iHarri 10 Posted July 29, 2009 (edited) I can't get fps to go over 30 in campaign, 2 weeks later is the only exception. No matter what I adjust it will always be 26-30. Resolution, number of cores, graphics low-very high, AA, AF. :eek: Training missions are all fine. Already tried tweaking with settings from different threads, no help. Q9450(3.2) Nvidia 280 (drivers won't make any difference) 4 GB X-Fi Vista 64 + SP2 Edit. Vertical sync is OFF from Nvidia control panel Edited July 29, 2009 by iHarri Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ICE-Raver 10 Posted July 29, 2009 I usually get 33 on vista 64. Funny thing is no matter what I do to my settings it's always 33. Sometimes it dips down to 28 in some situations but then right back up to 33. It hits 33fps like vsync is controlling the frame rate. It wants to go higher but there is some kind of wall stopping it. There is definitely some optimizing to be done with this game. Especially on new hardware. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Foop 10 Posted July 29, 2009 I had exactly the same problem as you until I turned vsync off in the catalyst control center, and by off I mean hardwired to off for all games. The 'off by default' option didn't work - arma2 must specifically turn it on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Albert Schweitzer 10 Posted July 29, 2009 I can't get fps to go over 30 in campaign, 2 weeks later is the only exception. No matter what I adjust it will always be 26-30. Resolution, number of cores, graphics low-very high, AA, AF. :eek:Training missions are all fine. Already tried tweaking with settings from different threads, no help. Q9450(3.2) Nvidia 280 (drivers won't make any difference) 4 GB X-Fi Vista 64 + SP2 Edit. Vertical sync is OFF from Nvidia control panel Same here, cant get above 33/35! But performance is still good and stable. Maybe it is just Fraps Q9450 4890 TOP (same with previous 8800GTS SSC) X-Fi Vista 64 + SP2 4 Gig Ram Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
weegee_101 0 Posted July 29, 2009 Set the "Max Pre Rendered Frames" option in the Nvidia control panel to 8. That greatly improved my framerate above 30. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ICE-Raver 10 Posted July 29, 2009 (edited) Set the "Max Pre Rendered Frames" option in the Nvidia control panel to 8. That greatly improved my framerate above 30. EDITED! That did work...................................Kinda. I'm WAS getting 65 FPS! 1680 x1050 with normal and high settings! When I switched it to 8 it worked perfectly but caused some weird loading issues with the game. However I went back and changed that setting and tried each 1-8 to try to overcome the loading issues and it quit working altogether. Even setting 8 which boosted my frames initially no longer does anything. Back to 33. I don't know wtf at this point. Edited July 29, 2009 by ICE-Raver Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Albert Schweitzer 10 Posted July 29, 2009 Could someone give me an advise for ATI since I am having the same issue. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iHarri 10 Posted July 29, 2009 Max Pre Rendered Frames to 8 is not helping(better this way if it adds 8-frame delay). :o Seems that when using -cpuCount=4 just one core is about 90% and the others are much lower. And when setting it to one fps is still the same... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ICE-Raver 10 Posted July 29, 2009 Alright. I rebooted my system and got it working again with no issues this time. By default my pre-rendered frames were 3. I was stuck at 33 fps all the time. Turning pre-rendered frames to 5 made my fps go up to 44. Turning pre-rendered frames to 8 made it jump to 64. I haven't played yet but I ran around the main base on a co-op map and it was very smooth. Thing is this makes no sense whatsoever. Everything I have ever read about this setting says that turning it higher will reduce FPS. In any case. It's working right now. I'll do some testing and get back to this thread. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iHarri 10 Posted July 29, 2009 Try some campaign mission. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
43st 10 Posted July 29, 2009 I found that using 8 added to much lag into the game, it's much smoother but there is a noticeable delay. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GunSlingerAUS 10 Posted July 29, 2009 Install Windows 7 on a separate partition - it's free to try at the moment, and boy does it help your frames in ARMA2. I went from Vista Ultimate x64 to Win 7 x64, and will never go back. It's also a hell of a lot more stable! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iHarri 10 Posted July 30, 2009 I am too lazy to do dualboot just for one game. Everything else is working like a charm, and Vista 64 is very stable. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
delevero 10 Posted July 30, 2009 the reason is that he campaign missons are filled with so many extra stuff and scripts to make them so cool it really drain the computer for power when it have to keep track of so much...... if you compare a big singleplayer mission and a normal campaign mission you can easy feel the difference.. I play alot online in a squad and the best advice to making good stable mission is the following KISS = keep it simple stupid Then the mission will be stable and run smooth. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kridian 33 Posted July 30, 2009 Install Windows 7 on a separate partition - it's free to try at the moment, and boy does it help your frames in ARMA2. I went from Vista Ultimate x64 to Win 7 x64, and will never go back. It's also a hell of a lot more stable! Yeah, but in SEVEN months, you'll have to reinstall all your apps again. ;) Waiting for the full launch of Win7. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iHarri 10 Posted August 2, 2009 the reason is that he campaign missons are filled with so many extra stuff and scripts to make them so cool it really drain the computer for power when it have to keep track of so much...... if you compare a big singleplayer mission and a normal campaign mission you can easy feel the difference..I play alot online in a squad and the best advice to making good stable mission is the following KISS = keep it simple stupid Then the mission will be stable and run smooth. Well, there is somekind of problem in game engine 'cause nothing will help fps. Core number=nothing, graphics settings=nothing, I have to try underclock cpu if it's still staying stable 30 fps :D. Or it's a problem with Vista 64 'cause some are saying that fps is much better with 7. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kklownboy 43 Posted August 2, 2009 Well, there is somekind of problem in game engine 'cause nothing will help fps. Core number=nothing, graphics settings=nothing, I have to try underclock cpu if it's still staying stable 30 fps :D. Or it's a problem with Vista 64 'cause some are saying that fps is much better with 7. well in some MP the frames stay less than 35fps and on others i can max out to my Vsync(100). In SP i can get more than Campaign, lots more, Its all campaign. Why? i dont know, and in the long run i really dont care. the game is best in MP/userSP, it is a sanbox. The campaign is embarrassment to Bis i would hope? and they will make it nicer for new players. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bangtail 0 Posted August 2, 2009 well in some MP the frames stay less than 35fps and on others i can max out to my Vsync(100). In SP i can get more than Campaign, lots more, Its all campaign. Why? i dont know, and in the long run i really dont care. the game is best in MP/userSP, it is a sanbox. The campaign is embarrassment to Bis i would hope? and they will make it nicer for new players. The campaign is fun but it's totally let down by the voice "acting" (acting might not be technically correct tbh, I'm not sure what you call it) and there are some major AI issues (they can be circumvented but are no less annoying). I never buy BIS games for the SP but I can see why someone might get angry if that was their reason for buying it. The campaign definitely did NOT work properly out of the box. Having said that, I didn't really have any performance related issues vis a vis the campaign. Some slight texture issues in Cherno, but that's about it. Eth Share this post Link to post Share on other sites