RedRage 0 Posted June 24, 2009 My specs are Q9300 Quad @ 3.0 Ghz 2xEVGA GTX 260 SC in SLI running on 186.08 beta driver 4 gigs RAM Raptor 2 150gb HD Vista Ultimate 32-bit 1680x1050 resolution Running the game on very high settings with few things toned down to High (and terrain to Medium) at 3km visibility, I'm getting constant frame clogs when turning around with very choppy movement(especially in urban areas). Overall fps averages at attrocious 24-25 fps when controlling land units (air units seem to sport low 40s). I've seen videos of people with much worse set ups getting steady 60 fps, so I'm a bit puzzled atm. Any suggestions on how to improve my frame rate would be most welcome. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maizel 10 Posted June 24, 2009 (edited) Join the club, mate. There are several fixes posted on the forums, but their effects vary from person to person, but are usually quite slim, if noticable at all. I think they just serve as a placebo, just so that the majority of players with a fast rig here, can leep on denying that he spent his money on (as it stands now) mess of a product fo a little longer. Edited June 24, 2009 by Maizel Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kklownboy 43 Posted June 24, 2009 My specs are Q9300 Quad @ 3.0 Ghz 2xEVGA GTX 260 SC in SLI running on 186.08 beta driver 4 gigs RAM Raptor 2 150gb HD Vista Ultimate 32-bit 1680x1050 resolution Running the game on very high settings with few things toned down to High (and terrain to Medium) at 3km visibility, I'm getting constant frame clogs when turning around with very choppy movement(especially in urban areas). Overall fps averages at attrocious 24-25 fps when controlling land units (air units seem to sport low 40s). I've seen videos of people with much worse set ups getting steady 60 fps, so I'm a bit puzzled atm. Any suggestions on how to improve my frame rate would be most welcome. dont listen to Maizel, hes old and bitter...lol You should roll back your driver to the 182.xx, and using a crysis.exe for a rename of your ARMA2.exe, should help with your SLI. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
neurojazz 10 Posted June 24, 2009 182.50 works fine :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Equazor 10 Posted June 24, 2009 Renaming the .exe file to crysis.exe or crysis64.exe should do the trick. It seems that SLI isn't enabled in the Nvidia drivers for arma 2 yet. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ambroisec 10 Posted June 24, 2009 hello excuse me for my english but i m french i have exactely the same problem with arma 2 my system is following: -core 2 duo x6800 extreme 2.93 ghz -asus striker 2 extreme -graphic card :gtx 295 -4 go ddr3 12800 ocz running windows vista 64 with last driver 186.18 and the game is not fluid at all the fps are 15 to 28 max i dont understand at all have an idea i bought this config for play arma 2 and i m very furious..... my processor it is good or i must change it? i try with vista 64 don t change anything -winxp too..... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RedRage 0 Posted June 24, 2009 Rolling back to 182.50 and re-naming the executable did not improve things. Interestingly, I get pretty choppy performance even with lowered graphics (2-3 fps difference between running on Very High and Normal). Running "Counterattack" scenario my fps averaged at 19-22 with both 182.50 and 186.08 beta (which is pretty much unplayable). Fallout 3, GTA4, Empire:Total war, and now this *sigh* It seems developers are not able/too lazy to properly optimize games to take advantage of the latest hardware tech. 1.03 better be all about optimization. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FraG_AU 10 Posted June 24, 2009 ^^ Empire had a patch yesterday.. Performance is one of they things they have worked on :0 As for fallout 3? That worked perfect and GTA4 has since been patched and works well (It was a console port after all :() Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
