ArmA2 / OA (low) performance issues

[An Fiach 10]

No, his GPU is fine, I have the same one and I'm running Vista so his performance in game should be better. Could be an HDD issue, may also look at updating all system drivers. Also some advice for folks out there, if you do not have a sound card, think about getting one because sound can slow down your cpu.

[ImYourFEAR 10]

Hi!

I was thinking that in some older games when they came out I know that low performance had to do with the sound buffer and hardware acceleration of the audio. Making me look for the amount of chanels and khz quality of the arma2 audi but the only option is to change volume!?

Anyone elese think this could be the reason!

I meen, there is alot of sound and things going on in arma2 all the time!

Best Regards!

[RyanRyzzo 0]

I'm running ArmA2 on

E2140 @ 1,60 GHz

2 GB RAM

512 HD4850

no AA, no shaders, normal terrain, textures, shadows + FPS helper

20 FPS average, can't understand what's the fuss about and why do I get such relatively normal FPS... :icon_wink:

Edited November 27, 2009 by RyanRyzzo

[lobi 10]

I had a problem with one gpu and 8gb ram on windows7 64bit, others have said its too much ram. BUT when I take the ram out i still have this issue in seven and when I put in my second crossfire card (HD4890) it goes away. BUT I still get crap performance 12 to 25 fps. so I made the switch to xp and got the worst graphics corruption ever (looks like 8bit colour) ! I even run my windows7 64bit with four gigs ram and the game is JUST playable. I think vista ran it better at a really poor 12 to 25 fps. I have tried all the shortcut switches, menu-settings, voodoo chicken spells, threats of violence and bribery, nothing works. On the xp drive the only things installed are Fraps, TrackIR5, Teamspeak and ArmA2.

Q9650 3.6ghz, Corsair DDR3 1600, GA-X48T-DQ6 mobo, two Sapphire HD4890 crossfired, western digital (7) and seagate (XP) HDD

and yes all other games are perfect.

also CTD a LOT in 7.

Edited November 27, 2009 by lobi

[kklownboy 43]

... I still get crap performance 12 to 25 fps. so I made the switch to xp and got the worst graphics corruption ever (looks like 8bit colour) ! I even run my windows7 64bit with four gigs ram and the game is JUST playable. I think vista ran it better at a really poor 12 to 25 fps. I have tried all the shortcut switches, menu-settings, voodoo chicken spells, threats of violence and bribery, nothing works. On the xp drive the only things installed are Fraps, TrackIR5, Teamspeak and ArmA2.

Q9650 3.6ghz, Corsair DDR3 1600, GA-X48T-DQ6 mobo, two Sapphire HD4890 crossfired, western digital (7) and seagate (XP) HDD

and yes all other games are perfect.

also CTD a LOT in 7.

but you dont say your Resolution or ingame settings...Also you have Vsync on all the time in Vista and win7.. so that will hurt. a pair of 4890s with VD set to 3000 or less and most settings at normal can run 1900/1200. But if you really talking about the CAMPAIGN, then you will never get any more performance with your H/W.

[Colt45_GTO 10]

win xp media edit 32bit

ASUS M4N-SLi Delux

AMD Athlon X4 620 running at 2800mhz

POV GTX 260 vid

2gb cheap mem

600w modular PSU

it runs fine for a while then i get no detail on the models and my team turn into a bunch of white manikins..... then bit by bit it all comes back to how it should be.

i noticed in this thread that someone gets better performance with some of the vid settings on default. might try this but keep AA and PP off.

i'll report back with my findings.

btw frame rate is around 20fps average.

---------- Post added at 10:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:30 PM ----------

just tested settings all medium with vid mem on default and i no longer hit 20fps.....

lowest i hit was 32fps in a tank as gunner full steam through towns and trees. so its a major improvement. highest fps rate was 68 in a field with a few trees and two tanks in tow.

a few explosions in the towns blowing cars and buildings up. never missed a beat. i did have a memory skip just after startup but that was it.

Edited November 27, 2009 by Colt45_GTO

[Shoot2Kill 10]

Can anyone help me with this....

My specs: Card - Nvidia 9600 GT OC 512MB

CPU - Core 2 Duo 2.4 Ghz

Mem. - 2 GB

Now i know my proccesor is weak but i can barely run arma on normal settings on a 1024 x 768 resolution :(

Ive tried alot of things such as 8 pre rendered frames, vsync off, ect. but no luck

P.S. all my drivers and bios are up 2 date

[Colt45_GTO 10]

go into the nvidia cp, set the program to default, go into the game video settings and set all to default. this should set the graphics to your card, then turn post processing off, turn anti alaising to off. turn the draw distance to low and try that. the pre rendered frams is the amount of frames the game will try to load in memory . this sometimes is a bad thing.

try that and report back.

[Shoot2Kill 10]

Thx will try

[Rapala 10]

amd phenom 3.2ghz quad core

ati 5850

4GB RAM

Win 7

Game fps drops to 15 quite often no matter what detail setting I use and is unplayable in my view. I am horrified they can release a game that is unplayable on the latest hardware and am very upset I paid good money for it.

Until they patch it I give up for now.

[Colt45_GTO 10]

amd phenom 3.2ghz quad core

ati 5850

4GB RAM

Win 7

Game fps drops to 15 quite often no matter what detail setting I use and is unplayable in my view. I am horrified they can release a game that is unplayable on the latest hardware and am very upset I paid good money for it.

Until they patch it I give up for now.

have you dissabled AA in video settings ingame? also play with video memory ingame.

there is no reason why you should drop so low.

try running GameBooster, seems like you gave back ground process's causing you problems.

[Breguinho 10]

Can anyone tell me how do am I having this crappy FPS with this settings? Im getting 24-30FPS. I've a 4870x2, E8500, 4Gb DDR2 1066Mhz, Win7 Ultimate 64bits...

[Colt45_GTO 10]

Can anyone tell me how do am I having this crappy FPS with this settings? Im getting 24-30FPS. I've a 4870x2, E8500, 4Gb DDR2 1066Mhz, Win7 Ultimate 64bits...

turn view distance down to just under half way, download and install gamebooster and come back with results.

[Breguinho 10]

Gamebooster? What's that?

[Rapala 10]

have you dissabled AA in video settings ingame? also play with video memory ingame.

there is no reason why you should drop so low.

try running GameBooster, seems like you gave back ground process's causing you problems.

ok I installed and ran gamebooster and ingame made it as ugly as possible. 800x600 res, no AA, no AF and all detail set to lowest possible. The FPS is almost exactly the same as when I have all detail on Very High, it averages around 30 and then in some places slows to an unplayable 10-15. When I run call of duty 5 I have all settings maxed at max resolution and I am getting 90fps+

I also tried changing video memory ingame with no effect.

[Breguinho 10]

Ok, I know what's "gamebooster" a program that hurts your PC to give some FPS, that's not gonna be installed on my computer, no way. If I need to do that crappy things to play this game properly, im gonna sell it then.

I turned all on minimum settings, even 3D resolution, view distance and im still getting 25-30FPS, how can this be possible?

[Colt45_GTO 10]

is your system clean and defragged? this is all related stuff.

try setting the vid settings to default, like how it would have been on install and just change the AA to off, sometimes lowering resolutions can also have the oposit effect. what resolution is your monitor/desktop set to? set it to that.

i only have athlon II X4 620 cpu running now stock 2600mhz

PoV GTX 260 vid

2 gig of ram 677mhz

win XP 2005 media center edition.

i can run the game smoothly on medium/high settings.

---------- Post added at 08:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:43 PM ----------

Ok, I know what's "gamebooster" a program that hurts your PC to give some FPS, that's not gonna be installed on my computer, no way. If I need to do that crappy things to play this game properly, im gonna sell it then.

I turned all on minimum settings, even 3D resolution, view distance and im still getting 25-30FPS, how can this be possible?

GameBooster in no way shape or form hurts the computer. its a simple program that stops unessesery programs running in the back ground. and switch it back when you done playing.

i'm very anal about my pc and this program is very safe. . . . and its free

[Breguinho 10]

Im playing on 1920x1200 native resolution and tried with all kind of settings; default, max, minimum and getting more or less the same frame rate, include with AA/AF off.

[Colt45_GTO 10]

are you running any beta patches?

[Breguinho 10]

Im with "latest" 1.04.

[Rapala 10]

alright I'm very confused now. I installed Crysis which ran very nicely (low settings) on my old laptop with hd3650. On my new desktop I am having similar issues as arma 2, on max detail the fps is similar to lowest detail no AA - avg 30 down to 10-15.

Could this be due to me running Win 7? I'm thinking of partitioning the hard drive and installing xp to see if there's an improvement. This kind of performance is NOT why I shelled out for a very expensive games machine. :(

[Colt45_GTO 10]

XP is probably the best option, its the most stable platform for gaming.

crysis runs very well on my system, max settings but its an arcade type game, completely different engine. these are two completely different products, please try not to compare other games performances to A2 you will forever be fighting a loosing battle.

but yes certainly try XP before you give up :D

---------- Post added at 09:33 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:18 PM ----------

I'm sorry if i cannot fix the problems you guys are having. i'm only using a little common sense and some thinking out of the box. i'm new to ArmA II myself, i had to upgrade my pc to make this run smooth. and if that required spending money i didn't have (indeed birthday money) to play something i can enjoy without the frag fest then yes to me its worth it.

i was never one to move to vista (microsoft virus edition) and certainly not to windows 7. i have had XP for a long time, it works and has no issues with games at all so i wont change this O/S for anything. maybe others that moved to 7 should follow my example?

for all the performance issues i have seen in this thread and one over at Dice site for BF2 they are all related to the same thing....windows 7.

so maybe thats the problem? all to say...hey i got 7 its cool i can shake a window and all over open windows fall inline. or hey look DX11. my DX9 works just fine thank you :D

[Wupjak 0]

@Breguinho

I see in your photobucket screenshot your settings have your video memory set to Very Low. Change that to High or Very High.

Second, have you changed the fillrate down to say 1680x1050, or at least reduce it incrementally to see whether your frames per second improves?

Third, is the 24-30 fps you describe in effect from the moment the game starts, or is this only in the official campaign (Red Harvest)? It is my understanding that those missions are capped at 30 fps and you won't get higher than that regardless of machine spec.

Try opening the editor and dropping yourself onto the map alone or with a small number of AI as opponents and see how your frames per second are affected.

Also, I've had video driver corruption just running the game normally which brings my frames per second down into the single digits upon game start (it's usually up in the high 80s-low-90s in the Khe San flyovers. Perhaps uninstall your video drivers, then reinstall them (search for the 'right' way to uninstall and reinstall video drivers to avoid more complications from an incomplete uninstall).

Edited December 1, 2009 by Wupjak

[Wartooth6 10]

hey everybody, how goes?

lately iv been having very poor performance issues with arma 2.

i just upgraded my video cards from (2) nvidia geforce 2600's.

now im running these system specs:

nvidia 780i mobo

q9300 quad core chipset

8 gigs ram

(2) evga geforce gtx 260's SLI

vista home premium

sometimes my frames drop under that what they were with the 9600s, and its really starting to piss me off after investing almost 700$ into 2 new cards.

my frame rates while playing as a person in the game are around 10-20.

while flying in a helicopter their up around 26-30.

im running most settings pretty high, but iv spent a lot of time incrementally changing things to see what it is, and no matter what i get the same frame rates.

even after overclocking my cards around 10-15% the frames stay the same, things just get a little choppier.

[Colt45_GTO 10]

hey everybody, how goes?

lately iv been having very poor performance issues with arma 2.

i just upgraded my video cards from (2) nvidia geforce 2600's.

now im running these system specs:

nvidia 780i mobo

q9300 quad core chipset

8 gigs ram

(2) evga geforce gtx 260's SLI

vista home premium

sometimes my frames drop under that what they were with the 9600s, and its really starting to piss me off after investing almost 700$ into 2 new cards.

my frame rates while playing as a person in the game are around 10-20.

while flying in a helicopter their up around 26-30.

im running most settings pretty high, but iv spent a lot of time incrementally changing things to see what it is, and no matter what i get the same frame rates.

even after overclocking my cards around 10-15% the frames stay the same, things just get a little choppier.

http://forums.bistudio.com/showpost.php?p=1334592&postcount=1

might help

---------- Post added at 03:38 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:34 AM ----------

alright I'm very confused now. I installed Crysis which ran very nicely (low settings) on my old laptop with hd3650. On my new desktop I am having similar issues as arma 2, on max detail the fps is similar to lowest detail no AA - avg 30 down to 10-15.

Could this be due to me running Win 7? I'm thinking of partitioning the hard drive and installing xp to see if there's an improvement. This kind of performance is NOT why I shelled out for a very expensive games machine. :(

Im playing on 1920x1200 native resolution and tried with all kind of settings; default, max, minimum and getting more or less the same frame rate, include with AA/AF off.

@Breguinho

I see in your photobucket screenshot your settings have your video memory set to Very Low. Change that to High or Very High.

Second, have you changed the fillrate down to say 1680x1050, or at least reduce it incrementally to see whether your frames per second improves?

Third, is the 24-30 fps you describe in effect from the moment the game starts, or is this only in the official campaign (Red Harvest)? It is my understanding that those missions are capped at 30 fps and you won't get higher than that regardless of machine spec.

Try opening the editor and dropping yourself onto the map alone or with a small number of AI as opponents and see how your frames per second are affected.

Also, I've had video driver corruption just running the game normally which brings my frames per second down into the single digits upon game start (it's usually up in the high 80s-low-90s in the Khe San flyovers. Perhaps uninstall your video drivers, then reinstall them (search for the 'right' way to uninstall and reinstall video drivers to avoid more complications from an incomplete uninstall).

apparently it has something to do with pagefile on W7. check this post

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=91218

dont know how true it is but cant do no harm trying what he done?