exThreads

[nobrainer 0]

correct, but do it anyway...

[3dartist 69]

The funniest thing about arma is that , it doesn`t matter wich pc you`ve got i`ve build a very custom pc with 48gb ram on board 2x Xeon 5620e processors (16 threads in total) 2x gtx580`s in sli + gtx480 for physx. Btw all the specs you will find in my signature below.

Fraps is showing me a constant fps between 19-20 fps , on my beast machine and it really doesn`t matter on what specs you play i`ve tried to set the specs on very low and very high , fraps just keep on showing me fps between 19-20.

About ingame arma 2 benchmark i don`t even wanna talk , this benchmark is nuts in my opinion, it shows me an average of 2 fps .YES 2 fps WTF by the end of the test. Arma 2 mark gave me better results with a total score of 238,558 points.

Lets say there is no way to find out what fps you have in game , i use exThreads=7 and cpucount=16 , the geometry loads quicker and everything runs fine (all on very high settings) between view distances 1000-3500 soon as i go above 3500 meters game becomes unplayable.

Althought i can run a dedicated server on my machine and at the same time playing on it.

Conclusion arma 2 is a wierd game , i still can`t figure out what performance can deliver my pc in this game.Arma 2 is the first game that gave me same fps on verylow/veryhigh settings.

[jumpinghubert 49]

possibly too exotic rig :D

[Mr. Charles 22]

More like the threads wouldn't be spread evenly on all your cores:

http://www.bistudio.com/index.php/company/developers-blog/91-real-virtuality-going-multicore

[Parrotnut 10]

Lets say there is no way to find out what fps you have in game , i use exThreads=7 and cpucount=16 , the geometry loads quicker and everything runs fine (all on very high settings) between view distances 1000-3500 soon as i go above 3500 meters game becomes unplayable.

Althought i can run a dedicated server on my machine and at the same time playing on it.

Conclusion arma 2 is a wierd game , i still can`t figure out what performance can deliver my pc in this game.Arma 2 is the first game that gave me same fps on verylow/veryhigh settings.

Nice system you have there :omg:

I think 1 of your 16 Cores is running at 100% and the other 15 are waiting for the first core to finish his job.

That one Core is “only'†running at 2,4GHz, so I think it doesn’t matter how much cores you have if they all have to wait for the first core.

It would be ideal if you could overclock only one core, that would be awesome...

And with 2x 580GTX in SLI you can turn on all the eye candy, but for the rest they still have to wait for the first core to finish

[Ripsaw5165 10]

3DArtist, I hear NASA is looking to lease some machine power for planning a mission to Mars. You should contact them, you might make some money with that beast.

Nice system. Do the street lights in your neighborhood dim when you fire that thing up?... ;)

[Dwarden 1125]

i see SLI in his signature ... ;)

anyway his machine while being approx 2+N times faster than mine

produce still 2+N times lower FPS than mine

life is irony i know :)

[Parrotnut 10]

@3dArtist

Maybe you can try to disable Hyper-threading in your BIOS, could help with a better work load balance of the 8 Cores.

[3dartist 69]

i see SLI in his signature ... ;)

anyway his machine while being approx 2+N times faster than mine

produce still 2+N times lower FPS than mine

life is irony i know :)

It shows me 20 fps ,but the game self feels smooth, like 40 fps or more, the thing is i can`t figure out what fps i have on my machine.

And task manager shows me while playing arma that 12 of my threads are loaded, not fully but they are processing something between 20% and 100%.

Edited December 27, 2010 by 3DArtist

[3dartist 69]

3DArtist, I hear NASA is looking to lease some machine power for planning a mission to Mars. You should contact them, you might make some money with that beast.

Nice system. Do the street lights in your neighborhood dim when you fire that thing up?... ;)

Lol actually if i pull out stekker and plug it back abit later , my safety electricity switch shots down the electrycity in my flat , so have to switch it on manually :) My power supply need lot of power on cold boot , so i prefer warm booting :) Then everything starts smooth :)

[zapat 56]

Output of a system is defined by the weakest link.

Which is a 2.4Ghz CPU core, causing bottleneck.

A2 is not that Gpu hungry, but needs CPU speed with some missions: missions that calculate a lot iof AI in a single thread. Problem is IMHO that this calculation cannot use more than one thread.

So half of your machine is idle, core calculating geometry, and textures are on like some%, GFX is at some% load, and a single core wants more than 100%, if I know ARMA well enough.

What FPS do you get eg. in the editor?

[PuFu 4600]

for an i7 970(6 core, 12 threads), recommended threads is...?

[strongbird 10]

and for an I7 870? quad core

[kklownboy 43]

for an i7 970(6 core, 12 threads), recommended threads is...?

There can only be 7 threads used by the engine and the 5,6 and 7 threads are corner cases anyways. Running the extra 6 VCs maybe a hindrance with your graphic card while playing the game?

[NeMeSiS 11]

There can only be 7 threads used by the engine

The 'ex' in exThreads stands for 'extra' AFAIK. ;)

[PuFu 4600]

i tried cpuCount=6 with exThreads 5, 6 and 7 with no difference whatsoever.

turning the hyperThreading from bios is not an option since it is used by most of the professional software and rendering engines i use.

the question was for ppl also running 6 cores i7/xeons with ht on

Edited January 9, 2011 by PuFu

[celery 8]

What's the default exThreads for a triple core?

[mrcash2009 0]

I have a dual core AMD 6000+ 3.1 gig chip (I know ... getting on a bit) and I notice since defaulting to exThreads=3 (XP 32 bit) my loading times were twice as long, taking sometimes 2 minuted to enter into a mission, after that all was well though.

I forced it back to exThread=0 to test and now things are back to what I pretty much have been used to since I got the game in terms of loading. Unsure why im effected so much with load times but it was ridiculously slow set to 3. I haven't with latest betas noticed much choppiness without it set to 3 so I will stick to that for now.

[kklownboy 43]

i tried cpuCount=6 with exThreads 5, 6 and 7 with no difference whatsoever.

turning the hyperThreading from bios is not an option since it is used by most of the professional software and rendering engines i use.

the question was for ppl also running 6 cores i7/xeons with ht on

I figured as much with your work. I bet the engine defaults to what it needs no matter how many more cores you have after 4 real cores (max 7).

---------- Post added at 09:34 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:30 AM ----------

I have a dual core AMD 6000+ 3.1 gig chip (I know ... getting on a bit) and I notice since defaulting to exThreads=3 (XP 32 bit) my loading times were twice as long, taking sometimes 2 minuted to enter into a mission, after that all was well though.

I forced it back to exThread=0 to test and now things are back to what I pretty much have been used to since I got the game in terms of loading. Unsure why im effected so much with load times but it was ridiculously slow set to 3. I haven't with latest betas noticed much choppiness without it set to 3 so I will stick to that for now.

is "exThread=0" even a value? It would be a default set up for 3 core if "0" wasn't.

Hmmm i guess it is a real value;http://forums.bistudio.com/showpost.php?p=1655138&postcount=10

First page.

Edited January 10, 2011 by kklownboy

[OrdeaL 10]

Yes but with one of the latest patchs it has been changed so that dual cores default at exThreads=3 now instead of 0. But some people with dual cores might find it running better by putting exThreads=0 instead :rolleyes:

In build 76122 and newer the default for dualcores will be changed to -exThreads=3 based on user feedback.

Edited January 11, 2011 by OrdeaL

[NeMeSiS 11]

i tried cpuCount=6 with exThreads 5, 6 and 7 with no difference whatsoever.

turning the hyperThreading from bios is not an option since it is used by most of the professional software and rendering engines i use.

the question was for ppl also running 6 cores i7/xeons with ht on

There is no 6. ;)

[mrcash2009 0]

Yes but with one of the latest patchs it has been changed so that dual cores default at exThreads=3 now instead of 0. But some people with dual cores might find it running better by putting exThreads=0 instead :rolleyes:

Indeed, and due to loading times (for me) I found that out recently. It was that post on the first page that gave me the answer I needed as I wasn't sure what pre =3 default patches were using previous to it by default.

I have set it to =0 and lowered my memory for graphics (GTX260 896) to "high" .. also had some general sluggishness in xp32 with Net framework 4.0 so I removed that back to 3.5, all things considered its back to accepted speed & feel and loading times.

Might as well note that ingame in not seeing much FPS difference =3 or =0 now, no micro stutter etc. But the loading times of missions and maps were double the time and more recently with =3 setting.

[NiKuTa 10]

What setting should i use with my i5 660 CPU?

He have 2 cores + 2 virtual cores.

[NiKuTa 10]

Any help ?

[maddogx 13]

What setting should i use with my i5 660 CPU?

He have 2 cores + 2 virtual cores.

Try this:

-cpuCount=2 -exThreads=5

CPU count at two because Arma 2 doesn't like virtual cores.

Not sure about the exThreads value though. Some dual core users say 7 works fine, others go with something lower. Note that the values 0, 3, 5 and 7 are the only ones that really make any sense here. I would suggest trying all of them out and seeing which one works best for you.