ArmA2 / OA (low) performance issues

[CookersNHocaine 1]

I've got a GT650 & Intel HD 4000, Intel I5 3210 & 8GB of Ram.

I can run ARMA 2 fine on high, but I struggle to run ARMA II OA on low, any suggestions would be really helpful.

[gslack 1]

Just got the ARMA2&OA package from steam 2 weeks ago. Ran fine everything nearly maxed until 5 days ago. Suddenly started getting texture flickering and LOD texture swap at random. Defregged hard drive, tested various different settings, and none of them makes any discernible difference. After going through various threads here (and the ridiculous hoops required to even register and post here) I have noticed its a big issue affecting many people and apparently completely independent of hardware. This I can confirm after personally trying to run it using 2 different video cards and drivers on two different systems.

System one: AMD fx 4100, Crucial 8 gigs ram, 1tb wd black sata 3.0 , MSI HD7770 power edition 1gb gddr5

Systen two: Intel Core I5, Crucial 8 gigs ram, 1 tb wd black sata 3.0, EVGA GTX 560 SC 2 gb gddr 5

On both systems, both drivers, had same issues. This did not occur playing DayZ, only ARMA2.

After tinkering I found that this is beyond a shadow of a doubt something specific to ARMA2. No other games I own showed this problem. Including Crysis 2, borderlands 3, farcry 3, mafia 2, sleeping dogs, saints row 3, GTA4, and many many others. Not one has this issue.

Looking up this specific problem I found multiple listings here but all of them are older and more or less abandoned. From my own personal experiences, texture/LOD loading and swapping is usually a memory read, hard drive, or graphic hardware/driver issue. But seeing as this occurs independently and regardless of setups or hardware used and In my own case i have eliminated hard drive, and graphics/drivers, I can only conclude its a read/write/selection issue within the game engine or game itself.

So is there some other setting or something I missed somewhere? I've tried the "default" memory setting and no real difference. tried settings all the way from low to very high and again no change.

[domokun 515]

Give these these tried and tested tweaks a go:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?85124-ArmA2-OA-%28low%29-performance-issues&p=2081466#post2081466

Let us know how you get on

[runforrest 10]

@desfocado and beckyolt

Stop tweaking! (however the link from domukun above is worth a look and very helpful) I did it for years, just to realize it doesnt effect much, or at least i didnt get what i expected.

The problems u describe have nothing to do with ur hardware its ArmA, the engine is not build for missions like that. Wasteland is total bs, objects everyhere on the whole map, that can NEVER EVER run very good (30fps+). Every object or unit present on the map eats fps, even if u dont see it and u are far away from it. Plus u have a very high player count on most wasteland servers. U willl notice, less players = abit more FPS.

Its the same with missions like warfare, the engine simply cant handle it. To have fluent gameplay at that scale u need missionbuilders and serverowners with LOTS of experience and knowledge. And u need the best PC u can get at this date as client AND server.

ArmA can run very good and look very good but only in very narrow boundaries. Lower ur expectations in regards to large scale missions!

Edited January 11, 2013 by RunForrest

[doveman 7]

What he said!

I was playing MP the other night and was only getting about 18fps, which dropped to 8fps when there was an explosion. I normally get somewhat better than that but it very much depends on the mission.

[blind123 1]

Same problem here, AMD Athalon II X4 640 Processor 3Ghz, MSI GTX 460 Hawk 1GB, 4GB Ram. Playing Wasteland in Chernarus no matter how high or how low I set settings and resolution FPS at highest goes to around 22fps, averages to 15fps and drops to 8fps after server has been running for a 2-3 hours. On this map GPU usage is anywhere between 20-8%. Started trying Wasteland Takistan and I'm actually seeing almost 50% GPU usage and sometimes 40-45FPS, still drops to around 25% at times but FPS still at a playable 25FPS...but in here almost all high settings. 200 pages almost, 3 1/2 years of posts, and this hasn't been fixed?

[MichaelZFreeman 20]

People. It's not always a software problem. I recently discovered that my PSU was not supplying enough power to my video card (its recommended Amps). I replaced my PSU with a high quality OCZ PSU matched to the video card rating. More so, its not just the amount of power but the QUALITY of that power. PSU's are tested with an oscilloscope to check the quality of the frequency wave form produced by the PSU.

[blind123 1]

I've got a 620 watt PSU (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817371031), don't think that is the problem here else all games (or atleast the more graphically intense) would be doing this. And then, I've got my video card actually overclocked and MSI Kombustor shows no problems (which no game can reproduce the 99% GPU usage that this program does). And here is another thing I've been noticing to help my FPS, actually lowering the Priority of the application to Below Normal actually gives me an FPS boost for about an hour of about 4-6FPS after which the dead bodies around the map being added in that time drops the frame rate back to what it originally started at.

Edit: Had a crazy idea thought I'd try after installing the new beta patch 101144. I set the 3D resolution to 200% (with resolution 1920x1080) and GPU was now reaching 60-90%...but still same 18 or so FPS! Using the Video Settings from this post http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?85124-ArmA2-OA-%28low%29-performance-issues&p=2081466#post2081466. Anyone know if the mods posted on that link there can be used in multiplayer Wasteland?

Edited January 24, 2013 by BliND123

[b00tsy 28]

What he said!

I was playing MP the other night and was only getting about 18fps, which dropped to 8fps when there was an explosion. I normally get somewhat better than that but it very much depends on the mission.

Same for me. Also big towns and forest/vegetation kills the fps (because of dynamic LOD?). We must be a pretty huge ArmA fans if we still enjoy playing the game with such performance! Only on the lowest settings I get a 20+ fps, but it looks like a game from 1998 then. I wonder if I could play ArmA3 at all with my current PC. I am happy if I can play it with the same performance!

---------- Post added at 12:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:40 PM ----------

Guys save yourself a lot of time and hassel:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?85124-ArmA2-OA-%28low%29-performance-issues&p=2081466#post2081466

And as far as I can see Razer's version of Gamebooster offers nothing more than IOBit's except that it requires that you register with them, i.e. they have your email address for marketing purposes.

Good suggestion? I doubt it...

Actually this first version of gamebooster was not that bad as it did kill all the unneeded processes and services for you. The latest version however (v3,..) does not do a thing other then silently trying to connect to the internetz, seems more like malware now.

[domokun 515]

Same for me. Also big towns and forest/vegetation kills the fps (because of dynamic LOD?). We must be a pretty huge ArmA fans if we still enjoy playing the game with such performance! Only on the lowest settings I get a 20+ fps, but it looks like a game from 1998 then. I wonder if I could play ArmA3 at all with my current PC. I am happy if I can play it with the same performance!

---------- Post added at 12:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:40 PM ----------

Actually this first version of gamebooster was not that bad as it did kill all the unneeded processes and services for you. The latest version however (v3,..) does not do a thing other then silently trying to connect to the internetz, seems more like malware now.

I beg to differ. This version of GameBooster was sold to Razer by Iobit. If you research it you will discover that many people, especially users of previous versions believe that this latest version is a step backwards.

[Longrop 1]

I allready post this in an other threat from the Nvidia users, but I post it here too for help.

Hello, I just bought myslef a new gaming pc, now when I play ArmA 2 I get only 16-20 fps on very high/very low settings. I play a lot of wasteland the last days but it is really annoying to have such a low fps while I bought a really good gaming pc.

I've tried some things to fix it like: all video settings, older gtx driver version and thats it;)

I asked people ingame and people with a gpu as good as mine get arround 50-60 fps.

SP is good though, 50-60 fps looking straight, 170 fps while looking at the sky.

My pc specs (the ones that are important for Arma 2 I think):

GPU: Asus Geforce gtx 690 4096 MB

CPU: Intel Core I7 3770 3.40 GHz, boxed, incl. videochip, Quad Core.

HDD:Seagate Barracuda 1 TB, 7200 Rpm, 64 MB, Bulk.

I hope someone have any idea how I can increase my fps.

-Jack-

[doveman 7]

Same for me. Also big towns and forest/vegetation kills the fps (because of dynamic LOD?). We must be a pretty huge ArmA fans if we still enjoy playing the game with such performance! Only on the lowest settings I get a 20+ fps, but it looks like a game from 1998 then. I wonder if I could play ArmA3 at all with my current PC. I am happy if I can play it with the same performance!

To be honest with you, it looks like a game from 1998 to me even with the graphics on high (OK, maybe I'm forgetting what graphics looked like in 1998 but it certainly doesn't look at all modern). I'm actually looking at playing BF2/PR instead as it looks more fun (gets a bit boring being killed constantly by AI that I have no idea are there and can barely spot even if I do recon constantly and even if I do see them, are tiny dots that I can't hit from the engagement distances whilst they manage to hit me no problem. Yeah, I probably just suck at it but so do my mates and they wonder why I bother with such a clunky, bad looking game that isn't much fun and I'm starting to see their point.)

Actually this first version of gamebooster was not that bad as it did kill all the unneeded processes and services for you. The latest version however (v3,..) does not do a thing other then silently trying to connect to the internetz, seems more like malware now.

I'm still using v3.4 and if it does try to connect to the Net I don't care that much as I'll just block it with my firewall but it certainly does still kill unneeded processes and services. It would seem rather bizarre if there is a newer version that doesn't do that but only tries to connect to the internet! I've heard that the Razer version is better if you're concerned about privacy, although I don't know how true that is http://www.razerzone.com/gamebooster

[domokun 515]

I hope someone have any idea how I can increase my fps.

Try these tried and tested tips:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?85124-ArmA2-OA-%28low%29-performance-issues&p=2081466#post2081466

And let us know how you get on

[TheBearJew 1]

Try these tried and tested tips:

And let us know how you get on

I have tried your tips, all the tweaks and the mods.

the tweaks didn't do anything and the mods i don't know, wasn't allowed on any servers anymore. so that wont help.

do you have more suggestions?

My system:

CPU AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition

GPU MSI gtx 660TI 2GB

8GB DDR3 RAM

OCZ vertex 4 ssd (where i have arma2 and arma oa on)

1tb hdd

Windows 8 64bit

and the rest isn't relevant.

Furthermore, when playing arma my gpu uses around 30% and same goes for cpu and the ram also doesn't uses all its capacity.

I hope someone can fix this, cause i think there are allot more people that are having the same problem.

PS:I couldn't place your url, since this is my first post.

EDIT: this is for the mod wasteland

Edited January 28, 2013 by TheBearJew

[SoccerSpartan 1]

Ive been getting lower frame rates than I should be getting with my PC. Specs:

Windows 7 64bit

8 gb RAM

Intel Core i73610QM CPU @ ~3.2-3.3 ghz

Nvidia GT 650m with 2GB of GDDR5 VRAM

And I have my game installed on an SSD

I know Arma does not perform the best, but I have not been able to get steady frames. Ive been benchmarking on Chernarus and I get ok frames in the open and in most towns/villages (around 20-25, 30 at most) However sometimes, especially when I get close to/in a forest, my frame rate will just drop to 10-15. This can get really annoying espically in multiplayer. I have my settings set to Very High with AA, ATOC, Post Processing all off simply because lowering my settings really does not make the frame rate any higher (turning everything to low for example only improves it about 5 frames).

Im thinking there is something wrong with the way my game/system is set up, any ideas?

[Leopardi 0]

I have tried your tips, all the tweaks and the mods.

the tweaks didn't do anything and the mods i don't know, wasn't allowed on any servers anymore. so that wont help.

do you have more suggestions?

My system:

CPU AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition

GPU MSI gtx 660TI 2GB

8GB DDR3 RAM

OCZ vertex 4 ssd (where i have arma2 and arma oa on)

1tb hdd

Windows 8 64bit

and the rest isn't relevant.

Furthermore, when playing arma my gpu uses around 30% and same goes for cpu and the ram also doesn't uses all its capacity.

I hope someone can fix this, cause i think there are allot more people that are having the same problem.

PS:I couldn't place your url, since this is my first post.

EDIT: this is for the mod wasteland

I have the same problem with my 1090T system, I think the engine just can't handle AMD 6-cores. You need an intel quad core to make ArmA work smoothly when there's more stuff than 1 vehicle on the map.

[fambaa 10]

Same thing

Well Before I had a AM2+ Pehnmo II X4 940 CPU DDR2 RAM 2GB and a GTX 260

I could play really well with medium settings and 4K view range

My motherboard died and I had to buy new stuff so I got a new AM3+ board and a AMD FX 6100 and DDR3 RAM still using my GTX 260 though.

What happens now is that I play with my settings ato 40-50 FPS even with 10K view range. At first I thought my CPU is running wild and I turned off Cool and quiet to make sure all 6 cores run at 3,3 Ghz.

I installed MSI Afterburner to watch what the hell is going on and I noticed that GPU load and framerate drop goes hand in hand.

I tried every tip I could find.

Windows Power management, Nvidia Inspector for setting the power for the graphics card to ensure it doesnt throttle down or anything.

My CPU is stable during playing at aroun 40 C and my GPU at 55-60. I got 3 120 mm fans in my ATX tower, 1 sucking air out at the back, 1 is directly blowing from the side to the graphics card making sure the card fan gets very cool air.

So all my temps are in the green, everything should run great but it doesn't.

It seems that whenever I get close to bigger towns the GPU load drops. Playing with settings doesn't really help either.

For those who might say it might be lack of power I got a 700W block in there to make sure that will never happen unless I put 100 HDDs and 4 cards in.

Also tried different drivers for the graphics card while deinstalling the one before as clean as possible. It really makes the game unplayable but it should run like a charm with this equip.

HALP!

[Leopardi 0]

I hope ArmA 3 will be more hexacore friendly or I'll be just wasting money buying it.

[TheBearJew 1]

I have the same problem with my 1090T system, I think the engine just can't handle AMD 6-cores. You need an intel quad core to make ArmA work smoothly when there's more stuff than 1 vehicle on the map.

Thanks for replying, I fear that it might be the case that its amd cpu's that they are not as productive as lower core intel cpu's.

So not much to do here, I tried almost everything there is to try, but i think there is nothing to win here...

Better wait for hopefully better arma3 engine :)

[fambaa 10]

Thanks for replying, I fear that it might be the case that its amd cpu's that they are not as productive as lower core intel cpu's.

So not much to do here, I tried almost everything there is to try, but i think there is nothing to win here...

Better wait for hopefully better arma3 engine :)

I am not really sure what exactly is going on with the newer AMD CPUs. Like I wrote everything was fine with my older 2008 build Phen II X4 940. Now that I got a Bulldozer something is holding back and I cannot find out what it is.

I installed EVGA precision now to have all important things regaring clocks and temps as OSD, first I though my card jumps down 1 or 2 P States because the load went down. But EVGA tells me it does not (You can see that when you memorized the voltage tied to the different P-States) Clock and voltage is constant at maximum performance while Arma is running in focus.

CPU is not even getting trouble, so I think something in the communication between CPU and GPU is the problem. In the Armory for testing this is almost not noticeable but there also is a drop in GPU load.

GPU load seems to drop when you come close to buildings as such Cherno is the worst.

and a quick edit:

It seems I have isolated a problem.

After testing in windowed mode I kep task manager open to see each cores load realtime. I noticed that my 4th core was doing almost all the work and was at 100% several times.

Simple trick I deactivated core 4 for arma 2 and voila, game runs much more smooth GPUs temp is rising means it does more work, and even if GPU load drops a bit It seems that I dont get drops to 10 fps anymore, sometimes it can run at 50% load 35 fps but most of the time I seem to run at 50 fps again XD

So find out if your core's loads are balanced if not deactivate the one who was the prime workhorse before.

[fambaa 10]

After playing Dayz+ since the time I posted (mod has to confirm my posts still ;) I can CONFIRM that switchin off the core which had the heaviest load when all cores are active REMOVED the problem for me.

Constant playable fps even in Cherno now, its like a superhuge difference for me where I was dropping down to 10-20 fps every minute anywhere and 15 fps in any town.

If you don't know how to find out which core to turn off, play windowed mode, go to the armory take a helicopter and fly to cherno.

Have Task Manager or any tool open that displays each individual core load curve.

Then rightclick the arma2oa.exe and disable that core.

In TaskManager for XP cores start from 0-x like the first window is CPU 0 second CPU 1 and so forth.

Good luck, and I don't take responsibility what happens to your CPU turning on and off cores ;)

[maddogx 13]

After playing Dayz+ since the time I posted (mod has to confirm my posts still ;) I can CONFIRM that switchin off the core which had the heaviest load when all cores are active REMOVED the problem for me.

Constant playable fps even in Cherno now, its like a superhuge difference for me where I was dropping down to 10-20 fps every minute anywhere and 15 fps in any town.

If you don't know how to find out which core to turn off, play windowed mode, go to the armory take a helicopter and fly to cherno.

Have Task Manager or any tool open that displays each individual core load curve.

Then rightclick the arma2oa.exe and disable that core.

In TaskManager for XP cores start from 0-x like the first window is CPU 0 second CPU 1 and so forth.

Good luck, and I don't take responsibility what happens to your CPU turning on and off cores ;)

What happens if you run the game with -cpuCount=4 as a parameter? (Sorry if you've already answered this.)

[fambaa 10]

I didn't tried that yet, but I think those freezes and hickups mainly originate from arma 2 engine and its use of multicores. When multicores came out they made a patch to support at least dualcores. Can still see that when you are in the serverbrowser that 2 cores run at 100% and the rest seems to be idle.

I would have to reduce my cpu count and ex threads anyways, maybe the gun will run even better when you turn off 2 cores run with count 4 and ex threads 6.

When you got an FX 6100 like me it should be posible to run the game at only 2 cores anyways.

[chrisb 196]

Griffz put a good little post here, third from the bottom post.

If you have six cores your probably just over cored for A2, so “-cpucount=4†perhaps, and pos, as pointed out by griffz, “exthreads=3†maybe.

Still, worth playing around with ‘ex threads’ as it’s all system specific A2, plus cores count, whichever performs better on your system..

Core performance and gpu here. Maybe be looking at trying to get somewhere around this, there will always be a core around 50% I have found most of the time my cores are: 1 @ 85-100%, 2 @ 70-90%, 1 @ 40-70%, can change, but thats an average for me.:)

Edited February 5, 2013 by ChrisB

[fambaa 10]

Thank you for that ChrisB. I was looking for info on that, but this is really hard to find.

I hope that Arma 3 will support up to 8 cores then were most likely set to play at 10kms everyone :)

When I first played Arma I had a "lousy" desktop version Opteron dualcore @ 2x 3,4 and that wasnt enough lol. Guess Ill just put in count 4 to not have to switch 1 core off all the time.

Not much improvement to my old CPU then, 4x 300 Mhz more a little bit more cache. And ddr3 ofc.

Well I guess its problem solved for anyone with a CPU with more than 4 cores.

That issue really has to be added to all the Tweaking guides for Arma 2.