Conclusion: Adjusting video settings won't help much!!

[RGN07 10]

After much tinkering with the video settings, i am of the conclusion that if you want noticeable improvements in performance, you need to drastically lower the settings. If we think that adjusting from Very High to High, or High to Normal, or even Normal to low, and lowering resolution by just one or two levels down would give us a satisfactory gaming experience, don't be too hopeful bec. it won't. If you want to have acceptable frame rates, make the res 800x600 or 640x480, on very low or low settings. I had hoped that a game as graphically complex as ArmA 2 would have more video adjustment components in the options menu. World in Conflict had video adjustment components that were available to really fine tune the game to your preference, and the changes were noticeable when using the built in benchmarking option. I know WiC is a RTS and ArmA2 is not but i hope you get the point.

[Bulldogs 10]

Depends on what settings your change. The one that I find has most impact is changing the view distance. Also depends on your hardware, if you're running SLI, or a newer card then Anti-aliansing won't be affected as much, but on older hardware disabling AA gives a mass boost. Then you've gotta look at the GPu->Bus->Cpu bottleneck, plus other realted things.

---------- Post added at 11:10 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:08 AM ----------

Oh.. one things I just noticed in your post, Arma 2 has a mass of adjustments, make sure you goto advanced config.

[Yapab 10]

The GPU can make a difference if your CPU is at 4ghz or more...

[randir14 10]

Yeah the only very noticeable impacts are from AA and view distance. I remember trying the demo with the view distance maxed out and thinking "damn this game runs like shit." I didn't realize the importance of lowering it. I have mine at 2015 and what's annoying are the multiplayer servers who force it to be higher.