Hardware and settings for ArmA

[gL33k 0]

From my experience ArmA is massively CPU dependent. Overclocking or buying a faster CPU would be my first upgrade.

AA, especially with the transparency (nvidia) or adaptive (ATI) modes enabled kills FPS in towns or forests. However, basic AA doesn't seem to cause that big of a hit.

i tested Nvidia multi core optimization.

i choosed a spot. it started to slowdown a bit. my FPS counter @ 20Fps , i switch to desktop , then , come back straight. still 20fps...secondly, i switch again to desktop , opened my nhancer app , and change multicore opti from disabled to enabled.

i refocus on arma.exe, .... 27fps.

i tried many such things on ATI drivers, up to 8.1 , but i never saw difference between 1 thread, and 2 , 3 4 threads. (done with ATI traytool)

i'm still not sure if my methodology is correct , it may be a good point for nvidia

i would add that not only AA wise , nextgen GPU could be a valid first upgrade. resolution first, then shadow perf. and texture filtering are important amha.

without touch my settings but anisotropic filtering to 16x and resolution, my 8800GTS jump from 22 23fps (X1900XT) to more than 40. all that in wood.

[e-tomek 0]

I recommned drivers for Nvidia 162.62, the game runs very well, on other i`ve had some graphic problems.

On ym system - C2D E6850, 2GB RAM Corsair CL4 and 8800GTX @ 626/2000 game runs smooth on 1680*1050 + all settings on very high + view distance 5000.

Hovewer the gameplay now is crappy

[gL33k 0]

I recommned drivers for Nvidia 162.62, the game runs very well, on other i`ve had some graphic problems.

On ym system - C2D E6850, 2GB RAM Corsair CL4 and 8800GTX @ 626/2000 game runs smooth on 1680*1050 + all settings on very high + view distance 5000.

Hovewer the gameplay now is crappy

you play 5KM VD in multiplayer session ?

[Vultar 0]

GF7300GS 256/512mb

RAM 1gb ddr2

intel pentium D 2,8ghz

Vista 32bit -.-

I'm Running arma on

1024x768 75Hz

1000m dist

everything Very Low or Off (blood high)

Matt Effects...

Dunno how to check current FPS if anyone would like to help me...

But it's not lagging.

[bubbashrimps 0]

Quote[/b] ]

Dunno how to check current FPS if anyone would like to help me...

But it's not lagging.

ATI Tray Tools can give you FPS on top right of the screen

[Mr_Tea 0]

Quote[/b] ]

Dunno how to check current FPS if anyone would like to help me...

But it's not lagging.

ATI Tray Tools can give you FPS on top right of the screen

ATI Tray Tools will not help him, he has an NVidia Card.

[Vultar 0]

Yes its nvidia, so what will help me?

[dwringer 45]

I'm not positive, but I thought ATI tray tools will still work with nvidia cards for some limited functionality.

I might be totally wrong, however.

[Mr Sarkey 0]

Your right, some parts of it do work.

[Infam0us 10]

I use ATI Tool and it works perfectly for overclocking, but I couldn't find a option to display FPS in games, try using Fraps ... and yes I have a Geforce 7900GS

[cjph 0]

Hi All

I'm looking for some advice. I have the following :

C2D 2160 o/c'd to 3Gh / 2gb PC6400 RAM / Gigabyte Gigabyte 965P-DS3 Mobo / Audigy 2 ZS / PNY 8800 GTS 320 mb / Win XP SP2 / Samsung 2232BW 22" LCD screen / 480W PSU

I play 1.08 (I know) at 1680x1050 with most settings at medium (only blood on high ;-)), AA/AF off and VD at 2000m for SP. Since moving from a 1280x1024 CRT fraps reports typically 40-50 fps with slowdowns in the North Island and when things get busy. I also suffer the blocky LOD problem when using a scope or binoculars. My question is I have £200 ish to spend, which could get me either a beefier GPU (8800GTS/GT 512mb or GTX maybe) or a Quad C2D and 1066 memory - whichever is most likely to boost the performance. I also have two other considerations - Suma's recommended specs for Arma2 coming out a quad core and 8800GT GPU, so I should be OK with either choice, and for the future I like the look of Kegetys triple head software (or since this would need a re-build to a new mobo with second PCI-e slot, perhaps the Matrox triplehead to go hardware) in a 3 screen setup.

I tried the trick of pausing the game mid-action and fps  rise once the action stops, which I read shows the system is cpu bound during the game ?

So current thinking is a Q6600 and faster memory now (if this would add anything over a 2160 - anyone have experience of o/cing a Q6600 on the Gigabyte board?) and save for a new GPU (might have to wait for DX10.1 generation) - the 9800GT, 9800x2 and 3870x2 are not being hailed as offering significantly better performance over the current top end cards, though they do offer a single slot solution and the Nvidia cards are still to be announced/tested, so might surprise.

Any suggestions much appreciated.

cjph

[paragraphic l 2]

I use ATI Tool and it works perfectly for overclocking, but I couldn't find a option to display FPS in games, try using Fraps ... and yes I have a Geforce 7900GS

ATI Tool and ATI Tray Tool aren't the same, ATI Tray Tool is a must have for ATI users, as it gives you more and better control of your GPU settings than CCC gives.

If you have a 38xx card you better use RivaTuner at the moment though.

[PTV-Jobo 820]

Hey guys, here's hoping I'm in the right section. I was considering doing a little upgrading again and was looking at the complete AMD Spider setup. I was wondering if anyone thinks its a good setup especially since I want to have good performance for ArmA 2, so thought I'd check with you more knowledgeable people before I take a chance--money is not something I wanna waste.

Thanks for any help you can offer!

//John

[Mr Sarkey 0]

The Spider setup is good for the money except for the Phenom processor which is miles behind Intel stuff in the same range..

[malik22 0]

How does the 3870 X2 perform with this game?

[paragraphic l 2]

I don't have a PCI-E 2.0 motherboard atm so the Sapphire RADEON HD 3870 x2 1GB doesn't really perform any better then the Sapphire RADEON 2900xt 512MB I had

Average of 30FPS

Going to upgrade my motherboard and PSU soon and hope to gain any performance

[Knowsknone 0]

I am running a C2D E4500 @2.2Ghz, 4gigs of PC6400 RAM, and a Ati Radeon 1900GT with Vista.

I run at mostly everything on high, with view distance of 12000, I like the veiw ;-), and I have a few slow downs here and there like fighting down hill against 10-20 guys... Sadly I kept getting the LOD bug with 1.08 so I bumped my textures down to normal... Anyway I averaged a smooth 35fps with drops down to the 20's (what I saw anyway could be lower in reality). I enjoy how the human eye loves 29.9fps... Yet everyone needs systems that pump out 100+fps.

Anyone have any suggestions for the LOD bug? I have tried the maxmem parameter only caused me to crash after 2-5 minutes. I really dont wanna upgrade to 1.09b seeing as most of the mods I play currently dont have compatibility with it...

Im not sure if its the game or my GPU, but when on high/very high texture settings after 2-15 minutes all the textures crap out and I cant see menus or read text... Also, even on normal textures I seem to have a difficult time loading them sometimes, I can travel 30m sometimes and can sit for 2-3 minutes seeing textures that should be seen at 3000m then they upscale to normal.

[wostrey 0]

I am running a C2D E4500 @2.2Ghz, 4gigs of PC6400 RAM, and a Ati Radeon 1900GT with Vista.

I run at mostly everything on high, with view distance of 12000, I like the veiw ;-), and I have a few slow downs here and there like fighting down hill against 10-20 guys... Sadly I kept getting the LOD bug with 1.08 so I bumped my textures down to normal... Anyway I averaged a smooth 35fps with drops down to the 20's (what I saw anyway could be lower in reality). I enjoy how the human eye loves 29.9fps... Yet everyone needs systems that pump out 100+fps.

What resolution you use with this set of viewdistance, details, fps and gpu? I would guess something around 800x600.

Edit...

My rig: C2D E8400 (3.0 GHz), GPU 8800GTS 512MB (G92 core), 2 GB RAM.

Settings:

I play mostly mp and set my viewdist via some sort of addon to 2.8 - 3 km.

FPS I'm getting is anywhere between 20 (in towns mostly) and 60 (southern part of Sahrani).

Viewdistance seems to affect fps tragically, limiting both min and max fps I get and for me anything above 3km is killing my framerate.

[5133p39 14]

Forgive me, if this is not exactly the right topic, but it seems my question should fit in here:

I am considering buying a new notebook MSI GX700E:

http://global.msi.com.tw/index.p....o=#menu

...and i would like to know how good it would run ArmA, especially whether someone, who owns this notebook, ever run into some problems when trying to play ArmA on it (concerning stability and performance) ?

[FritzDaKat 0]

Heh, I've got the same question basicly. Going to be on the road alot starting in a month or two and I was wondering which if any Laptops would best suit my needs performance-wise for playing / editing purposes?

Anyone with a laptop of any type, could you please post fps / advanced video settings and viewdistance? Oh yea, Make, Model and so forth for your laptop.

Thanks much in advance. Sorry if I missed a similar post 20 pages back but I'm on a dial up conn with a 2.5 Kbps avg. speed.

[5133p39 14]

I finally bought the MSI GX700E (the link is for GX700, which is missing few things, but its almost the same).

I cannot give you any precise data yet, because i haven't got time to install fraps and do real tests, but i can tell you this:

I am using resolution 1280x1024, view distance 1700m, and all settings on normal except post processing (low), shadows (low), and AA + AF both on the lowest or off (not sure now).

It works, and it is playable (which means approx. 40 FPS minimum - my guess based on how it feels).

[DocSnyder 0]

Im running:

Asus P5E, Q6600, 8GB Corsair PC6400 (800mhz), Crossfire 2x ATI 3870, Samsung 24" (1920x1200).

Even with the 2 new beta patches it doesn't run w 8gb RAM, so I have to limit it to 4gb to play it with 1.11 or 1.12.

It runs quite smooth with all set to high / very high.

But what I noticed with ATI Cards: Turning off this AI mode in CatalystControlCenter gave me a huge boost in framerates. Not sure if it only affects crossfire configurations. May be this helps others, too.

[droors 0]

Don`t understand how anyone can enjoy this game with fps below 60?

Feels like you can breath the air ingame when the fps is high, a whole different gaming experience overall.

So i lower my settings, choosing high fps rather than eyecandy with lag ( anything below 60 )

A quick question : Is there a fps lock at 85 ?   if so is it because you dont need anymore ?

[paragraphic l 2]

your screen probably doesn't support anything higher then 85Mhz so it's locked by your system.

60 fps will not make to much of a difference over 30-40 fps for many, probably not even for you but having the FPS counter on your screen makes you believe it does.

[droors 0]

thanks for answer

For me its a huge differece. Don`t need a counter for that. Mabey its just me..

But.. have a crt monitor. Mabey 30 fps isn`t the same on a lcd that it is on a crt ?