Cobalt_UK

I think it's safe to say we've all encountered some major "WTF" moments, while playing against Arma 2's enemy AI.

To be honest it's probably not worth oc'ing to 2.8Ghz just for Arma 2. You'd probably only get about a 1 frames per second increase :S I'd put on hold any oc'ing, or upgrades especially for arma 2, and just wait to see what the next patch will bring - performance wise.

To the post above mine, of course your fps will be decent with such a dirt poor resolution.

My 505 retail version requires the DVD to be present in the drive, yes.

I thought the Evga SLI fix only worked with the new 186.18 drivers. If you revert back to 182.50, wouldn't that cancel out the Evga fix?

Press F - select weapon mode - till you see grenades listed, then click left mouse button.

Get a Ds3 from ebay like this :- http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Gigabyte-945P-DS3-mATX-LGA-775-Motherboard-SND-LAN_W0QQitemZ180363608341QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_Motherboards_CPUs?hash=item29fe824115&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=65%3A12%7C66%3A2%7C39%3A1%7C72%3A1690%7C240%3A1318%7C301%3A1%7C293%3A1%7C294%3A50 Intel Core 2 Duo 6700 :- http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&item=160344150686 Thats £95 pound in total for the cpu and motherboard. As long as you've got some ddr2 ram, you're good to go. Should see a huge jump in performance for such a modest amount of cash. See what other folks say though. Somone might suggest a better alternative for that amount of cash. Good luck anyway.

You can try inserting -maxmem=2047 in the target line of the arma2.exe. Since i've included that in my exe, i don't tend to be crashing to desktop as much (touch wood). It's all hit and miss though at the moment, so it might work, might not. Worth a try though. Also try forcing vertical sync off in the nvidia control panel.

Pentium 4? Seriously you wanna ditch that cpu asap. Pentium 4's architecture is absolutely appalling compared to the next step up, which is a Core 2 Duo. You could easy pick up a decent C2D, & 775 motherboard for next to nothing on ebay. Would make a HUGE difference combined with your 4870. Especially since Arma 2 is extremely cpu dependent.

I had this exact problem in a multiplayer match earlier. Happened when i entered one of the large cities. The further i proceeded into the city the more my fps went downhill - till it was right down into single figures. At that point the screen started turning into all different kinds of cartoony type saturated colours, followed by a CTD lol. Oh what fun :eek:

My personal experience of Arma 2 in multiplayer is one of absolute frustration. CTD's, network server lag and absolutely disgusting frames per second. All add upto a very unenjoyable experience. No doubt this will all get patched up in time. But i think the problem is, alot of people just won't give Arma 2 'time'. I personally didn't hang around to see Arma 1 patched up to a playable experience. I bailed out after a couple of patches, and no doubt i'll be doing the same with Arma 2, if it isn't sorted out asap. Also unlike me continuing to have some kind of faith in Bohemia/Arma 2 before it's release. I definitely wouldn't offer that same kind of faith for a possible future Arma 3. If these problems aren't corrected soon, i'll be opting out of any future BI releases. I love the idea's/creativity/vision/scope/direction of Bohemia, and what they have to offer to the game world. I just think their idea's/vision are extremely poorly executed, especially at launch. I don't even think you could say Arma 2 is in BETA stage right now - maybe pre-alpha?

I appreciate the complexity of these Arma games. So i don't expect them to run like COD4 or Farcry 2. I do on the otherhand, expect the game to run decently at lower settings - which Arma 2 does not. Infact it doesn't matter whether i select the lowest or highest settings, the game still runs like crap. It's very upsetting, cause all i wanna do is appreciate this masterpiece. But the lousy performance and constant CTD's, have turned my Arma 2 experience into a living hell lol.

Q6600 oc'd to 3.0Ghz - 4Gb DDR2 Ram - Asus P5Q-E Motherboard - 295Gtx oc'd to 620/1336/1150 - Windows Vista 32bit - Nvidia drivers 186.18 - 1TB Hard Drive SATAII 7200rpm 32MB Cach - Defragged HD - zero processes running in background - all windows vista junk switched off. Ingame settings @ Resolution 1920 x 1200 - Fillrate 100% All settings on High except, Shaders, Object detail and Post Processing - set to Low. Ingame fps in Single Player between 25 - 40fps - average around 32fps. Multiplayer between 16fps and 30 - average around 23fps. Unplayable on multiplayer. Clearly no SLI support ingame, even with the lame exe/-winxp supposed fix. We need an offical statement from Bohemia regarding the problems everyone is experiencing with either the 295gtx, or i7/295gtx setup's, please.

SLI is definitely not working for me. I can tell because the temps are only averaging around 60 - 70 degrees, when normally in most other games it's around 80 - 85 degrees. Plus the performance, especially in MP is absolutely appalling. Basically it's unplayable, like 15 - 25 fps. Averaging around the 23 fps mark. I've tried the crysis.exe and -winxp thing, doesn't make any difference on my 295GTX :(

How can anyone hate the AK. What a marvellous piece of engineering.

Hey Carl, love what you've done with your room. Top marks on the decor :D

Don't know if it's just me, but the crysis.exe doesn't seem to be working since i updated to patch 1.02 - so i'd say if anything the performance has got worse. I'm getting between 23 - 40fps in single player - average high 20's. With everything set to high except Shaders and Post Processing. Resolution of 1920 x 1200 - Q6600 oc'd to 3.0Ghz - 4gb DDR 2 Ram - 295Gtx oc'd - Nvidia 185.85 drivers - Vista 32bit. I'd also like to know exactly what system Bohemia tested this game on as well.

Yea thanks for the patch guys. Installing right now :D

Motion Blur rocks. Can't see why folks aren't big on it - although saying that, i guess it does hamper the performance abit lol.

Makes you realise how special this game really is. Just wish the performance was alittle better, but oh well. I have alot of respect and admiration for the work Bohemia Interactive has done on this game.

My specs - Core2Quad Q6600 oc'd to 3.0Ghz - 4Gb ddr2 Ram - Nvidia 295GTX oc'd - Nvidia drivers 185.85 - Windows Vista 32bit. Settings at resolution 1920 x 1200 - everything High except shaders Normal - and something else set to Normal, can't think what. In single player i'm getting between 28 - 40fps - mostly in the low 30's. In multiplayer i'm getting between 23 to 28fps. Mp is basically unplayable. I've tried changing the exe to crysis.exe and tried the -winxp in the shortcut - makes no difference. Come on guys this is pretty bad. I should have learned after Arma 1, but i'm a sucker for pain - so i thought i'd buy Arma 2. Looks like absolutely nothing was learned from the poorly optimized launch of Arma 1. Do we really have to wait 9 - 12 months, before we get a half playable game? If this isn't sorted out asap, this will definitely be the last game i purchase from these guys.

Should be receiving my pre-order tomorrow - friday tops. Add me if you like - tawcobalt I played the first Arma quite abit when it first got released. I ended up binning it off though, cause i was sick of all the bugs and poor optimization. I spent most of my time in the Kellys Heroes server, had some fun times :D

I've tried this afew times now, but everytime i start up Cam2Pan my computer crashes to a blue screen of death and reboots. I've given up now lol

no i'd say yours is easily above normal.

Ok if you take into account what is considered a "normal" Pc these days, then yours is definitely "not" normal. I've posted a link to Valve's hardware survey - which started in November 2006, but for some reason the post got deleted. Anyway it clearly show's out of survey completed by many thousands of so called PCGamers, the average system used by most people today. I'm not gonna start rambling through the details, check it out yourself's. Also it's funny that the recommended spec's for the game :-  * CPU: 3 Ghz  * RAM: 1 GB  * Video Card: Nvidia 6800 and above or Ati x800 and above with at least 256 MB RAM  * Free HD Space: 3 GB (or more as needed for downloadable addons)  * Software: Windows XP and DirectX 9 is probably gonna result in you selecting most options on the "Low" settings. But yet since they state this is recommended, shouldn't this system or equivalent be able to run perfectly with the GFX settings set to "Normal" lol very odd, i'd like to know who was responsible for drawing up the minimum and recommended specifications list, cause i think someone was telling pork pie's.