su27 0 Posted February 24, 2008 I've built brand new PC, especially for ArmA/OFP2. I decided to spend more money for high-end components to bulit future-proof machine. So, after two weeks I had C2D Quad Core 2,4GHz + 2x 8800GT + X-Fi Xtreme Gamer + 7200rpm HDD with 16MB cache + custom cooling system PC on my desk. I was so happy. Until I started ArmA. I've experienced many problems: - not working SLI - poor SLI performance - crash to desktop - OS hangs - missing textures - poor SLI performance - crash to desktop - nvidia drivers crash - screen constantly becoming bright white - white epileptic screen flashing and blinking - poor SLI performance I tried many drivers, about 20-30 versions from early 169 to beta 174. Nothing helped. Some drivers make game stable but breaks other things. Someone suggested that 2.4 GHZ cpu is not sufficient for twoo 8800s so I've changed it to 3GHz C2D. No improvement besides increase in 3DMark06 score. Someone else suggested that 560W PSU is to weeak for SLI so I've changed it to 1000W SLI-ready PSU with separate channels for each card. Nothing changed. One day I decided to pull out one GFX card. Reinstalled drivers, reinstalled ArmA. From this moment I have: - stable Arma, no CTD's - no graphic glitches, no HRD problems - high performance, with only one card I can play 1680x1050, everything on very high except shadow details, visibility 3km - no more stuttering Now I am happy. So, my advice for those who are considering buying new computer, especially for ArmA (during my research I've noticed many games have similar problems with SLI): STAY AWAY FROM SLI! Buy one 8800gtx instead of two 8800GT/GTS. It is immature technology which may increase performance but eventually gives you more headache than it's worth... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeMeSiS 11 Posted February 24, 2008 I've experienced many problems:- not working SLI - poor SLI performance - crash to desktop - OS hangs - missing textures - poor SLI performance - crash to desktop - nvidia drivers crash - screen constantly becoming bright white - white epileptic screen flashing and blinking - poor SLI performance Interesting way to make a long list... Anyway, have you tried using the FEAR.exe profile from the nvidia drivers for ArmA? Some users had some very good results with this. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
su27 0 Posted February 24, 2008 Anyway, have you tried using the FEAR.exe profile from the nvidia drivers for ArmA? Some users had some very good results with this. I've tried EVERYTHING - fear.exe, gothic2.exe, 3dmark06.exe, messing with almost all profile settings with nHancer... It is true that fear.exe tweak works - it gave me few more fps and full SLI bar. But didnt help for HDR flashing and CTD's. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maatz 1 Posted February 24, 2008 I've built brand new PC, especially for ArmA/OFP2. I decided to spend more money for high-end components to bulit future-proof machine. So, after two weeks I had C2D Quad Core 2,4GHz + 2x 8800GT + X-Fi Xtreme Gamer + 7200rpm HDD with 16MB cache + custom cooling system PC on my desk. I was so happy. Until I started ArmA. I've experienced many problems: - not working SLI - poor SLI performance - crash to desktop - OS hangs - missing textures - poor SLI performance - crash to desktop - nvidia drivers crash - screen constantly becoming bright white - white epileptic screen flashing and blinking - poor SLI performance I tried many drivers, about 20-30 versions from early 169 to beta 174. Nothing helped. Some drivers make game stable but breaks other things. Someone suggested that 2.4 GHZ cpu is not sufficient for twoo 8800s so I've changed it to 3GHz C2D. No improvement besides increase in 3DMark06 score. Someone else suggested that 560W PSU is to weeak for SLI so I've changed it to 1000W SLI-ready PSU with separate channels for each card. Nothing changed. One day I decided to pull out one GFX card. Reinstalled drivers, reinstalled ArmA. From this moment I have: - stable Arma, no CTD's - no graphic glitches, no HRD problems - high performance, with only one card I can play 1680x1050, everything on very high except shadow details, visibility 3km - no more stuttering Now I am happy. So, my advice for those who are considering buying new computer, especially for ArmA (during my research I've noticed many games have similar problems with SLI): STAY AWAY FROM SLI! Buy one 8800gtx instead of two 8800GT/GTS. It is immature technology which may increase performance but eventually gives you more headache than it's worth... thank you for the information mate! i ordered my rig also with Quad core and was tending to get two 8800GT cards, but now i will first stay with one for ArmA. Thanks for the information you deliviered. was quite important for me! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
su27 0 Posted February 24, 2008 thank you for the information mate! i ordered my rig also with Quad core and was tending to get two 8800GT cards, but now i will first stay with one for ArmA. For the price of Q6600 you can have E6850. ArmA, like most games uses only one core, so basically it is the matter of 2,4GHZ vs 3GHz CPU. If you don't plan to use some graphics design or mathematics software - higher clocked dual core is better choice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Radius 0 Posted February 24, 2008 I got SLI working after a while, I am running dual 8800GTS's 640MB cards. The trick was (and I forget where I saw this) you have to create a profile for ArmA in the nVidia manager and turn on all the options you want. But this won't get SLI working completely, you then have to modify the global profile and turn off the sync to refresh option and then turn on SLI. Those two things in the global profile BTW, that's the important part. Then it works! It did for me anyhow. It drastically increased my performance. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MehMan 0 Posted February 24, 2008 thank you for the information mate! i ordered my rig also with Quad core and was tending to get two 8800GT cards, but now i will first stay with one for ArmA. For the price of Q6600 you can have E6850. ArmA, like most games uses only one core, so basically it is the matter of 2,4GHZ vs 3GHz CPU. If you don't plan to use some graphics design or mathematics software - higher clocked dual core is better choice. Well yeah, ArmA doesn't work well with Dual cores, but ArmAII is probably going to be optimized for it and newer games utilize dual cores better. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Radius 0 Posted February 24, 2008 A dual core will probably still benefit the average gamer. Just because ArmA doesn't support it doesn't mean it' useless. Other processes will run more efficiently on the lesser used pipeline so it's all good. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
binkster 0 Posted February 25, 2008 I would go with a Q6600, more performance for your buck, also check out Projected Optimal PC System Requirements at ArmA2 Wiki. It would be a good investment even though ArmA1 doesnt use dual or quad but ArmA 2 Will. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
su27 0 Posted February 25, 2008 I got SLI working after a while, I am running dual 8800GTS's 640MB cards.The trick was (and I forget where I saw this) you have to create a profile for ArmA in the nVidia manager and turn on all the options you want. But this won't get SLI working completely, you then have to modify the global profile and turn off the sync to refresh option and then turn on SLI. Those two things in the global profile BTW, that's the important part. Then it works! It did for me anyhow. It drastically increased my performance. And you don't have any problems with HDR? No flashing? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
su27 0 Posted February 25, 2008 I would go with a Q6600, more performance for your buck, also check out Projected Optimal PC System Requirements at ArmA2 Wiki. It would be a good investment even though ArmA1 doesnt use dual or quad but ArmA 2 Will. I, personally, cannot agree. For gaming and for daily use there is no really benefit from having 4 cores. And this comes from my short experience with vista nad core quad. It is much faster with 3GHz C2D. (and gives more 3DMarks) Buy Q6600 and in short time you'll just find yourself stuck with outdated 2,4GHz cpu. That is of course my personal opinion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maatz 1 Posted February 25, 2008 thank you for the information mate! i ordered my rig also with Quad core and was tending to get two 8800GT cards, but now i will first stay with one for ArmA. For the price of Q6600 you can have E6850. ArmA, like most games uses only one core, so basically it is the matter of 2,4GHZ vs 3GHz CPU. If you don't plan to use some graphics design or mathematics software - higher clocked dual core is better choice. but i'll need a quadcore for my academic studies anyway, so it just comes in handy Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
oChaos.DNJ 0 Posted February 25, 2008 I would go with a Q6600, more performance for your buck, also check out Projected Optimal PC System Requirements at ArmA2 Wiki. It would be a good investment even though ArmA1 doesnt use dual or quad but ArmA 2 Will. I, personally, cannot agree. For gaming and for daily use there is no really benefit from having 4 cores. And this comes from my short experience with vista nad core quad. It is much faster with 3GHz C2D. (and gives more 3DMarks) Buy Q6600 and in short time you'll just find yourself stuck with outdated 2,4GHz cpu. That is of course my personal opinion. Theres, not alot of commonly used multithreaded apps and games currently. Though games are starting to come around...More cores will become more usefull in the future. Games like Crysis, COD4, ET:QW, GRAW, UT3, and more use multiple cores. Many professional programs are multithreaded too though... btw that 2.4 Q6600 doesnt have to stay at 2.4 either. My E6600 is @ 3.2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
binkster 0 Posted February 25, 2008 I would go with a Q6600, more performance for your buck, also check out Projected Optimal PC System Requirements at ArmA2 Wiki. It would be a good investment even though ArmA1 doesnt use dual or quad but ArmA 2 Will. I, personally, cannot agree. For gaming and for daily use there is no really benefit from having 4 cores. And this comes from my short experience with vista nad core quad. It is much faster with 3GHz C2D. (and gives more 3DMarks) Buy Q6600 and in short time you'll just find yourself stuck with outdated 2,4GHz cpu. That is of course my personal opinion. My e6600 is at 3.6, 400fsb 800mem, on air stays around 50C. If ArmA2 is going to say quad core is going to be used then you bet im going to get one. If you know how to OC then this is no problem. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
xav 0 Posted February 25, 2008 I would personnaly wait for ARMA II Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ShrubMiK 0 Posted February 28, 2008 >ArmA, like most games uses only one core, I think if you investigate further you'll find there are already more highly multi-threaded games out there than is commonly realised. I believe valve's Source engine is now highly multi-threaded, although having not played HL2 or CS:S for quite some time I haven't seen that for myself. Oblivion quite happily loads all 4 of my cores. Bioshock. Quake4. Supreme Commander. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OldGeezer 0 Posted March 1, 2008 I just got Arma (1.09 beta-patched) loaded onto my new machine with two 8800GT cards running in SLI mode, and with graphics set to "very high" but with no AA or AF, it's running great so far (gotta figure out how to display fps)...much better than I expected it to. For 1800 bucks CDN, this puter can run ARMA and Crysis at the highest settings (dx9) at 1440x900 (no AA and AF) at perfectly acceptable framerates, so I can't complain. I like my SLI setup just fine. Motherboard: Asus P4N32-E SLI CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad 2.4GHz Ram: 4Gigs Corsair DDR2 800 (4,4,4,12) Video: Two "BFG 8800 GT OC 512Mb" cards in SLI mode Sound: Creative X-Fi Extreme Gamer Hard drive: 500Gb SATA Case/PSU: Antec Nine-Hundred "Ultimate Gamer Case"/Antec TruePower Quattro 1000 Watt Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OldGeezer 0 Posted March 2, 2008 >ArmA, like most games uses only one core,I think if you investigate further you'll find there are already more highly multi-threaded games out there than is commonly realised. I believe valve's Source engine is now highly multi-threaded, although having not played HL2 or CS:S for quite some time I haven't seen that for myself. Oblivion quite happily loads all 4 of my cores. Bioshock. Quake4. Supreme Commander. Even where the game only makes use of one core, it's not like a quad-core is a waste of money or anything, heh heh. I just upgraded from a 3GHz P4 to a 2.4 GHz Core2 Quad. With only one core in use, one might think I'd be better off on the P4 at 3GHz...at least I wondered about that at first. But then I remembered that my P4 was on a motherboard with an 800MHz front-side bus, using DDR 400MHz ram. The Quad runs on a front-side bus of 1066MHz and uses DDR2 800MHz ram. I'll stick to my measley 2.4GHz thank you very much. Out of the four games I have installed at the moment though, I think ARMA is the only one that doesn't use multiple cores. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dm 9 Posted March 3, 2008 I just got Arma (1.09 beta-patched) loaded onto my new machine with two 8800GT cards running in SLI mode, and with graphics set to "very high" but with no AA or AF, it's running great so far (gotta figure out how to display fps)...much better than I expected it to. For 1800 bucks CDN, this puter can run ARMA and Crysis at the highest settings (dx9) at 1440x900 (no AA and AF) at perfectly acceptable framerates, so I can't complain. I like my SLI setup just fine. What driver version are you using? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OldGeezer 0 Posted March 3, 2008 What driver version are you using? I'm using Nvidia's latest beta driver: "ForceWare Release 169 BETA 169.28" dated January 10/08. When you select the driver section from the main page, you can click a link for beta drivers to be included in your search. I chose it because it apparently improved Crysis performance. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
