ARMA2 not using avaialable resources on high end systems

[DarkBytes 10]

hi the following is a screenie of resource manager and rivatuner to show the utilisation of both CPU & GPU during ARMA II gameplay ( note dip at start and end where I alt tab out to see results )

Note how neither gpu dosnt go above 45%

and only one of the CPU cores is worked to any great degree , ( note that there are 4 physical cores on I7 but mutlithreaded so shows as 8 in windows ) , this is bonkers ,I know there is lots of talk of ARMA II being a demanding game that can strain the best of systems , but its no wonder that the high end systems / GPU cards are perfoming badly if ARMA II is not actually utilising the resource available

this was taking on the following spec

ARMA 2 German version Clean install , latest patch english language mod

running @1650x1050

everything on very high except AA which is on normal

CPU Intel Core i7 920 D0 Stepping @ 4ghz

GPU ATI 4870x2 ( with 2GB video memory )

6ghz Corsair DDR3 ( 16000 )

MB Gigabyte GA-EX58-Extreme Intel X58

OS windows 7 64bit ( clean install

GPU driver new 9.7 ( fixes cross fire one GPU problem )

ARMA 2 German version Clean install , latest patch english language mod

Now say what you like , but something is definatly rotten in denmark , The game isnt even giving these high end systems a chance to perfom , anyway thought the screenie might be of interest and perhaps some stuff will get fixed

Edited July 10, 2009 by DarkBytes

[bangtail 0]

Not really, this is the case with many games and is certainly NOT restricted to A2.

Eth

PS : You might want to resize that picture.

[Amuro 10]

Multi-GPU scaling has improved a lot on nvidia cards with the official profile patch, very goold load balancing. Maybe AMD will release new driver update that addresses crossfire support for this game.

[DarkBytes 10]

Not really, this is the case with many games and is certainly NOT restricted to A2.

Eth

PS : You might want to resize that picture.

resized , good call.

But come on , "erm not really ?"

If you read all the blurb from BI regarding ARMA II , it talks extensivly about how it will be multicore optimised .

Look at the picture mate , that is not the behavour of proper multicore optimisation is it ?

and with respect to the GPU , well that is not the behavior I see with many other games, it is simply not optimised or using available resource.

Look I love this game , I remember playing OFP when it first came out and thinking it was the most fantastic thing out there,

this post is to highlight issues not to rant , so I would prefer a constructive response , or at least one based on fact , not supposition.

Cheers

Edited July 10, 2009 by DarkBytes

[[GLT] Legislator 66]

Which scenario are you testing? As far as I know a quadcore cpu should be at 100 % with lots of AI units fighting, using waypoint and routing calculation. Right now I'm using an E6750 dual core at 3.5 ghz and it's often at 100 % cpu usage when playing missions with many AI soldiers. I ordered a Q9550 and I'm eager to see what will happen to my performance when this baby runs at 3.5 ghz too on all cores.

So maybe you should retry your tests in the editor:

- alone running through the country side

- fighting with small AI numbers (up to 50)

- fighting with medium AI numbers (up to 100)

- fighting with large AI numbers (more than 100)

It sounds much, but it isn't. Take a squad of 10 soldiers, some tanks and choppers ... two factions ... you'll get 100 units very fast together :D The test result would be interesting I guess.

[rekrul 7]

As for CPU, it seems pretty correct. You have 4 cores and with 8 diagnostic windows, adding those up, fully loaded would mean 400% while yours seems to be ~375%. (You can't get 100% on all 8 since you only have 4 cores.)

As for the GPUs, I agree. Have you tried the new Catalyst 9.7 beta drivers? They improved my performance.

[Scrub 0]

Yup, My knowledge of the virtual processors is for more efficient multithreading. I don't believe you can get more calculations per cycle from the same amount of transistors, just more parallel threads. Think tractor pull, not drag race. LOL.

[DarkBytes 10]

yup have the new catalysts , the results in the screenie are using those

with repect to this being expected for CPU Ok so maybe i am missing something here then , your trying to tell me that you should not be able to get 100% CPU utilisation across all threaded cores ?

well thats odd , because If I use some stress test tools thats pricisly what I do get ,

I cannot see how it can be said that the resorce i showed u being used is expected ? 1 is nearly always 100% there is another that isnt used at all, and the others range between 10 & 35 % how can that be optimisation for multiple cores ?

[rekrul 7]

Well it's kinda hard for me to see the actual percentages here, but the two on the right side, added together, make up about 100%. The two on the left added together looks like about 100% to me.

If you have some stress-testing program that actually gives you 100% *on the same CPU-monitor as the screenshot* on all 8 "cores" I'm wrong but I've never seen that happen with hyperthreading cores.

[DarkBytes 10]

Well it's kinda hard for me to see the actual percentages here, but the two on the right side, added together, make up about 100%. The two on the left added together looks like about 100% to me.

If you have some stress-testing program that actually gives you 100% *on the same CPU-monitor as the screenshot* on all 8 "cores" I'm wrong but I've never seen that happen with hyperthreading cores.

erm righto then

Prim95, pretty much the industry standard tool for test / stability

so anyhow thats each core / thread being worked 100% , that is full utilisation

Look happy to seek for answers an that , but please, aint bullshiting here , so afford me the same ..

Cheers

Bytes

[The.Yield 10]

I too am running dual 4870's. Even with the new 9.7 cats that have been leaked out... Scaling is terrible. And we STILL have to use the -winxp flag to get Xfire working.

BIS needs to get on the phone with AMD and get this figured out, on the pronto.

Send AMD's driver team a few free copy's of ARMA2 for science's sake! :D

EDIT: Wow at all the CPU comments. "Those threaded cores can't go above 50%..." LOL, Noob Kuchen is being served.

Edited July 10, 2009 by The.Yield

[ViperNL 10]

The reason not all your virtual cores are at 100% is likely because it is almost impossible to distribute the calculations of a game evenly over all cores. Its rather complicated and has to do with the fact that some code can not be distributed over more than one core.

So what you are seeing is probably one core is handling the main game loop, another the AI, another physics, etc. Try adding a lot more AI as someone suggested. One (or more?) of the cores' usage will (or should) go up.

The reason your GPU isnt at 100% is probably because the cpu core thats supposed to send data to the GPU is already at 100% and can not supply more to your GPU. It means that with the current settings, the game is CPU limited. I bet if you turn on GPU settings like AA and AF, you hardly notice a difference in FPS.

[rekrul 7]

Sorry Bytes, my bad then.

[bono_lv 10]

I almost started new topic about same problem. :)

Q9550, HD4870x2

No matter what happens on screen my cpu and gpu load doesnt exceed 50% on any core at the same time.

[Masterfragg 10]

I've seen the exact same problem on my Phenom II X4

At most points in the game it only uses 40% of the first 3 cores and a bit more on the 4th

Now I'm suffering a bit after a BIOS update with frame rate drops but soon as I have sorted that out I'll get some screeners up.

At the sec though I've gone from 50/60 FPS in the starting menu to 15fps oddly but I still get perfect performance from all my other games so I must of screwed something up royally