nuggetz 0 Posted November 30, 2009 (edited) After the launch of A2, I've was a regular here. Since then I put A2 away and moved on to other games due to bugs, bad performance, etc.. I've been back after reading that the devs are giving us beta patches and I've been installing them as quick as they're released. Performance has gotten a lot better for me but what has everyone else experienced? Still kinda feels at times that we're trying to polish a turd. The a2 engine as great as it is for most things just isn't as refined as it could be for a 2009 game. Anyway, it is what it is and there's nothing else like it so I'm sticking around for a while. On the performance front, I'm still not seeing all 4 of my cores hit 100% and I'm finding it hard to justify a CPU upgrade even tho I'm probably due for one based on my standards. I have SLI'd 8800GTX ultras that do very well in every other game I play. My Quad Q6600 @ 2.4Ghz running stock seem to be holding up well. However after reading a lot here on the forums, it seems that I need more CPU power for arma due to all the AI and what not and I agree but why wont Arma take advantage of all the processors? How are the i7 boys doing now-a-days with the beta patches? I'm running arma at 2560x1600 (native resolution of my 30 inch dell monitor) and I wish I could get better performance from this game. I'll probably get sick of A2 long before I get enough cash together to upgrade which is unfortunate. Anyway, how's everyone else getting along with arma with the beta patches? Edited November 30, 2009 by nuggetz Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
W0lle 1052 Posted November 30, 2009 1. This has nothing to do with troubleshooting. There is a beta patches forum available. 2. Your performance questions fit perfectly well to the sticky (low) performance thread. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
