Arma2 beta builds 1.05.6xxxx

[=kct=blackmamba 44]

woow huge change list thnx BIS, for a new patch :)

[AnimalMother92 10]

Just FYI, it did not fix the Default video memory setting crash. Same "v-buffer creation error" as before, along with it seems a new error, something about "Vertex buffer, out of memory?" I posted in it the other beta thread.

Really? Oh that sucks. My RPT is always full of v-buffer errors :(

I'm sure it'll be fixed some day.

[MavericK96 0]

Really? Oh that sucks. My RPT is always full of v-buffer errors :(

I'm sure it'll be fixed some day.

Well, I just received a PM from sprayer_faust regarding these crashes, and he suggested that I turn off Threaded Optimization in the nVidia control panel. Turns out, with my standard crash test (low flybys over Chernogorsk) I was unable to get the game to crash! I will do more testing, but it seems like for the moment at least, this has fixed, or at least worked around the issue for me. Let me know if you have any luck as well.

I didn't notice any performance difference between Threaded Optimization on or off.

[Dwarden 1125]

Well, I just received a PM from sprayer_faust regarding these crashes, and he suggested that I turn off Threaded Optimization in the nVidia control panel. Turns out, with my standard crash test (low flybys over Chernogorsk) I was unable to get the game to crash! I will do more testing, but it seems like for the moment at least, this has fixed, or at least worked around the issue for me. Let me know if you have any luck as well.

I didn't notice any performance difference between Threaded Optimization on or off.

that's interesting catch

[-EC-M.O.R 10]

Is the "go, I'm covering!" actually fixed? I need to go test this! :eek:

Thanks for the new beta BIS.

nope ai is still the same, and for some reason i have like water under the grass, only in some angles..like a texture pops up under it..i have ati card

BUT THX FOR DEV'ing another beta bis..sweet

[MavericK96 0]

that's interesting catch

Interesting, yes, though I still consider it to be a workaround. Though maybe knowing that will help you guys figure out what the issue is. :cool:

[AnimalMother92 10]

Interesting find, I'll have to test that.

[68157] HDRPrecision 16 or 32 respected when users selects it and card supports it.

Anyone know what this setting changes?

[-TwK-Danny 0]

It makes forcing HDRPrecision in the ArmA2.cfg file actually work. So if you force change HDRPrecision=8; to HDRPrecision=32; you will lose alot of performance, because your HDR is better.

This is a horrible change because i used to use this to fix the post process bug in the game.

The Post Processing option ingame does not work after restarting the game, its been this since the devs screwed it up in a early patch. Why isn´t this fixed yet?

Basicly if you set it to "very high" and restart the game it will be back to low/off (even though it still SHOWS as "very high" ingame). You need to change it to e.g. high and then back to veryhigh to get it working..

[Dwarden 1125]

Danny how's that terrible ?

till this build manual change of HDRprecision wasn't working at all

(contrary to old ARMA 1 where it was working)

now You were given option to choose 8/16/32

weird is this bug with Post Processing settings

(being set to Low after game restart while UI claims Very High)

will look into it ...

---

My test:

HDRprecision=8;

set Post Process to Very High, restart game, PP stays at Low (UI == VH)

that mean bug

HDRprecision=16;

set Post Process to Very High, restart game, PP stays at Very High (UI == VH)

that mean it's ok

HDRprecision=32;

set Post Process to Very High, restart game, PP stays at Very High (UI == VH)

that mean it's ok

---

so atm. as workaround

with default HDRprecision You must manually change it each restart

or use higher HDRprecision to avoid the bug

Edited April 24, 2010 by Dwarden

[maturin 12]

hmm... sorry to say your full of shit. You have had a crash. Everybody who has played this game for a fair amount of time has had a crash. It doesnt matter if its a Mod/Mission/Hardware, that caused it, The game ARMA2 Does crash, will crash. Heck the WORST offender is Warfare....Its a Bis addon ect... Anyhoo, i have had long runs with out a crash(weeks), then boom! for whatever reason, you crash.And may have crashes for awhile... then , ahh no crashes for weeks... rinse, repeat.

I blame/point the finger at BIS and there engine. Its supposed to play nice with OSes...(took sometime for Vista/win7, and 64bit OSes), new hardware,more than 4GB of ram is the defacto standard....

I love the game , but dont think its always the users fault for issues...The game is very buggy/glitchy and is only really good with 3rd party tweaking/addons. Love the sandbox, hate the cat poo.

I have had crashes. Every game crashes.

But on this laptop I haven't had one all year. Performance can be shitty, texture loading can go on vacation, but the game is stable.

The sheer spectrum of this game's behavior on different computers is rather frightening.

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/6476

I don't know why it only has 9 votes, but imho the Priority should be set to 'hysterical scrambling.'

Edited April 24, 2010 by maturin

[-TwK-Danny 0]

Danny how's that terrible ?

till this build manual change of HDRprecision wasn't working at all

(contrary to old ARMA 1 where it was working)

now You were given option to choose 8/16/32

weird is this bug with Post Processing settings

(being set to Low after game restart while UI claims Very High)

will look into it ...

---

My test:

HDRprecision=8;

set Post Process to Very High, restart game, PP stays at Low (UI == VH)

that mean bug

HDRprecision=16;

set Post Process to Very High, restart game, PP stays at Very High (UI == VH)

that mean it's ok

HDRprecision=32;

set Post Process to Very High, restart game, PP stays at Very High (UI == VH)

that mean it's ok

---

so atm. as workaround

with default HDRprecision You must manually change it each restart

or use higher HDRprecision to avoid the bug

I only meant its horrible for me because now i actually have to suffer from the PP bug. Its just, this was reported by many in a thread about this problem along time ago. We´ve had official and countless of beta patches released without getting it fixed.

I dont mean to whine but i love this game and just want it to work. Changing options everytime i start the game is annoying me. Not being able to disable Vsync does as well. Sorry if i came off in a bad way.

Its cool that we can use diffrent precision for the HDR, aslong as i dont have to choose between working PP settings or a 15% performance drop :p

And Drawden, to clarify;

Even before this beta patch, when you set HDRPrecision to 32 or 16 you could fix the PP bug. But without any performance drop. So it actually DID something for me at least. THATS the reason i said horrible.

Edited April 24, 2010 by [TwK]Danny

[=wfl= sgt bilko 10]

In Benchmark 01, I get a warning message: "Can't find bin\config.bin/CfgMarkers.Faction_INS". It will however run through when I chose "continue".

Also running ArmA2Test looks the same as before EXCEPT the last test (where you zoom in from high above ), increase of FPS of ~40%

This is probably due to the changes in "grass not rendering when flying high and fast".

[Fireball 16]

Danny;1614458'](...)

The Post Processing option ingame does not work after restarting the game' date=' its been this since the devs screwed it up in a early patch. Why isn´t this fixed yet?

Basicly if you set it to "very high" and restart the game it will be back to low/off (even though it still SHOWS as "very high" ingame). You need to change it to e.g. high and then back to veryhigh to get it working..[/quote']

Did you try stopping ArmA2, deleting your ArmA2.ini and restarting ArmA2 again?

[maturin 12]

Wait, how are the new helicopter HUDs and threat radar not included in the Update Notes? I wasn't expecting the beta to break Mando Missiles.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

I'm not able to find any new HUDs or threat radar. Where?

[Dwarden 1125]

Danny;1614820']

I only meant its horrible for me because now i actually have to suffer from the PP bug. Its just' date=' this was reported by many in a thread about this problem along time ago. We´ve had official and countless of beta patches released without getting it fixed.

I dont mean to whine but i love this game and just want it to work. Changing options everytime i start the game is annoying me. Not being able to disable Vsync does as well. Sorry if i came off in a bad way.

Its cool that we can use diffrent precision for the HDR, aslong as i dont have to choose between working PP settings or a 15% performance drop :p

And Drawden, to clarify;

Even before this beta patch, when you set HDRPrecision to 32 or 16 you could fix the PP bug. But without any performance drop. So it actually DID something for me at least. THATS the reason i said horrible.

[/quote']

i can assure You now it will be fixed ... sooner or later ...

[maturin 12]

I'm not able to find any new HUDs or threat radar. Where?

Well, it was conflicting with Mando Missiles so I never saw them except for a split second, but I'm pretty sure I recognized the white threat radar in the AH-1 from an Operation Arrowhead video. A BMP spawned on the horizon and I got a proximity alarm message.

I suppose it's possible that ACE added it, but it's not mentioned in their usually-comprehensive update logs, their documentation, and no one has ever mentioned it.

[nomdeplume 0]

Is it really that hard to run it without mods to confirm? I haven't used ACE in Arma 2 so I don't know what their stuff looks like, but I did quickly give the AH-1 a spin against a BMP3 and a T90 and it all looked exactly like the normal Arma 2 HUD.

[Mr.X 10]

Has there been any performance improvements for anyone? Or should I just stay on the previous beta because performance is my bane atm.

[sabre4809 0]

MUCH smoother for me and MUCH faster texture loading, it was terrible before. However I get the ground bug.

C2D E6750 @ 2,66

2 gb ram

GF 9800 GTX

[lt_darkman 0]

MUCH smoother for me and MUCH faster texture loading.

Big improvement for me too.

I still crash with out of memory error if I select default memory in video options though, even with Threaded Optimisation switched off in nvidia control panel.

It's not perfect but it's a hell of a lot better.

P

[maturin 12]

Is it really that hard to run it without mods to confirm? I haven't used ACE in Arma 2 so I don't know what their stuff looks like, but I did quickly give the AH-1 a spin against a BMP3 and a T90 and it all looked exactly like the normal Arma 2 HUD.

Well I ran it with only ACE and the HUD wasn't there either. Anyways, the new patch breaks Mando Missiles, and only in the vehicle in which I saw the mysterious threat radar.

wtf was that thing?

[AnimalMother92 10]

Overall this patch has improved a lot of stuff, but sadly the see-through ground is making it impossible to play with.

[MavericK96 0]

Just did some minor testing with Benchmark 2:

Settings:

AA = Low

Video Memory = Default

VD = 3905.

All else, Very High

Tests:

ArmA2 1.05, no command line modifiers: 20 FPS

ArmA2 BETA, no command modifiers: 21 FPS

ArmA2 1.05, using -cpuCount=4: 21 FPS

ArmA2 BETA, using -cpuCount=4: 20 FPS

Conclusion:

So, pretty inconclusive. Or rather, shows me that the beta didn't make any real framerate difference for me, nor does using the cpuCount attribute on my i7 920 seem to do anything for framerate.

Notes:

-My HT is turned OFF. This is because I'm overclocking and having it on raises temperatures considerably. I turned it off a long time ago because after reading benchmarks for gaming and normal use, almost nothing takes advantage of HT with 8 cores.

-In the beta, the game ""seemed"" like it had more stutter. Of course this is subjective, as it's not a framerate issue, but it seemed to stutter a lot more than 1.05.

-The beta also had a glitch where the mountains in the far distance would sort of disappear at the beginning of the benchmark and then reappear as you got closer. This did not occur at all in the 1.05 version. On the second run of the beta (with cpucount=4 enabled), it was less noticeable, but they still seemed to "warp" slightly.

-I didn't get any sort of ground textures disappearing or white boxes at all in either beta run.

[EricM 0]

Has there been any performance improvements for anyone?

Disappearing ground set aside, I have around +30 to +40% (+7-9 fps in the bencmark mission1 and flying alone in the editor) with Q6600 @2,6Ghz and G8800GTX and VD@1600. This is the first time I can fly over chernarus with an average of 35 fps and many peaks over 40 !

It appears though that the crappier your PC, the higher the benefit for you. I see people with monster rigs that see no real benefits.