Single Player Performance Issues.

[joethe33 10]

Doing the Chernogorsk campaign.

AMD Phenom 9950 2.6GHz (OCed to 3.1Ghz) Black Edition

MSI K9A2 CF-F V2 ATX AMD Motherboard

CORSAIR 4GB DDR2 1066

PNY GeForce GTX 260

According to Fraps, I'm getting less than 20 FPS at all times. I'm only using Fraps in the backround to display my FPS, it does not effect my frames if Fraps is off.

Same for any range of settings.

edit. running at 1680x1050

Edited May 30, 2009 by joethe33

[garack666 10]

ony max 26 frames here:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=73153

[Jorge.PT 10]

Doing the Chernogorsk campaign.

AMD Phenom 9950 2.6GHz (OCed to 3.1Ghz) Black Edition

MSI K9A2 CF-F V2 ATX AMD Motherboard

CORSAIR 4GB DDR2 1066

PNY GeForce GTX 260

According to Fraps, I'm getting less than 20 FPS at all times. I'm only using Fraps in the backround to display my FPS, it does not effect my frames if Fraps is off.

Same for any range of settings.

edit. running at 1680x1050

Hmmm not good, I've that video card and a Quad at 3Ghz also. Not very good news to me also...

Keep posting more info of your situation.

[joethe33 10]

Still seems to load slow. As well as textures. The textures take awhile to load. I sort of also think it seems like the map is a separate entity. It takes a second to load back in. Which I could understand because of how much data is displayed on the map, but honestly my computer isn't that bad. I don't have a Phenom II or anything (Latest and absolute greatest) but I run any DX10 game fine. Crysis is even some-what playable on the highest possible settings, etc. Of course I don't use those settings because its like 10ish FPS.

My theory is it's some code or something that's causing the lack in performance. Right now I'm on the Manhattan campaign, I'm getting around 30 FPS out in the open. Some-what high settings. Same resolution as the original post, Fill Rate at 100%, I've tried anywhere between 80-100%, I usually hover it around there. Obvious reasons. View distance is at 1600. It also seems like at any range of settings or the highest resolution, there's not much of a difference. It's sub 20 in Urban Environments. Which include the villages.

[ThePainkiller 10]

This game is a performance killer, even with a 4890 or 285 it lacks sometimes. They have to clean the code alot to make it playable.

[garack666 10]

This game is a performance killer, even with a 4890 or 285 it lacks sometimes. They have to clean the code alot to make it playable.

yep^^

[snkman 351]

C2D 6600

Corsair XMS DDR 800 2048 MB RAM

8800 GTX

Windows XP SP3

Settings all HIGH

50 - 60 FPS

Sometimes less is more. ;)

[mr.g-c 6]

After Reading all those numerous Reports about performance, i think its like usually that XP is running the Game up to 25% faster than Vista.

I had the same impression as i moved from XP to Vista over 1 Year ago and Arma suddenly ran 20% slower and a other game too.

[joethe33 10]

I'm using Windows 7, and I've tried it with the dual boot of XP sp3. XP does not show a huge improvement.

[easty 0]

Resolution -- 1920x1200

Visibility --- 3000

Fill Rate --- 200

Texture --- Normal

Vid Mem --- V.high

Anisotropic --- Normal

Terrain --- High

Objects --- High

Shadow --- Normal

Postproces --- Low

Vista plays aweful on mine, Win 7 RC seems pretty great so far.

[ohara 0]

Try to set fill rate on 100 and vid mem just to normal, vid very high can fullfill your bus, filrate 200 means that final resolutiob is in your case 3840*2400

[mr.g-c 6]

I'm using Windows 7, and I've tried it with the dual boot of XP sp3. XP does not show a huge improvement.

This is now Wonder, Windows7 i said to be as fast for programs/games as XP was (again).

Damn it i will screw Vista as soon as Win7 gets out finally.

[mr71mb0 10]

Could be a driver issue?

I expect BI will get it patched and nvidia & ati will release some driver updates.

In urban environments Upping the detail doesn't seem to slow the fps down any for me.

I'll get fraps on to measure my fps.

[thr0tt 12]

We need one of those benchmarking runs like the Arma Mark thing from Arma 1.

[garack666 10]

Try to set fill rate on 100 and vid mem just to normal, vid very high can fullfill your bus, filrate 200 means that final resolutiob is in your case 3840*2400

wich bus? what is a bus? i have a 1gb 4870, should i set to high?

[Steinfisch 10]

Doing the Chernogorsk campaign.

...According to Fraps, I'm getting less than 20 FPS at all times. I'm only using Fraps in the backround to display my FPS, it does not effect my frames if Fraps is off....

edit. running at 1680x1050

Fraps is not an accurate method of measuring the FPS. It hooks into IDirect3DDevice9::Present and adds some extra code, even if no recording is done.

I'm generally wondering how they draw hundred of objects, calculate the culling, the current positions and states, the KI.. and get 35 frames.

The game is worth its money - despite the annoying errors.

[joethe33 10]

Thanks. I wish I could find a command to show FPS to get an accurate reading. Still, I find the Urban lag and slow loading textures annoying. Despite this, I'm really enjoying the game.

[ThePainkiller 10]

Try to set fill rate on 100 and vid mem just to normal, vid very high can fullfill your bus, filrate 200 means that final resolutiob is in your case 3840*2400

did you ever play the game on fillrate 100%? it looks worse then arma, hell, even worse then ofp in some cases. it looks like a simulation of a guy who is short sighted, please give us AA asap.

[joethe33 10]

Still getting about the same performance on every range of settings, excluding the Fill-Rate/AF. Still seems to be "playable." Same slow loading textures etc. Running the 1.01 Patch. Hopefully the full release fixes that and concerns I'm having. Including the inability to get through the Manhattan missions. After completing the last objective, It set me back hours in game play to a previous save after crashing to the desktop.

I've been mostly sticking to the editor and multiplayer, waiting on the patch. If anyone has similar issues with FPS or possible "new" fixes, respond please. =D

[bluesteel 0]

The campaign is heavily CPU limited, even on a quadcore. (for details, see here)

Try this: Set the fillrate to 50%. If your framerate goes up, you are limited by your GPU and can improve the framerate by changing some options. If the framerate stays the same, you are limited by your CPU; short of overclocking it you can't fix that by yourself.

After a lot of experimenting I found that these settings provide a good balance between performance and visual quality:

With this I get 40-50fps outside and 30-40fps inside towns or forests.

Your framerate can go down if you zoom in while inside a forest, to fix this set shadows to medium. I avoided this since shadows look extremely blocky on that setting.

System:

Core2Quad 3.4GHz

GeForce GTX 260

4GB DDR2 RAM

Windows 7 x64 RC

[manzilla 1]

I get 35-50fps most times with all settings max except fillrate at 100% and VD at 7000. To me, the game seems to run just as good as ArmA does on my rig.

But moving the fillrate above 120%+ really kills the performance if I don't adjust some of the other settings to lower values.

My rig:

C2E X9650@3.00ghz

4GB Ram

ATi 3870 with most recent drivers(9.5 I think. I rolled it back a few and it still crashed.)

Vista 32bit SP2

ASUS P5E3 Deluxe Wi-Fi

[soldier9945 12]

I get 35-50fps most times with all settings max except fillrate at 100% and VD at 7000. To me, the game seems to run just as good as ArmA does on my rig.

But moving the fillrate above 120%+ really kills the performance if I don't adjust some of the other settings to lower values.

My rig:

C2E X9650@3.00ghz

4GB Ram

ATi 3870 with most recent drivers(9.5 I think. I rolled it back a few and it still crashed.)

Vista 32bit SP2

ASUS P5E3 Deluxe Wi-Fi

Now, that's nice for you, but could you confirm your FPS in the third singleplayer mission called "Gegenangriff" ? Go into the village and look towards the center... I've got 20FPS when VD=38xx (to be able to set the terrain setting to very high), fillrate=100%, the rest on Very High.

Also, do you guess your FPS or do you actually use a program for it, like FRAPS or RivaTuner? (I know, stupid question, but you never know :D)

I don't say you lie, but I want to be sure, so I can identify my problem... if there is one.

Thanks alot!

[joethe33 10]

The BETA 186 Nvidia driver made a slight noticeable difference.

[joethe33 10]

Happens after saves.

[Hitman_FR 10]

FPS tested with FRAPS in the "Harvest Red" mission (industrial complex) with a resolution of 1680x1050 and all settings set to maximum (with "sichtweite" set at 4000) :

with fillrate at 100% : only 20-22 fps :(

with fillrate at 200% : falls to 10 fps :(:(

my system :

Intel Core I7 920

6 GB Ram

GeForce GTX 295 (with 185.85 drivers)

Vista x64

Only one solution : LOWER SETTINGS !!! :(

Arma2 is a buggy but very good game (even if the aircrafts are too easy to handle for a "ultimative militärsimulation" in my opinion ;) )