ArmAII-Mark

[R3MF 0]

it wouldn't, because the benchmark determines the view distance AFAIK.

[MakubeX 10]

C2D E8400@3Ghz

Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3R

GSkill 4GB 2x2GB

XFX Radeon HD 4890 XXX 1GB@900Mhz

Creative SB Audigy

Vista Ultimate 64Bit

Are these score normal for my rig?? Or is there something bottle necking my system?

http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/5034/settingsb.jpg

test 1:

http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/2130/test1obq.jpg

test 2:

http://img269.imageshack.us/img269/9319/test2m.jpg

The CPU is probably bottlenecking it. This game is CPU heavy. Try overclocking it to see how much you gain. Your CPU should do 4GHz or close pretty easy.

Damn Choc how are you pulling off 5k? Does an i7 make that much of a difference? :X

It's not that it's i7, is that it's a 45nm Quad OCed to 3.6GHz.

My Q9650 is not i7, but it's a 45nm Quad OCed to 4.2GHz, and like I said ArmA 2 is CPU heavy. So if I use settings similar to choC's (3D resolution is actually even a little higher):

So get clocking. OCing your E8400 should help.

Edited July 11, 2009 by MakubeX

[binkster 0]

C2D E8400@3Ghz

Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3R

GSkill 4GB 2x2GB

XFX Radeon HD 4890 XXX 1GB@900Mhz

Creative SB Audigy

Vista Ultimate 64Bit

Are these score normal for my rig?? Or is there something bottle necking my system?

Vista

---------- Post added at 12:27 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:16 PM ----------

@Makubex What Mobo do you have and what voltages did you use to get to 4.2.... Its weird I have a 9650 and im stuck at 4ghz. Unstable anywhere over 4.

[MakubeX 10]

Improved score with regular gameplay settings: 4311.13

@Makubex What Mobo do you have and what voltages did you use to get to 4.2.... Its weird I have a 9650 and im stuck at 4ghz. Unstable anywhere over 4.

My mobo is an Asus P5Q Deluxe with 1702 mBios. That is Ket's moded bios ver. 1702.

You can find out more about Ket's mBios here: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=200109

For my BIOS settings, check out this vid and pic I took for someone in another forum:

vid of main OCing settings:

pic of CPU settings: http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g302/Makubex_GB/688efcf1.jpg

PS. My Q9650's VID is 1.25v

Also, due to vdroop, my actual CPU voltage is 1.33v.

Edited July 11, 2009 by MakubeX

[pj[cz] 2]

Hi, here are mine (Specs in sig)

Nvidia driver 182.50, win vista bussines x64, 22" Samsung Syncmaster (1680x1050)

1. Everything normal, AA disabled, Shadows high @1680x1050

------------------------2590.2-----------------------------

2. Everything very high, AA disabled @1680x1050

------------------------1981.5-----------------------------

3. Everything very high, AA disabled, Terrain very low @1680x1050

------------------------2863.9-----------------------------

For me the best fluid gameplay is without the grass and options Normal - vHigh, in that case arma2mark score bumped slightly above 3k. Al tests were run 3times and the values are interpolated

[ChineseWarri0r 10]

@MakubeX

Oh...So I guess having a Quadcore really does help...damn!! I mean a 3k different in score is huuuge. Ill have to try OCing mine...just need to figure out how

[ags 10]

Anyone know how to get this to work with SLi?

[choC 10]

Damn Choc how are you pulling off 5k? Does an i7 make that much of a difference? :X

I think it does.

Just to let you know, I pushed it further to 4ghz and broke 5500 marks

I'll post up screenies later, I'm not on my main rig at the moment.

[cid_gen_bondorf 0]

Vista

---------- Post added at 12:27 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:16 PM ----------

@Makubex What Mobo do you have and what voltages did you use to get to 4.2.... Its weird I have a 9650 and I'm stuck at 4ghz. Unstable anywhere over 4.

I also agree. I spent the weekend getting my PC set up with Windows 7 (v7100) and ARMA2 runs like crap now. I am loosing about 25% of my speed. And the game lags like crazy.

I figured that being I have 6GB of RAM in my PC with WinXP32. When I run Win7 it should just fly. But it doesn't It slows down. I had to drop my ARMA2 setting down a notch.

I am guessing that my system just don't have enough horse-power to run ARMA2 in a 64bit environment or Win7 uses too much of my CPU's resources to run the game.

And I tried all the little tweaks with the shortcuts, I have no Pagefile and that NOBLUR mod. Still didn't come even close to my WinXP score.

My PC specs are as follows...

CPU: Intel E6600

RAM: 6GB DDR2 800Mhz

Video: XFX Gforce 8800GT 512MB

ARMAMARK Scores:

Everything on normal, view distance at 2000m, post prossing effects at low, resolution at 1280x1024

WinXP-32bit = 2400

Win 7-64bit = 1700

Edited July 13, 2009 by CID_Gen_Bondorf

[Tincup 10]

Texture Detail - Very High

Anisotropic Filtering - Normal

Terrain Detail - Very High

Objects Detail - Very High

Shadow Detail - Very High

Post Process Effects- Very High

Fill Rate - 100%

Intel Q6600 @ 3.6

Gigabyte EP45-UD3P

4gb Corsair XMS 800 Mhz

Asus HD4890 Crossfire

Antec 900 case

Corsair 750 watt psu

I ordered I7 and 6gb ddr3 from Newegg, will be delivered tomorrow, I will do a comparison once I get the new rig together!

Edited July 14, 2009 by Tincup

[cid_gen_bondorf 0]

Thanks Tincup. :)

I'd be curious to see what someone else would get running both operating systems. I was just playing ARMA2 again with my WinXP install and I am getting between 30-50fps. It runs great with my settings on Normal. And with Win7 I was getting 15-20fps with everything on LOW. :681:

Lucky for me, I installed Win7 onto another SATA drive (a faster one too) in my PC. So I am just unplugging one drive before booting with the other. This is giving me the temporary option to either boot with WinXP or Win7.

I should have a new Intel Q9550 within a couple of days. I will see if that boosts performance in ARMA2 under both platforms... :rolleyes:

[MakubeX 10]

Thanks Tincup. :)

I'd be curious to see what someone else would get running both operating systems. I was just playing ARMA2 again with my WinXP install and I am getting between 30-50fps. It runs great with my settings on Normal. And with Win7 I was getting 15-20fps with everything on LOW. :681:

Lucky for me, I installed Win7 onto another SATA drive (a faster one too) in my PC. So I am just unplugging one drive before booting with the other. This is giving me the temporary option to either boot with WinXP or Win7.

I should have a new Intel Q9550 within a couple of days. I will see if that boosts performance in ARMA2 under both platforms... :rolleyes:

Why don't you just set which drive to boot from in the BIOS so you don't have to connect and disconnect drives every time you want to switch OS?

[cid_gen_bondorf 0]

I thought about that too. I see the option for selecting your primary drive to boot with. But I have too much stuff on my drive is too important. So I didn't want to take the chance of some how getting something messed up. Probably won't do any harm having the second hard-drive showing up. But I don't want to chance it and loose any data.

Thanks for the suggestion though. :)

[MakubeX 10]

I thought about that too. I see the option for selecting your primary drive to boot with. But I have too much stuff on my drive is too important. So I didn't want to take the chance of some how getting something messed up. Probably won't do any harm having the second hard-drive showing up. But I don't want to chance it and loose any data.

Thanks for the suggestion though. :)

So, u really think that having more than one drive connected is a risk? You do know that the reason motherboard have multiple SATA portss is to connect multiple HDDs (hard drive disks). So don't worry about it, having multiple drives connected is perfectly fine.

I have 5 hard drives connected in my rig. Two of them have OSs. One has Vista and one Windows 7. Whenever I want to switch OSs I simply go into my BIOS and switch the drive I wanna boot from. It's simple and safe. No need to worry. ;)

[cid_gen_bondorf 0]

So, u really think that having more than one drive connected is a risk? You do know that the reason motherboard have multiple SATA portss is to connect multiple HDDs (hard drive disks). So don't worry about it, having multiple drives connected is perfectly fine.

I have 5 hard drives connected in my rig. Two of them have OSs. One has Vista and one Windows 7. Whenever I want to switch OSs I simply go into my BIOS and switch the drive I wanna boot from. It's simple and safe. No need to worry. ;)

Thanks, I'll give it a shot then. Was getting to be a pain in the butt having to pull the lid off and swapping that SATA cable from one drive to the other.

I think there's software's out there for this too? I remember a long time ago there was one called something like BootMagic? Don't know if they are still kicking around.

Can't wait... Tomorrow I think my Intel Q9550 should show up. It'll be a jump from my Dual Core E6600 to this Quad Q9550. :D

[Gringo85 0]

I have a question, i recently bought a ATI HD Radeon 4890, my issue is the following:

I get in ArmA II from a range of 20-30 FPS, jump up and down, average would be 25-28 in open field (Country side) and it drops to 20-23 sometimes lower to 19, especially when assaulting a city with building and houses, but it gets back up after a while to around 23 FPS.

Motherboard: ASUS M3N72-D Nvidia nForce SLI

CPU: AMD Athlon 64 x2 6000+ 3.0GHZ Socket AM2(940)

Video Card: ATI Radeon HD 4890

Also whenever I make any changes in the settings to see if my FPS increase o decrease, nothing happens, still get the same FPS even thou if I lower all the settings I still be in the range, it might of change 1 FPS more or less in the changes but no difference at all, same with increasing the settings, right now:

Textures: Normal

Video Memory: Normal

Anisotropic: Disable

AA: low

Terrain:Normal

Object:Normal

Shadows:Normal

Postprocess: Disable

Resolution: 1280x768

3D Optimization: 1280x768 100%

Aspect Ratio: 16:9

I play on a 32" LCD TV:

Max Resolution is 1360x768

I've played with everything tweak everything and no changes, i dont know if i'm missing something or i have to do something, please is this normal? or something is wrong in this picture?

Appreciate any constructive reply about this issue, with experience on the topic, either professionally or just because of personal experience.

Thanks in advance.

[=Spetsnaz= 0]

I have a question, i recently bought a ATI HD Radeon 4890, my issue is the following:

I get in ArmA II from a range of 20-30 FPS, jump up and down, average would be 25-28 in open field (Country side) and it drops to 20-23 sometimes lower to 19, especially when assaulting a city with building and houses, but it gets back up after a while to around 23 FPS.

Motherboard: ASUS M3N72-D Nvidia nForce SLI

CPU: AMD Athlon 64 x2 6000+ 3.0GHZ Socket AM2(940)

Video Card: ATI Radeon HD 4890

Also whenever I make any changes in the settings to see if my FPS increase o decrease, nothing happens, still get the same FPS even thou if I lower all the settings I still be in the range, it might of change 1 FPS more or less in the changes but no difference at all, same with increasing the settings, right now:

Textures: Normal

Video Memory: Normal

Anisotropic: Disable

AA: low

Terrain:Normal

Object:Normal

Shadows:Normal

Postprocess: Disable

Resolution: 1280x768

3D Optimization: 1280x768 100%

Aspect Ratio: 16:9

I play on a 32" LCD TV:

Max Resolution is 1360x768

I've played with everything tweak everything and no changes, i dont know if i'm missing something or i have to do something, please is this normal? or something is wrong in this picture?

Appreciate any constructive reply about this issue, with experience on the topic, either professionally or just because of personal experience.

Thanks in advance.

Operating System?

[Mr.Ferret 10]

Everything on low, res 1920 * 1200 on a 24" monitor

AMD 3200, Nvidia Gefore 7800GT 512MB and 2Gig of ram running on WinXP

Test 1 - 12.1534

Test 2 - 13.0827

Test 3 - 10.8602

Test 4 - 13.471

Test 5 - 10.0432 (this one kept hanging would go for like a few seconds then just stop then keep going)

Total ARMA Mark score 1192.21

Do i win a prize? :P

Ive got a new MOBO and a AMD Phenom 2 Dual Core 3.12GHZ Black Edition Proccesor on order, plan is to unlock the other 2 cores hidden away on it (turning it into a quad)

and overclocking it a bit, and a ATI Radeon HD 4870 1GB, all on order and should be here in any day now.

[VeryBadTouch 10]

CPU : Q9300 (stock)

MB : Asus P5QL

GPU : Asus Radeon HD4890 (stock)

RAM : G.Skill F2-8500CL5D-2GBPI * 2

O/S : Windows Vista 32bit

Interface resolution : 1900*600

3D Resolution : 1900*600 (100%)

Texture Detail : normal

Texture Memory : very high

Anisotropic filtering : low

Antialiasing : low

Terrain Detail : normal

Objects Detail : normal

Shadow Detail : normal

Postprocess Effect : low

Interface Size : normal

Aspect Ratio : wide 16/9

Score : 2873.97

FYI the game runs from 25 to 60 fps roughly. Single player campagin gets unplayable though as you get further through the game.

Reckon overclocking my cpu I should get better performance? Its currently stock, running at 2.5Ghz. I've read that the Q9300 as no problem going to 3.5Ghz...

EDIT - Interesting, by setting my video memory to default my new score is 2946.75.

Edited July 15, 2009 by VeryBadTouch

[Gringo85 0]

Operating System?

Windows XP Pro SP3, with latest ATI Catalyst drivers 9.6.

Thanks

[Gringo85 0]

Update:

I was able to update my BIOS and crank it up a bit (Factory Overclock)

Now I'm running with:

AMD Athlon 64 x2 dual core at 3.3GHZ instead of the 3.0GHZ

RAM: 3.5G instead of the 2.75G (Due to Win XP we are limitted to 3.5G, i got 4 (x2 of 2G)

Those are the changes, now I'm running with same settings but I get more FPS, this time in the cities I get average 25 but still max seems cap out at 30, it hardly will go under 25 or over 31, I got to the conclusion that ArmA II does like Quad Core plus needs a high speed CPU, and I think that's my isue and I guess must of us also, since we do have high speed dual core but this game needs a Quad Core minimun, I feel bad for those guys running single core CPU .

(Also, I look every post that ppl had made with ArmA II Mark Results and your noticed that Quad Core Systems score noticeable higher than dual cores even those that run for 2.6ish +)

I got to the conclusion that I answered myself in this one ;) THX.

PS: I'm buying the AMD Phenom X4 955 Quad Core AM3 and yeah I know mines (motherboard) is a AM2/AM2+ Socket but guess what, AMD made the AM3 CPUs backward compatible, can't wait to try it out.(Only bad thing is I still gotta be stuck with DDR2)

[ModeZt 0]

CPU: AMD Athlon 64 x2 6000+ 3.0GHZ Socket AM2(940)

Video Card: ATI Radeon HD 4890

Textures: Normal

Video Memory: Normal

Anisotropic: Disable

AA: low

Terrain:Normal

Object:Normal

Shadows:Normal

Postprocess: Disable

Resolution: 1280x768

3D Optimization: 1280x768 100%

Anisotropic filtering is really cheap on modern cards. So you can set it to "very high" without a noticable performance impact. The image quality will get a little higher.

I'm guessing that your low fps's are the result of a weak CPU. 4890 should be able to run at 1280x768 with every option maxed out. Switch shadows to "high", try the catalyst 9.7beta driver.

Edited July 16, 2009 by ModeZt

[Gringo85 0]

Thanks, will do (ATI Catalyst Beta Drivers)

[=Spetsnaz= 0]

Update:

I was able to update my BIOS and crank it up a bit (Factory Overclock)

Now I'm running with:

AMD Athlon 64 x2 dual core at 3.3GHZ instead of the 3.0GHZ

RAM: 3.5G instead of the 2.75G (Due to Win XP we are limitted to 3.5G, i got 4 (x2 of 2G)

Those are the changes, now I'm running with same settings but I get more FPS, this time in the cities I get average 25 but still max seems cap out at 30, it hardly will go under 25 or over 31, I got to the conclusion that ArmA II does like Quad Core plus needs a high speed CPU, and I think that's my isue and I guess must of us also, since we do have high speed dual core but this game needs a Quad Core minimun, I feel bad for those guys running single core CPU .

(Also, I look every post that ppl had made with ArmA II Mark Results and your noticed that Quad Core Systems score noticeable higher than dual cores even those that run for 2.6ish +)

I got to the conclusion that I answered myself in this one ;) THX.

PS: I'm buying the AMD Phenom X4 955 Quad Core AM3 and yeah I know mines (motherboard) is a AM2/AM2+ Socket but guess what, AMD made the AM3 CPUs backward compatible, can't wait to try it out.(Only bad thing is I still gotta be stuck with DDR2)

I have the same cpu as you at practically 3.3ghz,4gb of ram, but a 4850 card, i run everything practically on very high and get the same fps. You might as well stick with the cpu as upgrading won't benefit you very much but may give you a bit of extra fps maybe 10-15%, the game itself needs more patching

---------- Post added at 06:49 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:43 AM ----------

Update:

I was able to update my BIOS and crank it up a bit (Factory Overclock)

Now I'm running with:

AMD Athlon 64 x2 dual core at 3.3GHZ instead of the 3.0GHZ

RAM: 3.5G instead of the 2.75G (Due to Win XP we are limitted to 3.5G, i got 4 (x2 of 2G)

Those are the changes, now I'm running with same settings but I get more FPS, this time in the cities I get average 25 but still max seems cap out at 30, it hardly will go under 25 or over 31, I got to the conclusion that ArmA II does like Quad Core plus needs a high speed CPU, and I think that's my isue and I guess must of us also, since we do have high speed dual core but this game needs a Quad Core minimun, I feel bad for those guys running single core CPU .

(Also, I look every post that ppl had made with ArmA II Mark Results and your noticed that Quad Core Systems score noticeable higher than dual cores even those that run for 2.6ish +)

I got to the conclusion that I answered myself in this one ;) THX.

PS: I'm buying the AMD Phenom X4 955 Quad Core AM3 and yeah I know mines (motherboard) is a AM2/AM2+ Socket but guess what, AMD made the AM3 CPUs backward compatible, can't wait to try it out.(Only bad thing is I still gotta be stuck with DDR2)

wait does that mean you can run AM3 CPUs on a AM2/AM2+ Motherboard??? :butbut: :butbut:

Edited July 16, 2009 by =Spetsnaz=

[R3MF 0]

I have the same cpu as you at practically 3.3ghz,4gb of ram, but a 4850 card, i run everything practically on very high and get the same fps. You might as well stick with the cpu as upgrading won't benefit you very much but may give you a bit of extra fps maybe 10-15%, the game itself needs more patching

---------- Post added at 06:49 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:43 AM ----------

wait does that mean you can run AM3 CPUs on a AM2/AM2+ Motherboard??? :butbut: :butbut:

yes, provided the boards bios is updated to support AM3 chips.