Unable to get more than 23fps

[desertjedi 3]

Are you suggesting that a 3.3ghz quad will only ever give 23-25fps on this mission as it is under powered ? no matter what you set the graphics to?

I'm starting to think that that is precisely correct.

Right when I switched to using a Very Low Terrain Detail setting coupled with the Proper Low Vegetation mod, I saw a noticeable frame rate improvement in many missions. That is, until I went into a mission called Abel by Ionflux where you and many other US soldiers defend a "base" against many, many attacking Opfor. I don't know how many exactly but the "win" parameter is to survive for a half-hour, so I'm betting there's a truckload out there. In this mission, my previous frame rate was 26fps. After I enabled the "veggie" mods, the frame rate was still precisely 26fps.

I'm currently running a Core 2 Duo clocked at 4.18Ghz. This, as they say, is not a good sign. [My video card is an overclocked GTX 260].

[Bulldogs 10]

My explaination was for why the CPU was effected by the campaign, not why other weird FPS issues happen... I blame aliens personally.

I reinstalled my German version and patched to 1.01 and played Manhatten @ 2.6 clock and got 23fps, overclocked to 3.5 and got 34 fps, then patched to 1.4 and my framerate on Manhatten went to 28 fps. This was all tested under XP.

I carried out the same test under Windows 7 32bit. With every patch and every clock my fps is at 22fps. With max video settings my fps is at 22 fps but very slow (seems like about 10fps) with video settings at minimum it's at 22fps but extremely smooth (feels like at least 35fps)

[desertjedi 3]

My explaination was for why the CPU was effected by the campaign, not why other weird FPS issues happen... I blame aliens personally.

I reinstalled my German version and patched to 1.01 and played Manhatten @ 2.6 clock and got 23fps, overclocked to 3.5 and got 34 fps, then patched to 1.4 and my framerate on Manhatten went to 28 fps. This was all tested under XP.

I carried out the same test under Windows 7 32bit. With every patch and every clock my fps is at 22fps. With max video settings my fps is at 22 fps but very slow (seems like about 10fps) with video settings at minimum it's at 22fps but extremely smooth (feels like at least 35fps)

This all sounds like, indeed, aliens really are involved. Maybe we need a server farm to meet the cpu requirements of this game!

[1longtime 10]

I never get FPS over 30 using Vista or Windows 7 (usually low-mid 20s as everyone else reports). XP, however, I can break 60 or more with modest resolution settings.

I've beaten my head against that wall long enough, and now I just keep XP on a partition for Arma.

---------- Post added at 01:55 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:48 AM ----------

I suspect it's a streaming issue Zoog.

My suggestion, (and I've yet to try it myself but plan to imminently), is to buy an SSD drive and install ArmA to that.

I suggest that the game lags when it has to load a lot of textures and graphics direct from the harddrive to the game. Streaming. At this point frame rates should radically drop and towns are where I would expect this to occour more.

SSD drives are RAM not harddrives, the access speed is 0.01-0.03 ms as opposed to 5.8-6.1 ms on a mechanical hard drive.

Any old cheap one will do. This will also increase your frame rates for other streaming games loaded onto it, such as World of Warcraft or Crysis.

This won't increase your frame rates overall but only during the streaming moments. The frame rate drop outs. Your peak FPS will be the same, your average FPS will be higher as will your minimum FPS.

Hardware review tests on Crysis have produced increased frame rates of up to 25 depending on the SSD manufacturer (Intel being the best but most expensive by a factor of about double). I intend to pay about £150 (OCZ Vertex) for an upper end 60GB drive, tested to improve Crysis frame rates by 20 during streaming. If nothing else the LODs will fill themselves in much faster.

I *did* try this, and I posted about it here:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?p=1451808#post1451808

Yes, that's right, I'm linking to my own post from a 3 month old question. I think it's pertinent. Sue me.