Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Lalaland

  • Rank
  1. It is cpu bound but blaming that on a Xbox 360 port is an odd conclusion to draw as the 'cpu code' for the Xbox 360 port would be PowerPC rather than x86 so the odds of them sharing a code base are pretty remote. As Bilko points out Quad Core cpus do deliver a boost to FPS but not enough to suggest that a dual core system is a sever bottleneck. No I suspect we'll just need to wait for the patches for speed boosts however given the lack of significant disparity between 9800GTX cards and GT260+ solutions I'd suggest there's a few fps waiting to be unlocked in the drivers too though.
  2. Lalaland

    Patch 1.03 development status

    I'd love to see this too but I'd probably wail and gnash my teeth at the elastic nature of patch release dates like everybody else. Most patches are an Irish stew of fixes here and there and deciding which to roll out in what point release is a pain. It's in development and will be out when it's out, any date given would be prone to hopping around the calendar like a cat on hot tin roof.
  3. Lalaland

    ArmaHolic ArmA 2 Optimization

    Thanks Stauff that seems to suggest the game is heavily cpu bound (50% frame gain for a 30% o/c) which implies any framerate gains are likely to be from patches unless there are some .cfg variables we can play with that haven't been published yet. I've noticed that some people have a rake of variables that weren't in my original .cfg and profile so here's hoping there are more out there. Typically I see my framerate at around 40fps so it works in most cases but clearly there is more in this engine waiting to get out
  4. Lalaland

    ArmaHolic ArmA 2 Optimization

    Textures = v high Vid mem = v high Ansi = v high AA = normal terrain detail = low object detail = high post process = off .cfg messing HDRquality=16 (clears up that nasty skybanding after removing NVGs) I've found of all the settings "terrain detail" is by far the most important one for damaging my frame rate. I've been forced to leave that on low and shadows = normal. Post processing effects seem to make the 'lag' worse so I have those disabled. I'm getting 2900 ArmAmarks with these settings and I seem to have established a firm 'floor' on my framerates of 22 fps, not great but it feels fairly smooth and responsive. Textures at vhigh and ansi at v high are 'free' for most modern gfx cards as they impact very little on the actual card performance and as a bonus a good texture on a poor poly always looks better than the reverse situation. I don't play MP so I can't speak to whether my setup would work for that (although having skipped ArmA1 I can't wait to give "flashpoint" a go online). It's frustrating but I think we're whistling into the wind here at the moment as moving between terrain detail levels produces serious drops in framerate (~20%) without any appreciable image quality boost (more grass doesn't count). What I'd love to see from BIS is a list of LOD variables for the config files so that we could fiddle to achieve the results we want (ie less close detail for more range or vice versa). The severe changes in framerate from changing that single control suggest to me that it's changing a number of variables at once and I'd like to try playing with them individually. What is the sceneComplexity variable counting, is it objects, textures, # of polys? By default it was set to 1,000,000 on my rig which is far higher than the numbers I see recommended here. What is the nonlocalVRAM variable? Does it represent a disk cache for textures or is it a RAMcache for textures? Is it nothing to do with textures and is instead a generic paging file for the app? Asus P45 SE/R 4GB @ 400 Mhz E8600 (3.4 @ 400 Mhz) evga GTX 260 216 896MB latest WHQL PhysX disabled (did bugger all that)