-DirTyDeeDs--Ziggy- 0 Posted June 17, 2009 upgrading from a evga 7950 gt to this gtx 275 oc is not a bad decision. is it the best card? no is it a good card? yes will it run ArmA2 on better than average settings with better than average performance? I sure the hell hope so! :D Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bad Pilot 0 Posted June 17, 2009 It's dumb to think you can max out a new game with high fps. Just dumb. I can't believe how many threads have said the same thing. There's a good chance it will get better, as A1 did. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Armin2 10 Posted June 17, 2009 Whos talking about maxing it out ? The problem is: ArmA 2 + low details + High End hardware = 25fps (in multiplayer) That's unaccaptable. AND DON'T SAY: Turn down the details. It does 30fps at lowest details and 25 at highest details, so obviously the engine sucks not my computer. ---------- Post added at 06:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:06 PM ---------- http://www.pic-upload.de/view-2345981/arma2-2009-06-17-02-16-58-69.jpg.html SAPPHIRE TOXIC HD 4890 1GB GDDR5 PCI-E Core Clock: 1000 MHz Memory Clock: 1075 MHz 1024MB /256bit GDDR5 memory interface Dual Slot Vapor-X Cooler with Heatpipes This HAS TO be a fake: Even in an empty editor with those settings I only get 15 fps: http://www.pic-upload.de/view-2350820/arma2-2009-06-17-20-34-45-86.jpg.html How should he get double the fps in multiplayer with even higher resolution with a 4890 ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NoBF2boy 10 Posted June 17, 2009 Whos talking about maxing it out ?The problem is: ArmA 2 + low details + High End hardware = 25fps (in multiplayer) That's unaccaptable. AND DON'T SAY: Turn down the details. It does 30fps at lowest details and 25 at highest details, so obviously the engine sucks not my computer. ---------- Post added at 06:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:06 PM ---------- This HAS TO be a fake: Even in an empty editor with those settings I only get 15 fps: http://www.pic-upload.de/view-2350820/arma2-2009-06-17-20-34-45-86.jpg.html How should he get double the fps in multiplayer with even higher resolution with a 4890 ? why should i fake that and how? sorry that you cant enjoy the game as i do, but calling my screenshots fake is ridiculous. what card do you have? what OS? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sk3pt 0 Posted June 17, 2009 gtx275 is not faster then the 4890? What the? Where did you get that from?! The GTX 275 is faster in several games, but far from all. SAPPHIRE TOXIC HD 4890 1GB GDDR5 I just got that exact same card today as part of my new build. :) Looks like a good card for Arma2. Actually, I'm surprised by the rather good FPS I'm getting on my 3.5 years old Opteron 170 @ 2.7ghz + HD2900PRO @ 820. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Armin2 10 Posted June 17, 2009 why should i fake that and how? sorry that you cant enjoy the game as i do, but calling my screenshots fake is ridiculous. what card do you have? what OS? Sorry but this just can't be right. I've got a C2D 2x4GHZ, 4GB Ram and 275GTX and I only get 15 fps in an EMPTY EDITOR while you get 30 fps at full warfarce action with a 4890 ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bush 0 Posted June 17, 2009 All of these screenshots are taken with my system in the signature below. This is the settings I used and all the screenshots are resized from 1920x1080. Singleplayer: http://img189.imageshack.us/i/1arma2.jpg/ http://img188.imageshack.us/i/2arma2.jpg/ http://img44.imageshack.us/i/3arma2.jpg/ http://img41.imageshack.us/i/4arma2.jpg/ http://img30.imageshack.us/i/5arma2.jpg/ http://img20.imageshack.us/i/6arma2.jpg/ Multiplayer: http://img200.imageshack.us/i/multiplayer1arma2.jpg/ http://img196.imageshack.us/i/multiplayer2arma2.jpg/ http://img194.imageshack.us/i/multiplayer3arma2.jpg/ http://img191.imageshack.us/i/multiplayer4arma2.jpg/ http://img190.imageshack.us/i/multiplayer5arma2.jpg/ http://img189.imageshack.us/i/multiplayer6arma2.jpg/ http://img188.imageshack.us/i/multiplayer7arma2.jpg/ http://img44.imageshack.us/i/multiplayer8arma2.jpg/ http://img41.imageshack.us/i/multiplayer9arma2.jpg/ http://img200.imageshack.us/i/multiplayer10arma2.jpg/ http://img196.imageshack.us/i/multiplayer11arma2.jpg/ As you can see the framerate is above 35fps in all of them and most of them are 45+. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sk3pt 0 Posted June 17, 2009 (edited) I only get 15 fps in an EMPTY EDITOR Obviously something is seriously wrong there... On my current ancient computer (post above), with only a few AI and NORMAL settings, I get 25-30 fps in Chernarus and even more on Utes. Edited June 17, 2009 by sk3pt Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Armin2 10 Posted June 17, 2009 (edited) Crap, I guess I have to return my GTX ... The card is working but it has the same performance as my old 4850... Even in 3DMark I only have 20% more points than with my 4850. So something actually is wrong. Can graphics cards work but not at the full performance ? ---------- Post added at 08:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:59 PM ---------- All of these screenshots are taken with my system in the signature below.This is the settings I used and all the screenshots are resized from 1920x1080. Singleplayer: http://img189.imageshack.us/i/1arma2.jpg/ http://img188.imageshack.us/i/2arma2.jpg/ http://img44.imageshack.us/i/3arma2.jpg/ http://img41.imageshack.us/i/4arma2.jpg/ http://img30.imageshack.us/i/5arma2.jpg/ http://img20.imageshack.us/i/6arma2.jpg/ Multiplayer: http://img200.imageshack.us/i/multiplayer1arma2.jpg/ http://img196.imageshack.us/i/multiplayer2arma2.jpg/ http://img194.imageshack.us/i/multiplayer3arma2.jpg/ http://img191.imageshack.us/i/multiplayer4arma2.jpg/ http://img190.imageshack.us/i/multiplayer5arma2.jpg/ http://img189.imageshack.us/i/multiplayer6arma2.jpg/ http://img188.imageshack.us/i/multiplayer7arma2.jpg/ http://img44.imageshack.us/i/multiplayer8arma2.jpg/ http://img41.imageshack.us/i/multiplayer9arma2.jpg/ http://img200.imageshack.us/i/multiplayer10arma2.jpg/ http://img196.imageshack.us/i/multiplayer11arma2.jpg/ As you can see the framerate is above 35fps in all of them and most of them are 45+. What score do you have in 3DMark06 (in case you know that) ? Edited June 17, 2009 by Armin2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
-DirTyDeeDs--Ziggy- 0 Posted June 17, 2009 (edited) :rolleyes: this is what I get with the computer @ 'Zigs Rig' in my sig, with my gtx275oc added and a slight oc on my new e7400 cpu. fyi : using resolution 1280x1024 Edited June 17, 2009 by [DirTyDeeDs]-Ziggy- Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bush 0 Posted June 17, 2009 What score do you have in 3DMark06 (in case you know that) ? I have not used 3dmark for years as it does not represent the real performance of the system and I think it is very boring to watch. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Porter_ 10 Posted June 17, 2009 Crap, I guess I have to return my GTX ... The card is working but it has the same performance as my old 4850...Even in 3DMark I only have 20% more points than with my 4850. So something actually is wrong. Can graphics cards work but not at the full performance? before you go and return your card: did you properly remove your old ATI drivers, run a driver cleaner of some kind, and then install the new nvidia drivers? poor performance is commonly caused by driver issues. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tomasz 0 Posted June 17, 2009 Armin2, have you doublechecked both power connections? Tomasz Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Armin2 10 Posted June 17, 2009 Dunno but is it a problem that I have one power connection behind a 12V fan ? Could the fan affect the GFX performance ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ollem 4 Posted June 30, 2009 Armin2, were you able to find out why you had bad performance with your 275? I'm still undecided whether to by a 275gtx or a 4890... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The.Yield 10 Posted June 30, 2009 (edited) For the record, as an absolute hardware nut myself, the AMD 4890 series of cards trades blows with GTX285's depending on the game in question. That said, GTX285's are nothing more than a 275 with a wider mem bus and slightly higher clocks. Here is a link to a Guru3D benchmark run of the new GTX275's with the double memory (which as it turns out is completely pointless, oddly enough). But anywho, they run down 4 or so different cards in the VGA perf section. This includes 4890's, 275's, 275's +mems, and 285's. http://www.guru3d.com/article/evga-geforce-gtx-275-1792mb-review/1 You'll clearly see it entirely depends on the game (and the resolution your playing at) - when talking about what is faster/equal to what. GTX285 and a 4890 are in a dead heat at 19x12 resolution in COD5, for example. Yet the 285 takes the higher marks when jumping to 25x16 resolution. Then you move onto HAWX where the exact opposite results are reached at 25x16 res. There is no such thing as "this is 15% faster than that" in modern PC gaming hardware. Blanket statements like that are utterly false. It all boils down to optimization. Edited June 30, 2009 by The.Yield Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KillerHawk 10 Posted June 30, 2009 I also don't understand the problem.. I'm running on an ATI 4870 1GB, and im NOT getting any damn higher then 23fps in campaign mode! Even, when i put all settings to LOW or medium, it still gives me those crapped fps. I started thinking ARMA 2 blocks my gpu, cause when i have a look on my second screen where my control panel is open, i see the GPU DOESN'T get any higher then 70% activity, its between 40 and 70%, so that is just weak. I can play crysis maxed out, SMOOTHLESS, so why i can't play this game on at least high settings.. I run on Windows 7 RC, an 4870 and an E8500 @ 3.16Ghz.. I DO NOT, spend arround 700/800 Euro's to play at this crappy fps. PLEASE, give an performance update, or PLEASE give an good solution! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
