redpoll 0 Posted June 5, 2009 Texture Detail - Normal Anisotropic Filtering - Normal Terrain Detail - Normal Objects Detail - Normal Shadow Detail - Normal PostProcess Effects- Low Fillrate - 100% Cpu - Q6600 @2.4 GHz Ram - 2GB DDR2 800 GPU - 8800GTS 640MB (Driver: v/181.22) HDD - Samsung F1 1TB (no OS or other programs) OS - XP Pro Resolution - 1680 x 1050 Normal Score - 2455 Further, after restart when objects etc. are already loaded, and no settings changed: Normal Score - 2713 Esp test 5 space shuttle gains a lot from this and is visibly way smoother as well (score 11.5 vs. 21.6) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamweaver 0 Posted June 5, 2009 (edited) System: Cpu - C2D E8600 @ 4.0 GHz RAM - 4GB DDR2 800 GPU - 280 GTX 1024MB (Driver: v/185.85) HDD - Samsung 250GB OS - XP Pro SP3 Resolution - 1680 x 1050 Texture Detail - Normal Anisotropic Filtering - Normal Terrain Detail - Normal Objects Detail - Normal Shadow Detail - Normal PostProcess Effects- Low Fillrate - 100% 1st run ~ 3700 2nd run ~ 4000 Configuration I play with: Texture Detail - High Anisotropic Filtering - Very High Terrain Detail - Low Objects Detail - Normal Shadow Detail - High PostProcess Effects- High Fillrate - 100% 1st run ~ 3700 2nd run ~ 4000 Edit: With 1.01 Final the results have increased around 50 - 100 Edited June 5, 2009 by dreamweaver Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shadow NX 1 Posted June 5, 2009 (edited) I dont know why or how but something is very very wrong here: Texture Detail - Normal Anisotropic Filtering - Normal Terrain Detail - Normal Objects Detail - Normal Shadow Detail - Normal PostProcess Effects- Low Fillrate - 100% 1680x1050, 2000meters viewdistance, latest german patch added Win XP SP2 Phenom X4 9850 BE 4GB G-Skill Pc-1000 AMD HD 4870 512MB Freshly installed Windows, lots of disc space is free Score was 1988 pts. :eek: What the heck is wrong with my system, even people with 8800 cards or even lower seem to get better marks :/ Edited June 5, 2009 by Shadow NX Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sparks50 0 Posted June 5, 2009 Can we get some 1.01 beta vs 1.01 final scores please? :D The performance should have increased slightly Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Blechreiz 0 Posted June 5, 2009 - AMD Phenom II X4 955 4x3.20GHz - Gigabyte GA-MA790XT-UD4P 790X - G1024P Club3D ATI Radeon HD4890 1024MB video card - 4096MB Corsair PC3-10666 CL9 Kit (DDR3 1333+) - 680W SuperFlower Atlas Design Modular - (temps never higher than 55°Celsius) - (on Windows Vista 64). CPU/GPU not overclocked, fresh BIOS (may 2009)update. Texture Detail - Normal Anisotropic Filtering - Normal Terrain Detail - Normal Objects Detail - Normal Shadow Detail - Normal PostProcess Effects- Low Fillrate - 100% Score 3025 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thr0tt 12 Posted June 5, 2009 I dont know why or how but something is very very wrong here:Texture Detail - Normal Anisotropic Filtering - Normal Terrain Detail - Normal Objects Detail - Normal Shadow Detail - Normal PostProcess Effects- Low Fillrate - 100% 1680x1050, 2000meters viewdistance, latest german patch added Win XP SP2 Phenom X4 9850 BE 4GB G-Skill Pc-1000 AMD HD 4870 512MB Freshly installed Windows, lots of disc space is free Score was 1988 pts. :eek: What the heck is wrong with my system, even people with 8800 cards or even lower seem to get better marks :/ I have X4 955 BE (3.2Ghz), HD3850, XP SP3, 4Gb DDR2 800Mhz... My Score is...: 1926 - last test was 10fps !! Looks like there is a problem somewhere like you but probably not the rigs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ez3kiel 10 Posted June 5, 2009 My old rig i sold in order to buy a new one for A2: Texture Detail - NormalAnisotropic Filtering - Low Terrain Detail - Normal Objects Detail - Normal Shadow Detail - Normal PostProcess Effects- Low Fillrate - 100% Res 1680x1050 C2D E8200 @ 3.2ghz 8800GT 4gb ram XP 32 Score: 3088.2 What i was about to buy only (almost) for A2 : - AMD Phenom II X4 955 4x3.20GHz- Gigabyte GA-MA790XT-UD4P 790X - G1024P Club3D ATI Radeon HD4890 1024MB video card - 4096MB Corsair PC3-10666 CL9 Kit (DDR3 1333+) - 680W SuperFlower Atlas Design Modular - (temps never higher than 55°Celsius) - (on Windows Vista 64). CPU/GPU not overclocked, fresh BIOS (may 2009)update. Texture Detail - Normal Anisotropic Filtering - Normal Terrain Detail - Normal Objects Detail - Normal Shadow Detail - Normal PostProcess Effects- Low Fillrate - 100% Score 3025 :eek::eek::eek: What .........k?? Can s1 explain this? I think i will change my mind and buy a C2D finally. I will save about 100€. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
froggyluv 2136 Posted June 5, 2009 My old rig i sold in order to buy a new one for A2:What i was about to buy only (almost) for A2 : :eek::eek::eek: What .........k?? Can s1 explain this? I think i will change my mind and buy a C2D finally. I will save about 100€. If I were about to update my cpu and $$$ wasn't a problem I would go quad. Remember, alot has to do with how well you've tweaked your settings for instance my Mark score has risen almost 1000 points with my cd2 8500 after all kinds of fiddling, ie.oc's; graphic card settings, de-frags etc... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ez3kiel 10 Posted June 5, 2009 I hope you're right. Phenom X4 955 BE is one of the best CPU of the moment according to computer specialist. 4890 is the top single core GC for Arma2 according to an article. Blechreiz, can you post your screen resolution (hope it's huge :p ) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fabrizio_t 58 Posted June 5, 2009 (edited) Am i the only (mad) one trying to run this game on a lappy ? However, i've run the test 3 times and it seems that it can handle it as well as some desktops: Worst score: 2400.90 Best score: 2804.60 Texture Detail - Normal Anisotropic Filtering - Normal Terrain Detail - Normal Objects Detail - Normal Shadow Detail - Normal PostProcess Effects- Low Fillrate - 100% Resolution - 1680 x 1050 ---- DELL Precision M6400 4Gb RAM Core 2 Duo T9600 Nvidia Quadro FX3700M 1Gb 2x320Gb WD Scorpio hard disk OS - Vista x64 Edited June 5, 2009 by fabrizioT Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
scottw 0 Posted June 5, 2009 On my normal settings I run I got around 5500 so about 600 point increase, on the normal settings stated by the thread starter I go around 5500 again so may be im CPU limited now? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MNX 10 Posted June 5, 2009 Isn't one big limiting factor the HDD performance ? Or how it is defragmented and optimised ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
scottw 0 Posted June 5, 2009 Yeah I think HDD would normally be a limiting factor, but im running SSD's and with literally no seek time I wouldnt have thought they might be the issue, I am getting a little low on space though and the performance does start to degrage when you get a little low on them, so think a clean up and a TRIM is in order, see if there are any benefits, might finally uninstall ArmA :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
binkster 0 Posted June 5, 2009 Maybe Harddrives can be a factor. I have a cheap 160gb as mine and I downloaded HD TUNE and mine is only running 100mb/s in the benchmarks. Can anyone else test this and let me know what Mb/s they are getting and which HD they have? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
scottw 0 Posted June 5, 2009 I just re-run HD Tach and Avg Read time was 220Mb/s im running an OCZ Vertex, ive got two but im not running them in raid at the moment but raid0 gives me around 480Mb/s, unfortunately I dont have another drive sitting around that isnt filled with data so I cant really test to see if there is any difference for you :( Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ruckus 0 Posted June 5, 2009 (edited) Texture Detail - Normal Anisotropic Filtering - Normal Terrain Detail - Normal Objects Detail - Normal Shadow Detail - Normal PostProcess Effects- Low Cpu - E8500 (3.16ghz) Ram - Kingston HyperX 4Gb 1066Mhz GPU - NVidia PNY 9600GT 512Mb HD - Western Digital 500Gb SATA II OS - Windows 7 64-bit Resolution - 1440x900 Normal Score - 3638 Edited June 5, 2009 by Ruckus Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mant3z 1 Posted June 5, 2009 I dont know why or how but something is very very wrong here:Texture Detail - Normal Anisotropic Filtering - Normal Terrain Detail - Normal Objects Detail - Normal Shadow Detail - Normal PostProcess Effects- Low Fillrate - 100% 1680x1050, 2000meters viewdistance, latest german patch added Win XP SP2 Phenom X4 9850 BE 4GB G-Skill Pc-1000 AMD HD 4870 512MB Freshly installed Windows, lots of disc space is free Score was 1988 pts. :eek: What the heck is wrong with my system, even people with 8800 cards or even lower seem to get better marks :/ LOL! You got worse score then my rig, how it can be? Check this game with Windows7 We have the same GPU but your processor is quite better then mine. It means either your windows xp is overloaded and full of crap and trash :) or arma needs more GPU power. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Majormauser 0 Posted June 5, 2009 T1 -38.04 t2 - 38.21 t3 -31.73 t4 -46.58 t5 -25.16 OFP MARK - 3594.44 - 8 Cores OFP MARK - 2575.98 - 4 Cores Now this is really weird. I rebooted opened up all 8 Cores. Ran the test. Score was 3198. Then I restarted the Test and this is now my score T1 -40.24 t2 - 42.35 t3 -36.05 t4 -51.83 t5 -27.64 OFP MARK - 3962.51 - 8 Cores OFP MARK - 3909.35 - 8 Cores (restarted Test again) 1600x1024 (this was a rez someone else used) 8800 GT 3GB RAM 8 - Core MacPro 2.8Ghz Windows 7 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PULARITHA 10 Posted June 5, 2009 (edited) @second run E8400@3.9GHz GeForce 260GTX (216SP) 4199.19 Points E8400@3.6GHz 3557.56 Points 4GB Ram Windows 7 RC 1 32Bit Edited June 5, 2009 by PULARITHA Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Majormauser 0 Posted June 5, 2009 Unfortunately ArmA Mark is sort of all over the place. You can run it once same res same setting and it will post a score and then after the next restart different one. Now the scores are quite different one maybe 2375 and the next 2975 No settings changed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
o22cool 10 Posted June 5, 2009 (edited) Texture Detail - Normal Anisotropic Filtering - Normal Terrain Detail - Normal Objects Detail - Normal Shadow Detail - Normal PostProcess Effects- Low Cpu - AMD Opteron 165 OC (2.2ghz) Ram - CORSAIR 4GB DDR 400 GPU - ATI 4850 OS - Vista Resolution - 1680 x 1050 Normal Score - 1605.61 I need a new computer desperately! EDIT: Okay I just broke down! I went on newegg and ordered a AMD Phenom2 X4 940BE with mobo and new ram. $400 out the door. I was thinking about getting another 4850 to crossfire, but I think I will wait til the DX11 cards that will be coming out in the fall. The Intel 920s are good, but I can't justify the price on their motherboards and DDR3. Edited June 6, 2009 by o22cool Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cionara 10 Posted June 5, 2009 Resolution: 1920*1080 Fillrate: 100% Texture Detail - Normal Anisotropic Filtering - Normal Terrain Detail - Normal Objects Detail - Normal Shadow Detail - Normal PostProcess Effects- Low Cpu - Q9550 @ 3,7Ghz Ram - 4GB DDR2-Ram GPU - GTX280 OC OS - WIndows 7 RC 4128 Points Patch 1.01 Final German Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Blechreiz 0 Posted June 6, 2009 (edited) I hope you're right. Phenom X4 955 BE is one of the best CPU of the moment according to computer specialist. 4890 is the top single core GC for Arma2 according to an article. Blechreiz, can you post your screen resolution (hope it's huge :p ) I run it at 1680x1050. ------------------------------------------------------------- My Post was: - AMD Phenom II X4 955 4x3.20GHz - Gigabyte GA-MA790XT-UD4P 790X - G1024P Club3D ATI Radeon HD4890 1024MB video card - 4096MB Corsair PC3-10666 CL9 Kit (DDR3 1333+) - 680W SuperFlower Atlas Design Modular - (temps never higher than 55°Celsius) - (on Windows Vista 64). CPU/GPU not overclocked, fresh BIOS (may 2009)update. Texture Detail - Normal Anisotropic Filtering - Normal Terrain Detail - Normal Objects Detail - Normal Shadow Detail - Normal PostProcess Effects- Low Fillrate - 100% Score 3025 If your AMD Phenom2 X4 955 BE (4x3.2 GHz) with an ATI 4870+/4890/Geforce 275+ !ONLY! ON AM3 (DDR3 PLATFORM) gives you a low score UPDATE YOUR BIOS. I HAD TO UPDATE MY Gigabyte GA-MA790XT-UD4P 790X BIOS TOO. YOUR MAINBOARD IS IN 90% OF THE CASES OLDER THAN THE 955 CPU. SINCE I UPDATED MY BIOS FRAMES INCREASED! DO IT ON YOU OWN RISK..bla..bla...and so on. This is one key reason for low frames with this CPU. Note there are other reason that may impact on benchmark scores (for example: high quality overall settings in graphic card settings) Edited June 6, 2009 by Blechreiz Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
binkster 0 Posted June 6, 2009 UnfortunatelyArmA Mark is sort of all over the place. You can run it once same res same setting and it will post a score and then after the next restart different one. Now the scores are quite different one maybe 2375 and the next 2975 No settings changed. This usually happens cause you need to run it once to let all the crap load into ram. Usually your second and third are your best scores and the scores are also closer together. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bizibiz 10 Posted June 6, 2009 (edited) Strange first result ... Score : 1st try = 3229.12 2nd try = 3623.83 CPU : E8200 (2,6Ghz) OC @ 3,2Ghz (FSB 400Mhz) DDR2 1066Mhz 4Go GPU : 8800GTS 512Mo OC @ Core:760 Mem:1050 (AtiTool) XP Pro SP3 DX9c March 2009 Update NVidia last driver All on Normal, Post-Effect on Low Fillrate 100% Reso : 1650*1080 I confirm Binkster's said, 1st try need to load entity in RAM, worst result in this try. CPU seems to be the main cause of bad FPS, GPU comes after, try to OC to reach at least 2,8Ghz Edited June 6, 2009 by Bizibiz Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
