The Value of FPS (And a bit of a rant)

[Heatseeker 0]

Not taking full advantage of what new components can deliver doesnt mean it wont use their raw horsepower eh .

edit: nvm...

[dirtylarrygb 0]

Not taking full advantage of what new components can deliver doesnt mean it wont use their raw horsepower eh .

edit: nvm...

See video front page, if you have to many options enabled you get shite FPS.

If you drop AA and keep things turned down you get great looks and fine FPS.

[dirtylarrygb 0]

^^

The way i see it thats far from being true, Arma is not 12 or 24 months ahead of current HW available. While it is a very demanding app that should benefit from future HW it doesnt take advantage of SLI or dual core CPU's, that being just a simple example of technology thats been out for a very long time now.

Since you seem to be quite the enthusiast you might have read about dx10 and understand that the leap from dx9 to the dx10 api will not be as big as the one from dx8 to dx9 in terms of graphical features. It will be a massive leap in terms of eficiency and better use of resources (SM4).

Arma is just not programed to take advantage of all this.

I agree the way things work is much improved with DX 10 over 9.

BUT the features this allows makes stuff that will blow us away. You only have to watch the physics and some effects in Alan Wake or Crysis and to see Real time 3d is appraoching what used to take hours to render on computer farms 10 years ago.

Crysis is close to the rendered film Final Fantasy. At the time the media wowed at who good graphcs look. Now real time 3d is getting close to that. 30 years ago the height of games was moving a bitmap round the screen.

Post process in Dx9 in ARMA is amazing. The HDR on 32 is very cool. these are dx 9 effects. The physics shaders etc etc on the way for DX10 will bring photoreality to life.

ARMA Crysis and Alan Wake are leading the charge, Rainbow 6 and Gears of War have blown console users away. But DX10 on big hardware WILL change the face of gaming.

Gaming is BIGGER than most people understand, and right now gaming is still viewed by the rest of the media as the spotty teenager. Games like WOW have proved gaming can make insane amounts of money.

This the games industry is worth 16-17 Billion Dollars.

If Visual effects in games continue to progress at the current rate. Games that are like films are less than 10 years away.

ARMA on the right system on a bg screen is amazing. It has it faults but right now there is nothing close on any platform to the reality that ARMA gives you from time to time.

The crack of gunfire the large view distance and good amount of detail are spectacular.

Like the guy Im running a single core CPU, but have fined tuned my 8800 and Oc'ed my machine and Arma runs great.

Thanks to the new beta (no fog) I can now snipe.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

You people didn't take your pills if you're comparing ArmA to HL2/DOOM3 and the like. 25km x 25km need I say more?

[4 IN 1 0]

You people didn't take your pills if you're comparing ArmA to HL2/DOOM3 and the like. 25km x 25km need I say more?

well acturally we are trying not to compare them to Arma thx for the pills BTW

[mr reality 0]

In 12 months the next gen videos cards will be 2 faster than the 8800 and the new CPUs 2x faster etc.  Crysis will be the same,  its always been this way it always will.

I just can't see this happening. One major hint that tells us things are coming to a halt in terms of processing power is the dual core and now quad core PCs. Single core processors are at there limit so now they create dual cores. SLI is now in place so this tells me that GPUs are now not going to be getting that much better than there predeccesors.

The likes of Intel and NIVIDIA create these things if there's nowhere else to go in terms of technology or they've hit a dead end. Maybe there will be a breakthrough and we'll see a 6Ghz single processor or a 2MB GPU but technology has its' limits and i think seeing dual cores and SLI in place just tells me there finding it hard to improve.

What i mean by finding it hard, is that there wont be these giant leaps forward from GPU to GPU that was seen previously.

This is speaking from a laymans perspective as it's how i see it.

[Dwarden 1125]

as someone mentioned here Supreme Commander , that's another multicore/multiCPU ready title (like Oblivion) ...

even they not truly ideal prepared for multicores they utitlize them to noticable advantage ...

that's where i think ArmA could hit problem ...

sure it's true that latest Core2Duo or Xeons can do lot of instructions per cycle (these 3GHz 5130 are ideal for ArmA server) still imagine combined power of 2 or 4 such

[dirtylarrygb 0]

In 12 months the next gen videos cards will be 2 faster than the 8800 and the new CPUs 2x faster etc. Crysis will be the same, its always been this way it always will.

I just can't see this happening. One major hint that tells us things are coming to a halt in terms of processing power is the dual core and now quad core PCs. Single core processors are at there limit so now they create dual cores. SLI is now in place so this tells me that GPUs are now not going to be getting that much better than there predeccesors.

The likes of Intel and NIVIDIA create these things if there's nowhere else to go in terms of technology or they've hit a dead end. Maybe there will be a breakthrough and we'll see a 6Ghz single processor or a 2MB GPU but technology has its' limits and i think seeing dual cores and SLI in place just tells me there finding it hard to improve.

What i mean by finding it hard, is that there wont be these giant leaps forward from GPU to GPU that was seen previously.

This is speaking from a laymans perspective as it's how i see it.

To be honest i thought the 7900 or 1950 were te limits of GPU's from what i was reading at the time any faster was going to run very hot and drwa silly power.

Then the 8800 comes along, draws silly power and runa bit hotter than the last gen cards but almost double the power.

Of course nvidia and Ati have SLI and crossfire, but games support seems about 505 right now, not to mention the move to vista from Xp is holding everything up for 6-12 months.

With the idea of hundreds of universal shaders (and it seems there room for adding alot more) I expect GPU's to move forward for a few more years yet before dual cards and quad core gpu's with 200 shaders per core arrive ;}

CPU's are intresting as bar RTS games nothing really pushes a fast single core right now (game wise) the benefits of duo or quad are for video editing 3d rendering and encoding etc. Games have kinda ignored the new power so far.

[ArmaVidz 0]

An X1900XTX and above isn't going to help to a viable degree in Arma. I've ran Armed Assault with an X1900XTX 512MB version clocked at 650GPU and 750Mem and it means squat.

Armed Assault is purely held back by the CPU. The most noticeable difference was when I upgraded from a 4200+ to a 5200+. That's all I could afford.

You wanna run Armed Assault at high res? Buy a $600 CPU and use a #300.00 video card. Quite disheartening actually.

[4 IN 1 0]

An X1900XTX and above isn't going to help to a viable degree in Arma. I've ran Armed Assault with an X1900XTX 512MB version clocked at 650GPU and 750Mem and it means squat.

Armed Assault is purely held back by the CPU. The most noticeable difference was when I upgraded from a 4200+ to a 5200+. That's all I could afford.

You wanna run Armed Assault at high res? Buy a $600 CPU and use a #300.00 video card. Quite disheartening actually.

well....i did that.....but not only for Arma to be true