Has anybody got full performance

[lockjaw-65- 0]

There are so many threads now with poor performance issues. I myself have spent more time trying to get the game to run at a decent level but still having problems. I thought I would start one where people who are getting full performance can let us know what rigs etc they use.

My setup is:

amd 6000+ x2 cpu

geforce 9800gtx+

8 gig ram at 1600

driver for gpu is 190.38

[S!fkaIaC 10]

Define "full performance". Absolute number vs. a HW+SW setup.

[An Fiach 10]

yes please, that's a very vague question.

Edited July 23, 2009 by anfiach
typo

[lockjaw-65- 0]

Ok what I mean is (and its not as technical as it comes across) I have most settings on normal and view distance under 2000. I get staggering frame rates, Textures delay in rendering and very often screen stops and then carrys on. So I would say that anybody who can run the game above normal settings with smoothness and without screen stop is running at full performance. Sorry I dont have bench mark as I just go by how the game appears as I play.

[Master gamawa 0]

Well, I can run the game with everything on Very High at 1680x1050 resolution (fillrate 100%) as long as my view distance is less than 2000. I get 30-40 fps everywhere except the big cities where it drops a bit. Sometimes it drops a lot! :)

I don't remember my exact specs. I have a dual or quad core processor, 4 gigs of ram and an NVIDIA 285 something or other card with 1gig or video memory? Dunno. Don't care!

Now the view distance is potentially too large to even be able to talk about full settings. Some people with a rig similar to mine may want to play with 5000m view distance which means that they have to compromise with their other graphics settings.

Of course I see no reason to have my post process effects and antialiasing to very high unless I am taking screenshots. When I play I prefer to have pp, aa and grass to low because it launches my frame rate to 60.

I don't think there is a machine out there that can play Arma2 on full settings since the view distance parameter is affecting everything and it has to do with personal preference.

Edited July 23, 2009 by Master gamawa

[Herbal Influence 10]

there's a thread on AMD 6000 here

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=77206

I am running it actually on about a 30 fraps +-4 and I am completely happy.

[Pauldarrington 9]

the only time my fps goes past 40 is when im sitting on the menu screen then it goes up too 180 fps :)

[tobmic 10]

My setup is Phenom BE 9950 @ 2.6ghz , 4gb ram (333mhz) and a Radeon Hd 4870 i can play all high even fillrate at 200% with solid fps 30-50 (Anti Aliasing Off).

But when i have to many Ai on the map the fps drops down to 20fps.

It runs good with good graphic when i play on LCD TV 40" with 1360x768 but with 24" lcd on 1900x1200 the fps drops down alot....

[lockjaw-65- 0]

there's a thread on AMD 6000 here

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=77206

I am running it actually on about a 30 fraps +-4 and I am completely happy.

Thanks for reply. You have about the same spec as me but I dont get your performance?

[Herbal Influence 10]

So it should depend on the settings in detail while I have seen a benchmark test - don't remember - the url ... where the 9600 GT was little faster than the 9800 GT.

I only remember because I couldn't believe it.

I start with highest settings.

My native resolution is shown below.

If you have a higher resolution - stop here ;-)

Otherwise:

You should then see it twice - the second is somewhat like 3-D-resolution.

I turn off post processing.

I hate detailed shadows and more than normal textures. ;-)

That should do it.

Whereas viewing distance doesn't change a lot - for me.

Pls put your specs into signature. An immense amount of posts can be avoided. A solution can be at hand when you do it.

[manzilla 1]

I run everything on max settings, 200% fillrate and 7500VD. It runs very well. Question? What's the memory on that 9800GTX?

[Herbal Influence 10]

Manzilla - what a big help to mankind your post would be, if we could only see your specs in signature! ;-)

[Alex72 1]

Running atm the 6000+ with settings to normal and some high. Low res though 1024x768 until i get my new videocard/cpu, but with that im very happy tbh. I got real good fps.

Ofcourse i see the ocational texture/model loads, but im on 320mb VMEM as well. So far so good at least. Scared to get top gear though as i see many complain with it. Im at least a bit confident im not gonna be hit with those problems though as i understand hardware and how they go together. I hope at least that those skills will help. Together with some patches im confident it will all be good.

Alex

[lockjaw-65- 0]

Running atm the 6000+ with settings to normal and some high. Low res though 1024x768 until i get my new videocard/cpu, but with that im very happy tbh. I got real good fps.

Ofcourse i see the ocational texture/model loads, but im on 320mb VMEM as well. So far so good at least. Scared to get top gear though as i see many complain with it. Im at least a bit confident im not gonna be hit with those problems though as i understand hardware and how they go together. I hope at least that those skills will help. Together with some patches im confident it will all be good.

Alex

What GPU you got ATM ?

---------- Post added at 12:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:44 AM ----------

Thanks for all response.

At last I have got it to a playable (and enjoyable) level.

I have everything on normal but disable the Postprocess effects.

View distance is 1610

Interface res: 1680 x 1050

3D res: 2100 x 1310

Having the 3d res higher seems to make up for the antialiasing being on normal (I like it on high, hate jagged lines).

It does slow down a bit at times but it is the best its run for me and for now im happy with that. :-)

[Alpha-Kilo 36]

Obviously the view distance is critical for the performance. I believe i read somewhere that enemies spawn appoximately 2000 m from the player. Is this correct? What is the advantage of a view distance greater than enemy spawning distance?

[Master gamawa 0]

Dunno.. Some people get aroused like that I guess.

Pilots prefer it too.

[Herbal Influence 10]

@LockJack65: Maybe I am little better off for my 9600 GT has twice the RAM.

[lockjaw-65- 0]

@LockJack65: Maybe I am little better off for my 9600 GT has twice the RAM.

Yeah you proberbly right. I think when I buy a new gpu it will be GF 280 with 1 gig of ram

[matte54 10]

50-60FPS in normal situations / 30-40FPS in heavy fighting/towns

1680x1024 all "very high" except Antialiasing witch is "normal" fillrate 100%

Intel Core i7 920 @ 3400mhz , 6gb Corsair dominator 1600mhz DDR3, Ati HD4870 1gb

[MPBR 10]

1920x1600

125% fill

4K Viewdistance

Everything on High / very high save for post process

lowest around 40fps in utes missions (200+ when looking up or down)

lowest around 25fps in main map

[no use for a name 0]

I get "full performance" from my system in my sig.

in game setting are:

visibility - 2500

texture detail - very high

AF - high

AA- very high

terrain detail - normal

object detail - high

shadows - very high

post processing - disabled

video mem - default

I usually maintain ~30-35 FPS; but it varies from 25-45 sometimes. In the most intense situations I sometimes dip down into the lower 20's; but that's pretty rare and it only seems to do it for a few seconds before going back up. Haven't had any major crashes or lockups either. I think I've had 3 since I bought the game when it came out; and I know one of those was my GPU overheating because it was 85+ degrees in my room lol

[Herbal Influence 10]

Please do not forget to restart game after changing "graphic options".

Completely - whole game.

Maybe, in some cases, which I don't know, even Windows.

I am just telling from my own experience "the other day" - fraps results did change.

The need to do this is not always clearly shown, but I recommend to do it as I experienced that some settings were only "noticed" by the game, when I did it. :eek:

Not need to deliver fraps or other data when you did not do this! :p