aa super slow

[carld2002 1]

Well i got aa today.

All I can say is that it's extremely slow in singleplayer (and would be in multi also i assume). I have tried putting the frame rate down to 60, the visibility low... performance to low

nothing helps

my computer is a p4 3ghz, 1 gig or ram, 504 mg video card

any ideas?... also, i got the exact same thing while playing the demo a few weeks back.

Please forgive if this is in wrong section, or is asked ofter, i didn't have much time to look for it.

[-Puma- 2]

first turn post processing and shaders to low, disable shadows.

run some antispyware checks

what kind of video card u have??

[-Puma- 2]

turn postprocessing and shaders to low, disable shadows,

run some spyware checks

-what videocard u have???

sorry for doublepost

[carld2002 1]

nvidia geforce

[-CS-SOBR-1st-I-R- 0]

Have you patched to 1.05 ??

Make sure your system is not labouring too much. Do what Puma suggested and do not leave everything on very high.

Then it should be decent actually.

[twisted 127]

one of the easiest ways to see what settings you should be playing on is:

download fraps, install it and run it. this program will let you see frames per second on screen.

start Armed Assault.

go to the video options settings.

choose normal quality setting. don't screw around with anything else just yet.

play game. if better then you have a solid base to work from.

if not the go to video settings and choose low. try again. but this might change the resolution to something other than 1024x768 (which is a good basic res to work with). so change your resolution back to 1024x768 if needed.

if performance is still crappy the try very low. again watch to make sure your resolution is 1024x768.

then after getting a base that seems to work well you can try and raise some setting up under the advanced setting tab of video options, to and get maximum out of the game. but not too high because then it'll play slow again. Try raising view distance as well as other video settings.

get a balance and don't be too ambitious as the game will look pretty much the same at low setting or even high settings. But it will play slower if you turn too many settings up.

of course you could always try high and very high quality settings in video settings to start with - maybe your computer will run well with those (although you do need a good graphics card)

[carld2002 1]

i did what he said, i think it helped a bit but not much... it's word cause I exceed the system requrements for the game yet can't play it on the lowest settings.

ok... does 1.05 work with the english patch?

[-CS-SOBR-1st-I-R- 0]

i did what he said, i think it helped a bit but not much... it's word cause I exceed the system requrements for the game yet can't play it on the lowest settings.

ok... does 1.05 work with the english patch?

Start the game and see what it says in the welcome screen... maybe you are up to 1.05

If not, yes it works with the UK release and with the internation release. You can find the patch on every community site buddy, ive gottan run now to catch the train, sorry afford to search for a link now.

[twisted 127]

nvidia geforce

you need to be more specific. what type of geforce? bit difference between old cards and latest ones.

[GAU-8 0]

says hes got a 500 meg vid card...cant be too terribly old. i would think

[telejunky 0]

I've got a P4 3Ghz 1GB Ram, too

But i bought a X1950Pro 512...I thought 3GHZ "single core" are recommend but i got a tft with native 1280x1024 resolution and then there is no big difference between anti aliasing on very high or disabled...only 2-3 fps

But like i said i got a 17" tft and i wont run arma at 1024x768

My actual settings:

disabled shadows (biggest difference ~15-20 fps ), aa and af high, textures and shader normal (but no big difference while set it to high ~ 3-5 fps). So i play with 20-30 fps on the open field and 10-15 in urban areas

So I conclude that arma is a fan of high-performance cpus, because I can play with the settings of texturequality, shaderquality, aa and af and and there is no big difference to the fps...the only thing really changed is the deteriorated visual quality.

Mmh i think a better cpu would increase the performance immediately but why the hell are 3 ghz recommended? There should be words like "Core 2 Dou like" but not the only 3ghz, which is a big difference between the different constructions of the cores...

[EricM 0]

Quote[/b] ]So i play with 20-30 fps on the open field and 10-15 in urban areas

I have roughly the same perf (fraps) with a Geforce 6600GT and an Athlon2000+ (2Gb of memory).

Terrain, object, shader detail on normal, post-process low, shadows and textures on low (can't have higher with my card) AA and AF off @ 1024*768. Viewdistance 1000m.

Tricks that may be useful to try : Colors 16bits, vsync off, card set to high performance, triple buffering on, reduce view distance a notch, reduce resolution a notch, defrag you disk (lots of data streaming going on), try -maxmem=512 or 1024 in you arma shortcut...