Am I the only one?

[Whyfly? 10]

Am I the only one who can play on teen digit FPS?

I played the game no problem on my computer on Normal settings with some stuff set to high, and I installed Fraps today and was averaging 16 FPS!

Sure that's low but I was playing it? Like I had no problem with lag or anything?

Anyone else experience this?

[BeerHunter 0]

My FPS vary between 10 - 20 in heavy graphics areas and up to 30 - 40 in the wide open spaces. :cool:

Me thinks way too much emphasis is placed on this FPS thingy. Guess it's all because if you have the hottest card , fastest CPU and more memory than the guy down the street you need something to brag about and FPS seems to be the bench mark.

Mind you , that's for SP. Online I suppose you'd find it a bit awkward to have <24 FPS constantly as it can effect your aim (but then your ping probably has a much bigger influence) but who bothers to play online anyway? SP in the editor is way more fun. :p

[Bulldogs 10]

I think it's a misreading by fraps (or by directx since that's where it gets it from)

I noticed that on very high settings I get 20 fps (but very unplayable) on very low settings I get 22 fps (smooth as butter)

[Eagle911 10]

I get 20 fps on normal settings

and like 6 on very high

And my computer isn't too bad

[Whyfly? 10]

I have This computer (It's crap, but I'm building one Labor day:yay:)

So yeah but I am very surprised as how to I can actually play on Single Player with this!

Now I just thought about it and I do not change the settings for when I got to MP, so it's crazy how on MP it's even lower but I get NO STUTTER!

Pretty awesome but it sucks cause I can't really use the Editor to my expectations.

I wanna see tanks exploding, tracers flying, guys getting blown off their feet, nightime battles to make everything stand out and everything, but then I get 8 FPS which is LAGGG!!

But 16 is good, and on Multiplayer I'm good too, so wow.

[max power 21]

Low FPS is a problem with fast moving games because it's sometimes hard to judge the speed of things. I've only encountered this problem when someone was running right in front of me across-wise in ArmA. In flightsims like IL2 it's a much bigger problem.

[sparks50 0]

I thought the FPS was the number of frames drawn by the video card(pr second)

It surely shouldn't be that hard to measure accurately?

Edited August 18, 2009 by sparks50

[Grizzle 0]

There's an FPS mod on Armaholic. Use it, not FRAPS.

To the OP's point. I don't see ARMA as a game where high FPS matters much. I also find that when it dips down into the teens it's still playable. Though that might be different if you are flying. I'm running in the mid 20's most of the time and that's with most options on very high but it's still plenty smooth for me.

[Nutlink 10]

Am I the only one who can play on teen digit FPS?

Not at all. Some of us have just been spoiled over smooth gameplay from the other games we play on our nuclear powered PCs that low FPS gets annoying and frustrating. Look at Goldeneye or Perfect Dark on the N64 ten years ago. Stuttered like crazy with an FPS of what, 10-15? People absolutely loved those games, and while the frame rates were brought up as an issue it was usually not considered any more than a minor annoyance.

Going further back, I remember struggling getting the Doom freeware to run smooth on my computer. Of course, all this was 10 years ago or longer. Low FPS is fine if you can cope with it, but once you get used to the fluidity of a high FPS compared to a low FPS, it's like going from watching a blu-ray movie to a Polaroid flip book.

[Sleek78 0]

i get less than 18 FPS all on high 70 when i look straight up :P i dont like the normal or the low setting so till i upgrade my rig or the community make some patches like in Arma im sticking to Arma

[Deadfast 43]

I found Fraps to be an instant FPS killer for ARMA 2 on my machine. With it on my FPS was effectively the half of what it was without it.

That's why I put together the FPS counter that uses an internal game's function (fps_diag) to get the results. Link is in my sig :)

[Whyfly? 10]

Wait wait wait?

So is Fraps also a killer even when not recording? I just use it to show FPS?

So without could I be getting like 25 FPS?

I'm good with 16 actually but with my new gaming rig I could see me not being comfortable with that speed.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

With textures at low, I get varying fps from 15-45. Upping it to normal, I get 10-25 or something. However, in certain places near some heavily leafed trees, it just can't cope and drops to 3-7 fps, and that is obviously completely unplayable.

Most of the other settings are set to the lowest, but resolution is quite high in windowed mode. Full screen is not an option.

[shataan 1]

The ONLY way to play ARMA 2 is everything maxed imho. At 1680x1050 or better. I use no AA/AF tho. Anything less and ya might as well be playing ARMA 1.

If ever there was a " diiiiamn I need to upgrade asap" wake up call.... ARMA 2 is IT! Thankfully, I took the plunge. ;p

[Deadfast 43]

Wait wait wait?

So is Fraps also a killer even when not recording? I just use it to show FPS?

So without could I be getting like 25 FPS?

I'm good with 16 actually but with my new gaming rig I could see me not being comfortable with that speed.

Fraps is basically a DirectX hook, it seems to be conflicting with something on my PC and bringing my FPS down.

Others may or may not have this issue on their systems.

[GunSlingerAUS 10]

Low FPS is fine if you can cope with it, but once you get used to the fluidity of a high FPS compared to a low FPS, it's like going from watching a blu-ray movie to a Polaroid flip book.

I think you've summed up perfectly why there's such a gulf between those who don't have an issue with ARMA2's performance and those who do. Unfortunately I'm in the latter camp - having been spoilt by 60fps in most of my games for the last few years, with 30fps as a minimum, I now perceive 20fps as a slideshow.

[Nutlink 10]

Your lucky. Anything under 40 is annoying, 50 is ok, but 60+ is where it's at for me. While it's still perfectly playable at 25-30, it just doesn't feel natural.

[Flaxpants 10]

I must admit to not quite understanding this obsession with fps. Most animated movies run at less than 30 fps, and I don't see anything 'laggy' or 'jumpy' about those. I did study animation for a short time when I was younger and remember being told that for fluent movement you need around 25fps, any more and you were just creating work for yourself and the difference to the human eye would be almost unoticeable. I don't even know how many fps I'm getting, and so long as my game doesn't visibly lag I don't really care. My processor is an old E6400 2.13 dual core, but I have an 8800GTX which helps it out. I run ARMA 2 on medium to high settings, on 1440 resolution and I get fluid movement, even in built up areas. It looks beautiful for me, I have no complaints at all.