ArmAII-Mark

[Is1980 10]

No it's not fake mate , if you use the Proper buildings low (not the very low version ) , it just changes the LOD models , there are less of them so they load faster for the computer , only a few buildings look low rez , but for the majority of them it looks ok really . The Proper Vegetation low is even better because it's hard to spot the difference from the vanilla trees , plants etc.. and the mod ( small difference , and it still looks good ) .

If you want i can post a screenshot when i'm in a city with the mods , it looks good IMHO , good enough to play it really smooth and feel a lot of immersion

Edited October 21, 2009 by Is1980

[yanquis 10]

ya i like the veg one a lot, looks reeally good, tho im doing ok w/out it at the moment. the might be really good for low-altitude choppering ill have to try that.

i dont think its all buildings, but in that one city some of the storefronts just looked really bad, i probably just had dumb luck w/ it in that that was the first thing i noticed

[ademczuk 10]

what happened to the google spreadsheet love?

http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Al3NXpquRRMvdDVVSDQ0X21LeUhJbFFuN1N2YkNwMGc&hl=en

[Gabkicks 10]

can someone please explain to me how to install and run the benchmark from start to finish? I am trying to find good settings for my PC. sofar, I've turned off hyper threading and done some of the things reccomended to the shortcut link.

I have the steam version of the game, BTW

[binkster 0]

put the mission in the missions folder under the ArmA directory. Check in missions in singleplayer in game UI.

[ubascouser 0]

just upgraded from vista 32 bit to windows 7 64 bit and ran arma mark with a big improvement went from low 30s to high 40s.

test1 33.4918

test2 60.4438

test3 46.2748

test4 65.2884

test5 35.262

result 4815.21

cpu at 31% ram at 36%

-cpucount=4 and -nosplash also used.

Using the 1.4 patch and aint messed with my cpu its all stock.

[Gabkicks 10]

Test1 48.87

test2 56.96

test3 51.84

test4 58

test5 18.82

OFPMark: 4691.89

What am i doing wrong? i got my i7@ almost 3.6ghz, and i have a 5850... -cpuCount=4 -nosplash in steam launch options.

I have Hyperthreading disabled...

Edited November 2, 2009 by Gabkicks

[liquidpinky 11]

Test1 48.87

test2 56.96

test3 51.84

test4 58

test5 18.82

OFPMark: 4691.89

What am i doing wrong? i got my i7@ almost 3.6ghz, and i have a 5850... -cpuCount=4 -nosplash in steam launch options.

I have Hyperthreading disabled...

Do more than one run, second one has textures loaded from first run, maybe defrag your HDDs as well. Test 5 is your score buster and it will run better from a defragged disk.

Also try using the latest Beta patch as it has smoothed the loading out too.

The first test scores are pretty decent and it is just test 5 that lets you down.

[ubascouser 0]

like liquid said do at least 4-5 tests plus defrag, also what system you got windows 7 64 bit improved mine a lot. When i was running vista 32 bit i was asking the same question's as you.Hyperthreading is enabled on mine and im running at stock speed's i suppose i could get into the 5's if this hyperthreading thing is true plus with overclock.Plus dont knock your score that is a good score it dont get much higher than that.

[Gabkicks 10]

I did 3 runs, and on the 2nd i got 5308 w/ the settings below. i score around the same w/ everything at normal. I still have to read/test to see which of these give the big performance hits, and what can be increased w/ out much of a hit. Also, i havent run w/ HT on to see if it improves or lowers my score. aaaand also i guess we're all running w/ vsynch forced on? cus i see some people have numbers over 60. I still gotta defrag my hdd and do a few other things.

Edited November 2, 2009 by Gabkicks

[ubascouser 0]

Nice score m8 test 5 for me is where my hdd seriously lets me down its about 4 years old now.

[pryskn@ 10]

yo all

I got everything on NORMAL.Only PP on low. 1680 x 1050

1. run: 3498

2. run: 3970

My spec.:

Q6600@3.2GHz@Noctua,EX38-DQ6,4GB ram,GTX 260@ssc,Win XP 32bit

[jumpinghubert 48]

second run, latest betapatch:

test one 44

two 60

three 45

four 69

five 47

OFMARK 5359

settings:

textur: very high

video: very high

filter: very high (control panel 16x)

AA: normal

landsc: low

object: high

shadow: very high

postproc:very high

[kklownboy 43]

why "landsc: low"

and what rez and fill rate?

your using 16xAF from the nvda 3dsettings CP?

Ah i see 1680/1050 and yes the NVDA AF @ 16.

Edited November 5, 2009 by kklownboy

[jumpinghubert 48]

the landscape regulates the radius of grass and the lowest radius give me lots of fps. The detail of object and vegetation for example has for me higher priority. :)

Edited November 5, 2009 by JumpingHubert

[taxus 10]

Configuration

> Core i7 860 @ stock

> Asus P7P55D

> G Skill 4Go 1600Mhz 7-7-7 24

> Radeon 4890 1Go (Catalyst 9.9)

> I have now Windows Seven 64 and a SSD (Falcon 64Go) ; the game is on the SSD.

Settings

> HT disabled

> Both resolutions 1680*1050

> All normal (including AA), Post-processing Low, memory very high

Result

1/ 57.93

2/ 54.94

3/ 48.84

4/ 59.23

5/ 41.39

5246.88

> With same settings on Vista 64 and without SSD : 3935 => 33% better, thx SSD and Seven !

> Next step => OC my i7 860, because this game is very CPU(frequency)-dependant...

EDIT : how can I disabled Vsync with ATI? Despite disabled in ATT, Vsync is always enabled in game...

Edited November 10, 2009 by taxus

[Cygnus X-1 10]

Texture - Normal

Anisotropic Filtering - Normal

Terrain Detail - Normal

Objects Detail - Normal

Shadow Detail - Normal

PostProcess Effects- Low

Resolution - 1920x1080

CPU - Qx9300 2.53 OC@3.0

RAM - 6GB DDR2 800mhz

GPU - Mobility HD 4870x2

OS - Windows Vista Home SP2

Score= 3056.31 Upgraded cpu from Q9000 to Qx9300 300+ point increase thus far with same settings. Oh, its a laptop too.

__________________

Edited November 16, 2009 by Cygnus X-1

[Ish 11]

1# Two runs in a row will improve your score since everything is already in memory.

2# People can still manipulate their CCC/Nvidia CP settings..

But if one is honest to oneself, I guess this is a good way of determining what works best for you. But comparing scores is kinda meh to be honest.

I got ~4500 first run with the settings i play with and 5330ish after some tweaking so yeah. Who cares about some numbers if the game looks like crap when you play it? =)

[binkster 0]

1# Two runs in a row will improve your score since everything is already in memory.

2# People can still manipulate their CCC/Nvidia CP settings..

But if one is honest to oneself, I guess this is a good way of determining what works best for you. But comparing scores is kinda meh to be honest.

I got ~4500 first run with the settings i play with and 5330ish after some tweaking so yeah. Who cares about some numbers if the game looks like crap when you play it? =)

We did it on normal to have a standard to figure out what specs get the highest score. Its not a contest but more of see what specs/tweaks can improve the score.

[RogueBlade 0]

is it just mine, or does other peoples arma mark run with big black letter box bars on the top and bottom of their screen as if watching a widescreen movie on standard def tv?

i always have to restart the the arma mark to make the black bars go away

[Ish 11]

is it just mine, or does other peoples arma mark run with big black letter box bars on the top and bottom of their screen as if watching a widescreen movie on standard def tv?

i always have to restart the the arma mark to make the black bars go away

Nah, I get the same but vertical ones.

[chammy 7]

Why is it that my game seems to run a lot faster in Very High than on Normal or High?

[chammy 7]

You know, I noticed something weird.....I installed EVGA Precision tools for the over clocking and all, and it totally slowed the performance of Arma2. Actually it made it worse. Can any explain?

[RogueBlade 0]

arma2.exe with no extensions

1680X1050

Texture Detail - Normal

Anisotropic Filtering - Normal

Terrain Detail - Normal

Objects Detail - Normal

Shadow Detail - Normal

PostProcess Effects- Low

i7 920

6gb DDR3 1600mhz

Crossfired 4890's

vista 64bit sp2

Score - 3600.

(my score was 36** but print screen just caught a black screen and my task bar :\)

Above is my old score. Below is my new score with the same hardware.

i7 920 OC'd to 4.0Ghz

6GB DDR3 running at 1523Mhz 8-8-7-24

NEW crossfired 4890's. no oc. My previous pair were a bad batch.

win 7 64bit (previous test was vista 64)

score: 3919.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Why is it that my game seems to run a lot faster in Very High than on Normal or High?

What's your setup? Bottleneck in your system, most likely to be the CPU. If you turn off all the GPU-stressing settings, your CPU will take all the load.

Same scenario as with 1024x1024 vs 19x12 resolutions. Think of it as software vs. hardware acceleration modes in some older games. :D