everything you set in the control panel

[ArMoGaDoN 0]

Just another minor tweak, though worthy of mention:

Discovered something called "Texture LOD Adjustment" lurking in the ATI Tray tool. Decided to play, and when set it to -2 (yes: minus two), then all the textures, trees etc look much much sharper, but weirdly performance seems to have increased by a couple fps, especially while moving / looking around and which always lagged before.

Maybe when the textures forced higher by this setting then the graphics card usage is smoother, ?less swapping around? - someone else might like to play with the setting also on different cards (mine 1950pro) to see if similar results happen?

p.s. @Freisar that looks like anm overheating problem to me.

[Jack-UK 0]

Thanks Warwolf added

[gilbert21vb 0]

I have no clue as to what the problem here is, but after some time of playing arma, my PC becomes choppy and it gets kinda impossible to play. Then, even after closing the Arma application, the system keeps on being choppy. Teamspeak, for instance, doesnt return to normal performance. Its propably a Vista problem, as i have no problems playing Arma on XP (on the same PC). The problem is present both in vista 32 and 64 versions

a few specs

Vista64

8800gtx 768mb

2GB ram (downgraded from 4gb, as arma is fubared @ 4gb)

Please forgive me if the answer is elsewhere in this topic. i stopped reading thru it after 30 minutes.

[ArMoGaDoN 0]

ArmA and machine/graphics settings I use:

Have been asked a few times about how this rig is setup for ArmA, so here's a short precis.  

Might help some, but follow any advice here at your own risk.

I have many tweaks on the system itself, almost everything that CAN be overclocked is.

The settings are running on an Asus P5WDH mobo using 2xAsus 1950Pro configured in crossfire mode.

ArmA installed on Raid-0 array 2xfast SATA2 drives.

Okay, here goes with the basic graphics setup:

In the BIOS I have the PCI-Ex settings adjusted as follows..

PEG Buffer length = Short (reduces the stutters on texture loading)

PEG Link mode = Fast ("Faster" gave problems as the PCI already overclocked)

PEG Root Control = Enabled

The drivers I use are the Omega drivers for ATI card.

Next to latest drivers (as the new ones cause alpha-transparency problems on my rig).

So I am using the Omega v 3.8.413 drivers.

Settings here are taken from ATI Tray Tools (replacement for CCC which is NOT installed.)

Anti-Aliasing = Application Controlled

Adaptive Anti-Aliasing = ON, Mode: Peformance

Anisotropic Filtering: 4x, Quality with Trilinear

HQ AF = OFF

Texture Preference = High

MipMap Detail = High

Vert Sync = Application Controlled

Refresh Rate Override = Disabled

Support DXT format = ON !!

Support Bump Mapping = ON !!

Alternate Pixel Centers = OFF

Anisotropic Filtering Optimization = OFF

Trilinear Filtering optimisation = OFF

Geometry Instancing = ON !!

Temporal AA = ON, 2X, Manual Frame Threshold @ 75fps

Catalyst AI = LOW

Flip Queue Size = 2

Smart Shader = "No Effect"

AND THIS ONE IS COOL:

Texture LOD Adjustment = -2 (minus 2)

THIS seems to quadruples the image quality, hence AF left at 4X above.

----

In the other GL settings (some do affect DX..)

Vert Sync: Always off

Triple Buffering = OFF !!

Force Z Buffer Depth = DISABLED

Temporal AA set same as DX settings 2X, Manual, 75

----

In standard tweaks section...

Dont override anything,

Optimize Pixel Shader Code = ON

Geometry Instancing = ON

Force MipMap Filter = OFF

----

In Advanced Tweaks...

MultiThread Support:

ENABLE = ON

Max and Min Working Threads set at 4

----

ARMA SETTINGS:

Terrain Detail I have Normal.

Object Detail VERY high (reduces stutters on this setting)

Texture Detail - LOW (surprised?)

...If you have 256Mb or less graphics card then stick to LOW texture detail(this includes 2x256 in CF).

...512 should work with Normal fine, any higher on texture detail and you'll notice stutters when the thing is streaming from disk.

Shading Detail = Very High

PostProcess Effects = LOW (hate those on high)

Anisotropic Filtering = Normal (but overridden by graphics driver settings anyway)

Shadow Detail = Very High (again reduces stutters)

Antialiasing Low/Normal = generally use LOW online, and the 2x Temporal setting in drivers effectively doubles this)

Blood = High (who'd expect me not to like blood?)

I run normally online at 1152x864x32 resolution.

and a higher res offline.

View distance I adjust to taste or lower if the map is a heavy one (edit: just remember that the larger the viewdistance, then the more stuff has to be loaded / unloaded when you are moving relative to the scenery, therefore increasing loading stutters).

I lock the refresh rate at 75, pointless using any higher.

----

I also found improved framerates when I hand-edited the ArmAProfile file in my documents,

turning ON (=1) the hardware sound, and OFF(=0) the EAX.

----

Generally I achieve between 30-60fps depending on the map, occasionally it'll drop below 30 when loading complex textures

over Corazol, or low over dense woodland in Tres Valles it can go below 25.

If I unlock the vertical sync (force off in drivers) i have seen the rig achive 170fps on these settings on CloseCombat map.

but then you get texture tearing, so allow ArmA to use the sync.

Okay, so maybe you can pick the bones from these settings to help you tweak your own system in.

Heartily recommend the Omega drivers, and ATI TrayTools.

ATITool (different from ATI TrayTools) is also invaluable for clocking and/or fan speed control

far beyond what the standard stuff can achieve, and crossfire fans are not catered for in standard CCC(dumb or what?)

----

p.s. not really interested in discussing these further, just posting these for information only.

[Cannon Fodder 0]

I've found that the biggest indicator of performance for me is how high the level of detail can be maintained before performance significantly degrades - in other words, video RAM.

I'll give you an example - I'm engaging targets on a large scale map, like Evolution, and I'll be running quite smoothly in the desert. As soon as I get to the woods to the North - the game runs much, much more slowly when I look at shader-intensive areas - like a cluster of trees with overlapping shadows. This is NOT because of the fact that my computer is having trouble rendering it from a speed point of view - it is essentially because I do not have enough video RAM to render the entirety of the scene without 'swapping' occurring and causing massive slowdown. A quick alt-tab (because FLUSH doesn't work usually) and I'm back to running nice and quickly for a period of about 5-10 minutes and then the same will occur again, when the memory is filled.

I do not think this is a problem with how ArmA manages memory - instead, I think it is a problem with how far I am pushing my computer to reach the desired visual quality at the expense of stability. Because of ArmA's streaming system, I definitely think that the game allows me to run at a higher than normal level of graphical quality for my video RAM but only for limited periods of time. Because I'm using an older 256MB card (a 7900GT), it is only a matter of time before the RAM is filled.

Reducing various things helps ease the burden and stretch out these periods between the memory getting filled - shadows seem to be the biggest factor. Next to that is texture quality, then post processing. All of the others do not affect the eventual degradation of performance, from my testing. A quick fix solution is to play in a lower resolution - I can maintain lower resolutions for longer periods than anything higher.

I've come to the conclusion that a 8800 with a huge amount of RAM is the only solution to these woes.

Hey there, thought I'd update my previous post now that I've progressed a little. The conclusion to the post was that I'd need a graphics card with a load of onboard RAM to remove the time-dependent stuttering, due to the abuse of my (old) 7900GT's (overclocked) meagre video RAM. Well, for the holiday season I splashed out on a new 8800GTX - I wasn't prepared for how big it would be. It's about twice the size of my previous card - getting it into the case was a nightmare - not to mention the fact that it requires TWO power inputs (you know, the six pin type - I only had one, attached to my PSU, and because I bought my card OEM, it didn't come with another. Thankfully, the old 7900GT was bundled with one, an adapter, when I bought it ages ago!.

But it went in, and a bit of fiddling later (I've overclocked it to just under Ultra standards), I'm running ArmA how I always wanted. Silky smooth, and I've pushed my view distance up to 2500m to compensate. It WAS the video RAM! I used to only be able to play either without shadows or without post processing, and only then at a low resolution to prevent the periodic slowdown and inevitable alt-tab. Not so any more. I just spent the last few hours burning this badboy in, not a hitch, not a drop, not a hiccup in the entire time I played.

I have to tell you guys - I didn't think that the step up from the 7 series to 8 would be so huge - but it is! The latest, more shader intensive games REQUIRE the latest batch from the relevant companies. I went from running Crysis on everything (and I mean EVERYTHING) low to high in an instant! It seems to me that the video RAM and new shader architecture are far more important than the increased clock speed etc. Games with ever increasing texture sizes need it.

I provide this post as a little bit of a self-congratulatory measure but also for those who wonder whether the stuttering problem could be their card - I had some trepidation wondering if it was my memory or processor - but this game, and many other like it, were built for this generation's hardware, and run very poorly on anything else. It's like night and day, it really is. It's a great feeling not having to worry about looking at dense woodland or shaded areas, or having to compromise the depth of field effect or other immersive touches. If you're in two minds about splashing out, I used to spend hours and hours fiddling with settings and worrying about eeking out a few extra fps. Now I don't give a shit and that's worth far more than what you would expect.

Now I can be one of the unlucky few to start moaning about the fog bug (although it's really not THAT bad).

[Dwarden 1125]

i own AMD.ATI HD3870 card with Catalyst 7.12 drivers

there is some weird visual error with Armed Assault AA settings set to LOW

this error is gone when AntiAliasing is set to disabled, normal or high

FYI in case someone else run into this issue

and i get various weird shadows errors while setting in high / very high

the shadows in general renders liek they should

but some parts of it flash from visible to invisible each 1-2s (which is quite disruptive)

only fix is set shadows to normal , low or disabled

[lapa 1]

My system specs:

E6750 2,67Ghz

2 Gt DDR II 800

ATI X1950 Pro

I've browsed the troubleshooting and hardware threads here and I've gathered that my PC should be able to run ArmA at least on Normal settings. However, even if I use normal textures, low PP and shadow effects and disable AF and AA, my FPS drops around 15 in combat and around cities. Generally, the FPS stays around 35, but may even rise to around 70 in open and treeless areas.

This is weird, because several people with similar systems on these forums have said that they're able to run ArmA smoothly.

EDIT: Needless to say, I have the newest Graphic card drivers.