Why in the world....

[JuggernautOfWar 1]

Why in the world does my game gain FPS with Anti Aliasing enabled? I've never seen this in any game, not even in ArmA 1.

[TRexian 0]

You, my friend, are The Chosen One. :D

(But seriously, have no idea, but enjoy it while it lasts.) ;)

[vasmkd 12]

No idea, u pc must be god :)

What is ur system specs, op system and Vid drivers etc?

[NeMeSiS 11]

Your first test with it disabled was in a CPU demanding mission, and your second test with it enabled was just you playing with yourself in the editor?

(Just a random possible scenario in which case it would make sense. :p )

[ffur2007slx2_5 11]

You're a lucky boy!

[cole 0]

I heard this from some other people too. Really weird thing but you're lucky it's like that :)

I didn't notice any FPS loss when going from No AA to High AA. Maybe it's because AA isn't affecting shaddows?

[JuggernautOfWar 1]

I dunno, but in the ArmAIIMark (ArmA II Benchmark utility) I get better frames with AA enabled. Better frames as in ~+10 FPS. Also in the main menu when I'm circling the LHD same thing.

[otrebla_snake_ita 2]

You, my friend, are The Chosen One. :D

I agree with you: he is The Chosen One

[jw custom 56]

Well i get better performance with higher settings, weird but true :s

[Alex72 1]

This is a normal thing for me as well. Not really in ARMA2, but in many games i gain FPS with it on.

Dont ask me why. Usually it should stab FPS in the back. :D

[trickster1982 10]

I wouldnt say ive gained FPS by turning AA on (which it wouldnt let me do before 1.03), but I certainly dont lose any performance by having it on high, and it makes the game look rather excellent!

[NoRailgunner 0]

I get huge framedrops with AA on high/highest setting. Chernagorsk and Elektrozavodsk arent that nice to play+enjoy with normal (30-50) AI density.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Annunaki have blessed you with +1 to goldmining yield.

No other reason toexplain the feat you're experi encing. :D

[JuggernautOfWar 1]

Annunaki have blessed you with +1 to goldmining yield.

No other reason toexplain the feat you're experi encing. :D

Does that make sense to anybody else?

[Steakslim 1]

Does that make sense to anybody else?

It doesn't have to make sense, it's a reference from WoW I believe.

[neokika 62]

Does that make sense to anybody else?

LOL

[thaFunkster 0]

Win 7, all settings medium, except AF Low. AA Disabled.

1680x1050:

3799.93

Win 7, all settings medium, except AF Low. AA High.

1680x1050:

3429.32

Was kinda hoping for a miracle, but it didnt happen.

On the plaus side, performace hit wasnt as bad as expected, only in 3: 'tank walk' was the difference noticeable to the eye.

Edited September 11, 2009 by thaFunkster

[vasmkd 12]

Guess the mixed results just add more hope for ppl who don't think the game is optimized to it's full potential regarding performance.

Mine is fine but would be good i i can run some more video options higher than medium

[JuggernautOfWar 1]

I'm running everything maxed out, medium AA, and both resolutions at 1680x1050. My problem with performance is primarily due to CPU. AMD Athlon 5600+ 2.8GHz 2x1MB lvl 2 cache isn't enough. If I put everything on lowest settings I get same FPS as highest settings, minus AA, where I get more FPS with it on medium.

---------- Post added at 06:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:41 PM ----------

Speaking of Anti Aliasing; why is there a number system next to the "low-high" settings for AA? I don't think it's the sampling rate, as they just add one number between.

[vasmkd 12]

I just changed from no AA to Medium AA and guess what?...framerates same in heavy dense mission in editor with lotsa AI and vehicle/choppers. Tried the mission multiple times with those settings.

It runs the same but i can notice the jaggies are not as bad on medium.

With 1440x900 and 1280x800 resolutions i get maybe 1-2fps better with lowest and 1440x900 is the same...definetly seems not to be optimized properly

Ive got these settings:

view distance = 2400

res = 1680x1050

vid memory = very high

Everything else on medium

map is chernogorsk at berezino, im basically defending just north of the lumber mill east of the tracks with about 35 AI and 3 tanks, 3 other vehicles, 2 IGLA pods, 2 machine gun nests and 3 ka-52's for air support. probably missed something but thats most of what iv'e plotted in it

The enemy is charging me and has about 6 M1A2 Tusks, 3 Humvees, 2 APCS, 5 AH-1Z's, 2 UH-1Y's and about 80 soldiers

I drop to 22fps at worst and get mid 30's at best with 26 average in this self made edited mission, pretty stable

That is with FRAPS, probably a few more without FRAPS running

Edited September 11, 2009 by vasmkd

[thaFunkster 0]

vasmkd:

I also have E8400 @ 3.6, 4G ram (though 800mhz), WinXP 32, Win7 32.

But I have a HD4850, which should be better. All up I should be more or less getting the same results as you. I cant turn on AA without a performance hit though, and 4850 should be better in this regard than 8800.

What ArmA mark score are u getting?

@Juggernought:

I recently over clocked my CPU from 3 to 3.6G. Arma mark score went up from about 2800 to about 3800.

THat is impressive. It made all the difference between being able to run at a decent Image Quality and framerate or not.

So look into overclocking that processor if you are keen.....

[vasmkd 12]

Forgot to mention my CPU was put back to 3GHZ a few days back, its stable i just put it back because the game was running fine.

Will oc it again and run arma mark...

My GPU is overclocked as usual as in signature

will test arma mark soon and let u know what i get with OC and standard for CPU

UPDATE: standard CPU speeds with OC video is 3434.9 and 3493.44 2nd run in ARMA mark on video option settings as mentioned before (AA was normal)

With CPU OC @3.6ghz i got 3711.93 and 3731.72

vasmkd:

I also have E8400 @ 3.6, 4G ram (though 800mhz), WinXP 32, Win7 32.

But I have a HD4850, which should be better. All up I should be more or less getting the same results as you. I cant turn on AA without a performance hit though, and 4850 should be better in this regard than 8800.

What ArmA mark score are u getting?

@Juggernought:

I recently over clocked my CPU from 3 to 3.6G. Arma mark score went up from about 2800 to about 3800.

THat is impressive. It made all the difference between being able to run at a decent Image Quality and framerate or not.

So look into overclocking that processor if you are keen.....

Edited September 11, 2009 by vasmkd

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

OP: one word and it's - CPU bottleneck.

You'll change your mind later on and placebo effect will fade away when you get into some woods. :D

[randir14 10]

After getting a new monitor and raising my resolution performance was worse, so I decided "ah screw it" and enabled very high textures just to see how bad it could get. To my surprise it actually made performance better. The settings in this game are weird. I can enable low AA without a problem, but medium or high makes forests lag bad. For some reason AA doesn't affect city performance for me.

Edited September 11, 2009 by randir14

[kklownboy 43]

well the Forrest has many more objects to AA... even the leaves... And then your using the framebuffers more efficiently of your card and the drivers ect...