Official nvidia 9600gt / 8800gt thread

[katua 10]

Even they are not comparable by a long shot with newest high-end graphic cards , these are very popular amongst gamers and a large sector of possible Arma 2 buyers.

In the game´s system requirements 8800gt appears as the optimal card, and 9600gt is just 5-10% slower.

A lot of reports from people with better cards are saying that they have several problems to get a good quality/fps combo.

This threat is to survey from real 9600gt/8800gt owners how these cards are really doing with the game and what tricks, drivers,game versions and game settings are giving best results.

Please try to fill this questionnaire and add later your impressions, thanks.

I will put my system´s info as example.

CARD: 9600gt 512mb

CPU: Intel core 2 quad q9400 2.66MHz

RAM: 4gb

OS: Vista 32 bits

Resolution: 1280 x 1024

Drivers: 182.50

Game Settings: -

Average fps: -

I will edit my game settings,fps and add my impression about how is the performace when i can get finally the game on Thursday...

I have all very high/high, except shadow (normal), and pp effects (disabled), and game overall runs smooth for me.

Edited July 12, 2009 by katua

[Helmut_AUT 0]

For me, 1920x1200 is okay on the 9600GT, with everthing set to Low except textures. Disabling post processing too. The card is limited in shaders for high resolution work, at lower resolution you might be able to use medium detail.

I get 22-20 min, 29 avg, 40 tops FPS, but at about 10 AI squads present my CPU (5000+ AMD) starts to bottleneck at around 25 FPS, so in theory if your CPU isn't the fastest, you can turn up a bit more detail since the card won't be the limiter anyway.

Drivers 185 or 186 (some people have problems with one or the other) bring about 10% more performance compared to 182 and earlier. Setting Object Detail to VERY LOW also is a good trick, I haven't yet been able to spot what it changes exactly, looks the same like LOW to me, and is 3 to 5 frames faster.

In summary: The 9600GT does it's job, in larger missions the CPU will bottleneck you anyway, but there are certain slowdowns (for example with lots of smoke on screen) that mean you still have to keep the quality settings low since the minimum FPS of the card will be less than minimum FPS from CPU.

[Zone 10]

I would like to give you my results, but as I can not see the game at all as I seem to have a serious graphics problem, I have tryed all types of fixes from old nvidia drivers to reducing the amount of ram to reinstalling the game and updates 3 time's now. My specs are- Q6600 @ 2.4, 8 gigs ram,

Zotac GT8800 Ampted, P5Q Pro mb as you can see my system is a very good mid range setup , I can play Crysis on high setings all the way to the end of the game so my system is up to playing Arma2. I hope that 505 Games and Bohemia can come up with something this side of 2009.

[ubermachtig 0]

Interesting Threat,

I'm also a 9600GT owner. These are my specifications:

Intel Core 2 Duo E6400 @ 2,13GHz (Stock speed)

Point of view 9600GT 512MB (Slightly overclocked)

Windows Vista Home Premium 32 Bit Service pack 2 RTM

300GB 7200RPM Seagate harddisk, 175GB free

186.18 WHQL GeForce drivers

2GB DDR2 800MHz Ram

With this mid-range cards, it's essential to keep all drivers up to date, since they can really mean something to the performance. This is my primary suggestion to everyone owning one of these 2 cards.

[whisper 0]

For me, 1920x1200 is okay on the 9600GT, with everthing set to Low except textures. Disabling post processing too. The card is limited in shaders for high resolution work, at lower resolution you might be able to use medium detail.

I get 22-20 min, 29 avg, 40 tops FPS, but at about 10 AI squads present my CPU (5000+ AMD) starts to bottleneck at around 25 FPS, so in theory if your CPU isn't the fastest, you can turn up a bit more detail since the card won't be the limiter anyway.

Drivers 185 or 186 (some people have problems with one or the other) bring about 10% more performance compared to 182 and earlier. Setting Object Detail to VERY LOW also is a good trick, I haven't yet been able to spot what it changes exactly, looks the same like LOW to me, and is 3 to 5 frames faster.

In summary: The 9600GT does it's job, in larger missions the CPU will bottleneck you anyway, but there are certain slowdowns (for example with lots of smoke on screen) that mean you still have to keep the quality settings low since the minimum FPS of the card will be less than minimum FPS from CPU.

Helmut, with your card and the resolution you try to achieve, and now with the FSAA that can be enabled, if you can bear with losing shadows, you may want to try putting your 3D-resolution lower than your actual resolution and smooth things up with FSAA. That way, maybe you can go for higher settings in other departments

[Helmut_AUT 0]

Whisper, thanks for the idea but I'm not lowering the res. Ran trough a village yesterday after an exploration flight with the Venom (crew of three also rendered on screen as they followed me), and I had 30+ frames unless very close to some buildings.

Right now my main performance worries are the CPU (which makes included missions unplayable, thanks BIS for that...) and the occasional graphic slowdown which is related to special effects. But otherwise the card can put out decent framerate - Arma1 in woods and tight villages didn't get much above 25 either, I'm used to that. It's the rare slowdown that kills me.

If the game didn't dip so deeply - sometimes lower than 20 - when rendering smoke, I might actually turn up some settings to match the card speed more closely with the frame limit of the CPU.

Besides, I tried some "High" settings yesterday - maybe it's me, but the vehicles and objects always seem to use pretty low LODs, even with a VD at 3000, even on high. That's the one visual thing I don't like - the heavy use of low-level LODs pretty close in distance, but it doesn't seem to be changed much by object detail.

Edited June 22, 2009 by Helmut_AUT

[katua 10]

I will share some youtube Arma 2 gameplay videos from people with 9600gt/8800gt cards:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPhfD-SZFKc

[lilshortie 10]

my specs. are.

Intel Quad Core 2.66GHz, Windows XP SP3 32bit, 4GB RAM, 2x Nvidia 9600GT SLi.

i'm running the game with everything on High settings, apart from shadows. thats on MED.

im not sure how to find out my fps plz tell..

[scorpio17523 10]

Download Fraps, it's used for recording in game footage (like all the youtube videos I'm sure you've seen). Fraps will display your fps.

EDIT: oh and i forgot my details, lol

Intel Core 2 Quad @ 2.40 GHZ (not over clocked)

4GB DDR2

nvidia 8800gtx 756MB (driver version 182.50 seems to be the best, anything after this just gets slower so 182.50 is the best driver to use ;) )

Vista Ultimate 32 bit SP2

My top rez with ym card and monitor is 1440x900 so I can run that, with everything on very high apart from Anisotropic Filter disabled, shadows on normal and Postprocess Effects disabled.

3D rez from 100% to 200 % hardly effects my fps and my visibility is set to 4070.

Runs pretty well but im still playing around with the settings.

Originally i had to drop most settings to Normal and lower the rez etc but since i downgraded my drivers for my gfx card, performance has increased. I hope this helps people.

Edited June 22, 2009 by Scorpio17523

[datter 0]

System specs

CARD: 8800gt 512mb x2 (SLI)

CPU: Intel Q6600 quad 2.4gHz overcocked to 3.3gHz

RAM: 2gb

OS: Win XP Pro sp3 32 bits

Resolution: 1680 x 1050

Drivers: 186.18

Game Settings:

View distance : 3300

All settings to high, except AF (very high) and post processing (very high)

3d resolution : 133%

Average fps: 30 - 40

[cenkcnk 0]

i have palit 8800gt sonic , 2 gig ram , amd 7750 2,7 ghz

i am thinking of buying arma 2, i pray , i will not be upset.

[Snowwhite 10]

System specs

CARD: 8800gt 512mb x2 (SLI)

CPU: Intel Q6600 quad 2.4gHz overcocked to 3.3gHz

RAM: 2gb

OS: Win XP Pro sp3 32 bits

Resolution: 1680 x 1050

Drivers: 186.18

Game Settings:

View distance : 3300

All settings to high, except AF (very high) and post processing (very high)

3d resolution : 133%

Average fps: 30 - 40

Very nice, beats all the single cards out there so that means 8800GT still has some juice in SLI.

I only have one 8800GT and can manage these settings:

View Distance: 3000

Normal AF, Object and Terrain detail

High shadows, AA disabled, 1680 x 1050 2D/3D res

PP disabled.

It's the best image quality/performance I can get with around the same average FPS. Shadows normal to high makes a hugh difference in Image Quality. Terrain and Object are minimal or only distance related and becaus eof the intense action barely noticeable.

Post Process is a no go for me, far too much bloom and DOF is too near (although I like DOF)

Blur is overdone wich make it feel like an arcade (crysis) game and not a military sim.

I still have to turn down the sahdow to normal now n then to smooth out the gameplay.

If future patches can let us up a notch for one or two options (like shadows) keeping the same FPS then that would be great.

Later lads

[Damack 10]

CARD: 8800gt 512mb x2

CPU: Intel I7 3.0 over clocked to 4.0 g

RAM: 24 DDR 3 2000 gb

OS: Win XP 64

Resolution: 1680x1050x32 and 3d Res @ 2040x 1146

This seems to run really well for me... I don't seem to be running into any real problems other then glitches in game...