ArmA2 8GB RAM Problem

[_Hurricane 0]

There is no way you can get ArmA II use more than 2GB, as it is a 32-bit application.

I changed the LocalVRAM and NonLocalVRAM values manually and put the file on read only to make sure ArmA II doesn't change the values again.

I'm still trying things out, but I think this is a solution for many Crashes to Desktop (access_violation and out of memory).

LocalVRAM = amount of VRAM on graphics card; for me this is 1GB = 1024³ = 1073741824

NonLocalVRAM = amount of RAM ArmA II can use, but this won't go higher than 2GB = 1024³ * 2 = 2147483648

[HardBoot 10]

There is no way you can get ArmA II use more than 2GB, as it is a 32-bit application.

x86 can use 4GB so why would it use only 2GB? Its no trouble realy, as its running ok now.

Also, the default directory on my system is the x64 ProgramFiles... which is where I installed it assuming it was x64 capable. If its not... I think I just found my problem. :eek:

[Falke1976 10]

Got exactly this Problem :mad:

Installed yesterday, startet the game, saw this texture failure, exited, patched to 1.04 and the problem still exists. And i realize, that its somewhat at slowmotion when i move, shoot and turn.

I tried to lower graphic settings, but didnt fix it. I did not try windowed mode, but i will try this evening.

System specs:

AMD Phenom X4 9850 Sockel AM2+ - 8 GB Corsair DDR2 PC6400 CL4 - MSI K9N2 Diamond (NForce Driver 15.49) - Asus ENGTX285 ( Driver 191.07) - Samsung Syncmaster T260 HD @ 1920*1200 - SB X-Fi Extreme Audio PCIe - 5x Samsung 250HJ Raid5 930GB - BeQuiet Dark Power 750W - Antec 900 - G15 Keyboard- LG7 Mouse - Saitek Command Unit - Windows Vista Ultimate 64 SP 1 - TrackIR 5 Pro

And by the way, i am pissed of securom, sorry, but i had to update my DVD Firmware to get that damn Game installed, and its not really working properly. Ill buy a new dvd ram this evening, but man, my old one is about 4 years old. I would recommend on the box, that it is securom secured, and that some DVD RAM / ROM may have problems with that.

:j:

Edited October 20, 2009 by Falke1976

[.kju 3244]

@ Falke1976

Beta patches remove the DVD check.

[BCA Cat Toaster 10]

LocalVRAM is that on your VGA

NonLocalVRAM is shared System-RAM that can be additionally used by your VGA if needed but that´s way slower. The only point where the 64-Bit OS comes in with lots of RAM.

Can´t see anything wrong with the values here, showing 1-2GB VRAM present on your VGA and 1-4GB additional Cache provided by the System-RAM if you have a 64-Bit OS and 8GB RAM.

A 32-Bit Application can only access 2GB of System-RAM (there are some tweaks of course to make it aware of 2.5 or 3GB but that has sideeffects). Of course there are about 40-70 other programs and processes running on your OS that could use the remaining 0.5GB-1GB RAM left a 32-Bit OS can access from 4GB. Of course your Vista32 might show that are 4GB installed, but it can only use 2.5-3.5 maximum at all without tricks like PAE which isn´t available on consumer-platforms for good reasons.

However I haven´t seen that ArmA2 uses even 1GB of System-RAM at a time so obviously there is no need or benefit using a 64-Bit OS in this case as ArmA2 is no 64-Bit Application. The only game i know today that has 64-Bit Binaries is Crysis and it makes little use of it.

I haven´t noticed any performance differences running ArmA2 on XP32 or on Windows7-64. In both cases and no matter if I used a nVidia or ATi-VGA I have to use -winxp command to get proper graphics at all with 8GB installed.

[Falke1976 10]

Sorry man,

64 Bit is the the future. I dont remember that there were such a discussion when 16 Bit change to 32.... (but this is long ago, and playing games were totally different then)

In my eyes it is no solution to change a 64 Bit into a 32, so there is no need to talk about the fact that in this case a 32 bit would be better. And i know games where it was better to have 64 Bit then 32...

Age of Conan

Darkfall

The list of 64 Bit supporting games grows:

Native 64 bit games:

Half-Life 2

Lost Coast

Bet On Soldier: Blood Sport

Codename: Panzers (Phase one)

Colin McRae Rally 2005

Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay

Far Cry

Fahrenheit

Shadow Ops: Red Mercury

Unreal Tournament 2004

WWII Tank Commander

S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Shadow of Chernobyl

Dreadnought

So what ever the bugs comes from, its useless to think about changing to 32 bit. Then you can also get out your Atari 2000 to play pong or other "classic" games. My 2 cent on "32 Bit is better".

Edited October 20, 2009 by Falke1976

[BCA Cat Toaster 10]

I did not say with ONE word that 64-Bit isn´t the future. What I said is, that there´s no difference with current 32-Bit Applications and ArmA2 at all, no matter if you run a 64-Bit or 32-Bit OS as long as the Application is 32-Bit.

The fact is that an application "runs under a 64-Bit OS" does not mean it uses any of its features or that´s it even coded in 64-Bit.

Edited October 20, 2009 by BCA Cat Toaster

[Falke1976 10]

Ok, sorry for my misunderstanding ^^

English is not my mothertongue, i just thought you would advice ppl to use better 32 bit os.

[shataan 1]

Again I agree. It amazes me that a game that could really benefit from the 64 bit coding/better ram efficiency etc etc etc, was not coded for it.

[_Hurricane 0]

However I haven´t seen that ArmA2 uses even 1GB of System-RAM at a time so obviously there is no need or benefit using a 64-Bit OS in this case as ArmA2 is no 64-Bit Application.

I've seen my game use up to 1.7GB several times already.

You are right saying there will be no benefit in using a 32-bit or 64-bit architecture at the moment. However I think ArmA II could really benefit of being a 64-bit application. It would then be able to address more RAM (if available) and use the different features of 64-bit architectures.

[kklownboy 43]

I did not say with ONE word that 64-Bit isn´t the future. What I said is, that there´s no difference with current 32-Bit Applications and ArmA2 at all, no matter if you run a 64-Bit or 32-Bit OS as long as the Application is 32-Bit.

The fact is that an application "runs under a 64-Bit OS" does not mean it uses any of its features or that´s it even coded in 64-Bit.

It runs much better on a 64bit OS for me, and it runs better on Vista64 than Xp64, and win7_64 is better than both.You have to think more than just the A2_32bit exe.

You should look at better memory management, Better device drivers, better MultiGPU support, better multi CPU support, Better usage of CPU cache, better versions of DX9c( yeah they are a bit different than XP) And just for the shear fact that you can run the OS(64b) and other apps along with the game using 1.95GB of physical ram (which on 32bXP i never can get too). A2 64b> A2 32b. In spades with my H/W.

[HardBoot 10]

A few hours on microsoft forums and...

The incorrect Display RAM issue isn't an issue at all. dxdiag is not only checking the onboard RAM but any system RAM allocated to the GPU. So if ARMAII is seeing that you have 4GB of video RAM when you only have 1GB, it is NOT an issue and everything is working fine.

As for the rest, I still need the -winxp tag.

[BCA Cat Toaster 10]

@Hurricane

Completely agree. Memory Usage of course might depend a lot of what and where you´re playing. In AAS-Missions I usually play it never passes 600MB so far but that´s just my experience which is of course not representative for all other players in the world.

@kklownboy

You can´t say that in general at all. My experience was as I changed from XP32 to 7-64 that the nVIDIA-Drivers with the same version-number weren´t on par with those XP32 at all. It performed about 5pfs average better in XP32 with the same Hardware and Settings in ArmA2 and I noticed no difference in other games. Of course that might have changed with the latest nVidia-Drivers already. Those things always change and move.

The last thing I would say is that device drivers for 64-Bit are better than 32-Bit and there are a lot of compatibility issues 32-bit Application can run into in an 64-Bit OS-Environment. It has improved a lot during the last three years, Vista64 was a pain in the axx three years ago, even Adobe Reader and many standard applications didn´t work. As long as game-consoles define the mainstream, real 64-Bit-Support and anything higher than DX9 has still a long way to go on the PC. Just count the amount of titles that use DX10(.1) during the last three years compared to DX9.

[OH-58-FL-Pilot 10]

@Hurricane

Completely agree. Memory Usage of course might depend a lot of what and where you´re playing. In AAS-Missions I usually play it never passes 600MB so far but that´s just my experience which is of course not representative for all other players in the world.

@kklownboy

You can´t say that in general at all. My experience was as I changed from XP32 to 7-64 that the nVIDIA-Drivers with the same version-number weren´t on par with those XP32 at all. It performed about 5pfs average better in XP32 with the same Hardware and Settings in ArmA2 and I noticed no difference in other games. Of course that might have changed with the latest nVidia-Drivers already. Those things always change and move.

The last thing I would say is that device drivers for 64-Bit are better than 32-Bit and there are a lot of compatibility issues 32-bit Application can run into in an 64-Bit OS-Environment. It has improved a lot during the last three years, Vista64 was a pain in the axx three years ago, even Adobe Reader and many standard applications didn´t work. As long as game-consoles define the mainstream, real 64-Bit-Support and anything higher than DX9 has still a long way to go on the PC. Just count the amount of titles that use DX10(.1) during the last three years compared to DX9.

Why even factor in DX10 though.. DX11 has a new streamlined method of apporach with teselation that has seen devs jump over to 11.

We will see more 11 then we did with DX10. The way DX11 has been designed this time around makes it very attractive and approachable for developers.

And a note on the 64bit vs 32 bit app management.

It always makes more sense to use a 64 bit OS - Comparability is nearly non existent in terms of issues. Due to the 32 bit emulation in 7 - I have not yet found a single program that does not work the way it is intended in a 64 bit environment.

Memory management is quite refined in 7 as well.. The advantage to 6+ gigs of ram is seen within the environment itself.

When you offload 64 bit application memory usage to banks not used by the 32 bit app you free up more ram for the 32 bit application to use.

So by using a combination of both you are always using your memory to your benefit.

Many XP users use programs to limit services for "memory conservation" or use applications that kill off the gui and all services to free up memory.

It is quite amusing because in a 64 bit environment - You generally do not need to do this since the OS memory usage itself can use the memory that your 32 bit application does not.

[Falke1976 10]

The workaround with adding -winxp disables the texture bug for me....

[mr.g-c 6]

The workaround with adding -winxp disables the texture bug for me....

It does for everyone, sure. Problem i noticed (and i made the tests with that switch and plugging-out 4GB of Ram) that it sucks away around 10% Performance, which is crucial in Arma2 ;)

But -winXp switch is not the solution, not at all....

In no software in the world you must use such a shortcut switch to make a product working :o

Just hope this is fixed sooner than later and that its not a pretty heavy engine limitation like it was with Arma1 obviously, where we waited like ~1.5years for a fix for the 4GB issue :eek: :eek: :(

[Sniperdoc 0]

Considering that half the population of computer gamers is still on Windows XP 32 bit (http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/) would probably be a bad indication of making games exclusively for 64-bit. But, to think ahead and make it 64-bit compatible... that would've been a nice thought. One of the reasons why I think this game has failed to catch on. It's a great game, great concept, with an unbelievably shoddy follow-through as people with 8GB and a 64-bit system have still not had their issue resolved by BIS. How long has it been since the last patch... oh... never mind. They're not patching anymore... they're working on an expansion for a half-finished game.

[OH-58-FL-Pilot 10]

Considering that half the population of computer gamers is still on Windows XP 32 bit (http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/) would probably be a bad indication of making games exclusively for 64-bit. But, to think ahead and make it 64-bit compatible... that would've been a nice thought. One of the reasons why I think this game has failed to catch on. It's a great game, great concept, with an unbelievably shoddy follow-through as people with 8GB and a 64-bit system have still not had their issue resolved by BIS. How long has it been since the last patch... oh... never mind. They're not patching anymore... they're working on an expansion for a half-finished game.

What 64 bit issues?

The issue is 8 gb ram addressing with 7 gigs limited the game works fine and works perfect in a 64 bit environment. I would say the ram issues is not a compatibility issue with 64 bit but the way the game see's memory overall.

[shataan 1]

It is not about the game working fine in a 64 bit enviro. It is about the game not being forward thought coded to take advantage of the better code properties of 64 bit O/S. Such as more ram usability for 1.

Ok let us forget for a moment that there should have been some 64 bit o/s support. The problem with ARMA 2s memory in 32 bit, is pretty bad. I`d go as far to say it is the main problem forcing peeps away from this game. Not the graphics handling. But the horrible texture load stutter peeps are facing.

Anyone remember Delta Force 2? The fugliest game ever, even at release. But I could play it smooth.

If BIS wants to sell more units, the memory issue as far as how textures are loaded in this game, had better come asap. I can run this game maxed. But many can`t. I think I am only doing it thru brute force tho.

[bourkie 10]

What 64 bit issues?

The issue is 8 gb ram addressing with 7 gigs limited the game works fine and works perfect in a 64 bit environment. I would say the ram issues is not a compatibility issue with 64 bit but the way the game see's memory overall.

It seams to be a v-ram dection issue, this is what i worked out.

I have noticed with my system when going between 32 bit and 64 bit windows (duel boot xp 32' date=' 7 64) that the more ram the system has the more it allocates to be used as vram, I checked dxdiag and it said my 9800 gt has 4080 mb of vram, I then checked the 2 lines in the arma.cfg.

localVRAM=2139150848;

nonlocalVRAM=2139150848;

I then added these two together (they are the same) and converted it to Mb which was 4080.10645, the same as what the dxdiag shows my vram as.

It seems when arma2 checks your vram it gets your total and halves it, meaning the more ram you have the bigger total ram you have so arma thinks my 512mb card has 2gb vram, which was causing crashes every time I was in a town or graphic intensive place (the buildings and the ground flash white and then the game crashes straight away)

what it should read is

localVRAM=536870912;

nonlocalVRAM=3741430784

This is my system secs

Gigabyte - GA-EP45-UD3L

Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650

8gb ram (2X Corsair TWIN2X4096-8500C5D 4GB (2x XMS2 2GB) PC-8500 (1066MHz) DDR2 RAM, 2x240-pin DIMMs, Non ECC, Unbuffered, 5-5-5-15)

navdia geforce 9800 gt 512

driver 186.18

windows 7 64bit rc build 7100

[/quote']

large fps bost when playing under xp, its un playable under win7, even with the start lines added i get crashes all the time and low fps

[killakaze 10]

seems to detect mine wrong too

language="English";

adapter=-1;

3D_Performance=100000;

Resolution_Bpp=32;

Resolution_W=1920;

Resolution_H=1080;

refresh=60;

Render_W=1920;

Render_H=1024;

FSAA=0;

postFX=2;

HDRPrecision=8;

lastDeviceId="";

localVRAM=807262208;

nonlocalVRAM=807262208;

My system Specs

Gigabyte - Ga-p35-s3

Core 2 quad q9550

8gb Ram (4 x 2gb G.skill 1100hz)

Sparkle 285gtx 2gb

Windows 7 RC 64bit & vista 32 (same issues on both)

Only way ive been able to not crash is to do the flush during gameplay

hold left shift and the minus key at the numeric pad then blind type flush works well for me even though its bloody annoying especially when you forget in the heat of battle and crash. To make use of as much RAM as possible in arma 2 in the last week ive been using ramdrive and putting files onto it as recommended by a guide i found on this forum somewhere and the game runs drastically better for me the only problem with that is my favourite server detects a problem and kicks me so i cant play cti unless i revert to playing sluggish again but every other server i try has no problems.

it would be good if bis could somehow get arma II to detect any possible ram sizes and maybee load files into ram in some kind of priority till the ram is fully utilised that would be alot better than how it stands now.

Edited October 24, 2009 by Killakaze

[kklownboy 43]

try this in your arma2.cfg;

HDRPrecision=32;

lastDeviceId="";

localVRAM=2136342528;

nonlocalVRAM=2136342528;

A1,A2 cant use more than 2GB of System RAM.

2048MB. But it needs a buffer so 2047MB.

Just a therory, but arma2 uses 2Gb~ but your driver, and DX (because of your driver) sees 8Gb?/4GB>(with -winxp flag) And fubars the allotments and buff... so you need to tell your driver that you use 2GB..?

Edited October 24, 2009 by kklownboy

[ANGRY ARMA FAN 10]

Upgrading from Vista 64 8GB to Win 7 8GB has had little effect on the problems running this game for me.

I still get the stuttering.

I have fiddled with the ARMA2.cfg until there is no more fiddling to do. I have removed RAM physically, tried the "-winxp" command and other suggestions.

My video memory is also detected wrong.

I totally agree with everyone who has suggested that BI need to address this problem. I shouldn't have to sit here for many, many hours trying to fix somthing like this.

My system:

Win 7 x64

E8500 @ Stock 3.16GHz

8 GB DDR2 @ 800MHz

EVGA 9800GTX+ 512MB (191.07 WHQL)

3 x SATA 2 HDD (500/400/160MB)

[Smee 10]

have to agree with angry here, needs a sort. especial as its well known.

[liquidpinky 11]

To make use of as much RAM as possible in arma 2 in the last week ive been using ramdrive and putting files onto it as recommended by a guide i found on this forum somewhere and the game runs drastically better for me the only problem with that is my favourite server detects a problem and kicks me so i cant play cti unless i revert to playing sluggish again but every other server i try has no problems.

Strange, should work okay in online matches, are you using it as an addon for the file location or have you used the symlink method.

Certainly not had any problems online with RamDisk so far but not played a CTI with it yet.