why so low FPS for ati users still on 1.08?!!!!!&#

[dragunov90 0]

My rig:

Intel pentium 4 3.2 ghz rated at 4.8

2 gig ddr ram

diamond radeon x1950pro (512 gddr3)

When i run arma(1.08) even on the lowest settings I get this slow performance, FPS is like maximum 15

This is so annoying because i play Rainbow six Vegas on high settings with no performance problems my FPS is like 30 on almost highest settings.

I know other people who play with older cards like nvidias 6800 ang get better performance than me.

And I have installed the newest driver which is 7.6 right?

Can somebody who plays with an ati graphic card please tell me how it's going or could sombody just tell me what's wrong!!!!!

[dragunov90 0]

by the way I'am using VISTA

[Mattjin 0]

Get rid of that Vista crap, and install good old Windows XP. I also think that your CPU is a bottleneck-

[NeMeSiS 11]

Can somebody who plays with an ati graphic card please tell me how it's going

Awesome, 20-30FPS on normal (with tweaked grass) settings with a x1600XT, amd x2 4200+, 1,5gb ram.

Anyways, if you still have an XP cd lying around somewhere, it may be worth to try a dual boot system and just install ArmA under XP.

[Guest Ti0n3r]

Quote[/b] ]Get rid of that Vista crap, and install good old Windows XP. I also think that your CPU is a bottleneck-

His CPU should be more than enough for ArmA. Like people already said, try using XP instead (if you have a CD lying around that is).

[dragunov90 0]

Well it seems like i have to wait for the next patch again.

I will not convert to XP because I think Vista is a lot prettier

and besides meanwhile I can play Company Of heroes with my friends which is so fun

If you have any solutions except trying XP please post them

[Guest Ti0n3r]

What resolution are you running ArmA in?

[TheVoodoo 0]

Get rid of that Vista crap, and install good old Windows XP. I also think that your CPU is a bottleneck-

Get rid of this piece of crappy Arma Engine Code, and tell the dev they have to get it running right!

8 months are over since the game has been released and all i get is BSOD, system freezes, error messages like "cannot create memory surface blabla" and stupid anti-vista-noob posts in troubleshooting forums and a fucking gamesupport from dev's cause they need 3months to release patches and make it just worse.

[dragunov90 0]

something called 1024X900 maybe can't remember but it's one step higher than the lowest which is 800X600 right???

It doesn't mather what resolution still same shitty FPS

And adjusting the visibility and details doesn't help either

As i said it's very strange, because I play many other games which require more cpu power without any problems on high setting, but with arma, I don't know........................................

[Chris Death 0]

Get rid of that Vista crap, and install good old Windows XP. I also think that your CPU is a bottleneck-

Get rid of this piece of crappy Arma Engine Code, and tell the dev they have to get it running right!

8 months are over since the game has been released and all i get is BSOD, system freezes, error messages like "cannot create memory surface blabla" and stupid anti-vista-noob posts in troubleshooting forums and a fucking gamesupport from dev's cause they need 3months to release patches and make it just worse.

Well, the good old BSOD and them user's accusations it might

be caused by crappy software.

Best you open up google, then enter BSOD or blue screen of death, and have a long long read.

Then you come back and show us links to serious sources,

which are pointing onto crappy software (except driver software - they are related to hardware imho).

And that Vista is running games which were not optimized

for Vista slower than XP is also nothing new in the entire gaming scene.

~S~ CD

[bravo 6 0]

Well that's how i feel.

Im not using vista, im using XP pro SP2 and i have the same problem.

Im hoping something improves in next patch

[Marines 0]

AMD 64 X2 5000+

3G RAM DDR3

Nvidia 7900 GS OC

I'm running the game at "High/Very High", with a reasonable 35+ FPS. This sounds like a problem at your end, as most users with a like ATI card have almost no problems.

[LoFFeN 0]

XP owns Vista by a lot, when it comes to gaming! Vista struggles with driver issues, bugs and performance issues. I bet that Vista maybe need a year or two to be fully stable.

So my tip is to have both XP and Vista installed on two different Harddrives or partitions for example.

[dragunov90 0]

I had played OFP for almost 4 years. It was my favorite pc game because you could do so many things. And I'am a big military fan so this game was perfect for me. When bis announced arma I became very happy because I had also experienced those not enough memory errors which someone called crappy software which was quite fun hehe:P

However when they said that there would be a new game which was arma, I became so happy because OFP came out in 2001, and now arma wow think about all the improvements and all the new features. I simply couldn't stop dreaming. But when I got arma the first thing i saw was old bugs that existed in ofp. And later came the boring period where you waited month after month for a new patch that would solve all this issues. And later I became aware of the texture bug that was killing my other cpu which has geforce 8800 not to mention there are texture bugs on 512vram cards also. So I had to wait even more. And finally the 1.08 patch arrived which boosted som fps to my 8800 but ´no change for my x1950pro, and both of them experienced som minor texture bugs. As a summary i want to say that I expected more from arma, I mean come on it's 2007 many years have passed and it's not enough to just sharpen the graphis a little.

Now I don't want to disappoint any of you, I just wanted to tell you how i fell about arma which could have been a better game.

For you who agree with me, maybe if codemasters provide a ingame mission editor for its upcoming OFP 2, it will give us a new hope for future military simulations

[NeMeSiS 11]

Now I don't want to disappoint any of you, I just wanted to tell you how i fell about arma which could have been a better game.

No, all you did was vent your frustration.

[snkman 351]

Get rid of that Vista crap, and install good old Windows XP. I also think that your CPU is a bottleneck-

Get rid of that ArmA crap, and install good old Operation Flashpoint.

Problem sloved

[-Puma- 2]

HI! I have about the same system and can confirm that vista is dragging u down. I'm playing 1280x1024 resolution, with everything on normal/high exept shadows low AA low. Get nice 20+ FPS on thightest spots(big city battles) and 30+ on everywhere else.

Alltough VISTA looks nice and all, I bet all those goodies take huge amount of system resources + hog memory like hell.

like others said make a nice dualboot system to play arma in xp, and do whatever in VISTA

[Jack-UK 0]

Yup, dont expect a patch to be released for ArmA to work flawlessly on vista.

The game was built for XP, im pretty sure that the majority of people here still use XP and not vista.

It was designed for XP therefore you either use XP or have to live with the lesser performance which Vista gives.

Im sure the devs will eventually try and increase their vista support, but dont expect 1.09 to be 100% compatible...

[dragunov90 0]

Well well I will still have to hope for a new patch, because if vista was a drag, then how do you explain games like company of heroes and rainbow six vegas for example that runs perfect on vista with high settings on, those games came out before vista.

So they better release a new patch before losing people, because I don't think everybody going to stick to old xp just for one game!!!

[-Puma- 2]

Well well I will still have to hope for a new patch, because if vista was a drag, then how do you explain games like company of heroes and rainbow six vegas for example that runs perfect on vista with high settings on, those games came out before vista.

So they better release a new patch before losing people, because I don't think everybody going to stick to old xp just for one game!!!

It's been said 1000 times, make a dual boot system for the love of god

...or sit and wait till u grow roots for that vista patch...

[4 IN 1 0]

why ppl always bitch about something not working when its not designed for that OS?

my company is using fuji digital photo processing softward and that version only works on win2000, putting it into XP and it became very very slow

"do you get a patch for that thing?" you might ask, but sorry they aint call Mr.perfect and if you want that softward to work on XP, pay them $XXXXX for a new version, would you want BI to be such an asshole? i bet you not

[Chris Death 0]

Comparing different games on same hardware is like

comparing apples and bananas.

They should have same taste because both grow up on trees.

ArmA can be compared to Star Trek - it explores regions

of your hardware, where no other program has been before.

When i saw first time that newer pc's only get sold with Vista

i straight came to the conclusion that MS is making pressure

because they want to get their new product on the man.

I'm really happy to have bought my latest rig a month before

every hardware dealer jumped onboard of that Vista ship.

I still remember how long time it has taken for me to hop

onto XP, because my older ME was working fine for those

games i was playing at given time and there was not a single

reason to change that - though i remember lot of ppl having

had various problems with XP during it's first year of presence.

BIS has made a good decision with staying on XP for ArmA

IMHO.

Imagine: what if Vista had turned out to be a auto-goal and

if ppl had made a decision not to like it.

How many copies of ArmA BIS (or their publishers) would have

had sold then?

XP was here when ArmA came out - Vista wasn't - should BIS

be blamed afterwards for forcing their customers to buy a

new Operating System just to be able to play their game or

should they have kept developing it for a working and well-known system?

There's a good phrase, i know it from football/soccer, but you

can easily convert it to every single aspect of life:

'Never change a winning team'

And yeah - don't be afraid from setting up a dual boot - the

worst thing that can happen is that the game is not running

but then at least you would know upon your own experience.

~S~ CD

[kklownboy 43]

Well well I will still have to hope for a new patch, because if vista was a drag, then how do you explain games like company of heroes and rainbow six vegas for example that runs perfect on vista with high settings on, those games came out before vista.

So they better release a new patch before losing people, because I don't think everybody going to stick to old xp just for one game!!!

COH is from a huge dev... not a lil dev like,BIS AND was being devolped with vista/dx10 in mined... All of you guys who bitch ( rightly so) that your card/the engine sucks should quit playing the game. It runs much better on XP and will for the rest of the year and beyond, Any card under a 8800gtx is not good enough to run this VERY VERY complex game ,even though it might not look like a next gen game/renderer. Most of the ppl who complain( and again rightly so) have sub par HW. Hey to user your "its 2007" argument, your using a 2006 card! and a mid line at that from 2006. Which makes your 1950"pro" and LOWend 2007 card. and you guys with 6xxx and 16xx, are so far off the back its not possible to play at a good res with nice settings. I run a CF 1950"XTX" and can just play the game with ALMOST all the cool settings, and will put in my new pair of 2900xt s in CF soon. I get 20 to 60 (capped) FPS with to big cards running at the same time, i would expect your 1950 "pro" to suck.

[ck-claw 1]

Arma is a strange entity?

Since 1.08 i found the games fps getting lower?(running at normal)

so i try lowering the settings a bit more? no diff?

Now just for the hell of it(cant hurt surely)?

I stick the settings all on high-and hey presto,whatya know?

Higher fps and looks better

P4 2.9

1 gb ram

7900gs

[dragunov90 0]

I run a CF 1950"XTX" and can just play the game with ALMOST all the cool settings, and will put in my new pair of 2900xt s in CF soon. I get 20 to 60 (capped) FPS with to big cards running at the same time, i would expect your 1950 "pro" to suck.

well good for you asshole