Jump to content

Reezo

Member
  • Content Count

    776
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Community Reputation

44 Excellent

6 Followers

About Reezo

  • Rank
    Master Sergeant

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I agree that in Arma 3 (as with any other game, in my modest opinion) pushing for higher and higher FPS is pretty much useless if you don't maintain a high average and/or suffer from dips/stutters/slowdowns. Being efficient and effective with the latter especially is a nightmare and can hinder your game experience, making you look somewhere else than Arma 3. Once it happens a couple times that you start a nice op only to find yourself in a town or busier area and "feel" the sluggishness, all your pulse is kinda ruined. It's also true that if you optimize, tweak and OC for better performance, you will get pretty much all three: higher fps, higher average, less dips. But it's not always like this.. as some tweaks are more effective at lower dips than others, for example, without granting you too much in higher fps peaks. All in all, the faster you can get everything, the better.. but that's pretty much old news. Lucky for us all the new systems work pretty well for Arma 3 if you can take your head away from the fps battle and enjoy gaming (I know being a geek myself sometimes both things can be fun ;)).
  2. That's great, thanks @Gunter Severloh! Glad you liked what I did. Again, I did try and be the least invasive to the system, only adding a bit more damage to the Vanilla system. Yes it could be taken further with animations and a more elaborate injury system but I don't know what the Arma 3 system already does to calculate what has been hit and how so I didn't want to throw in more data. I've got to say (as you noticed by the guy prone who only got injured but didn't die) that so far it works and it's the least amount of code I could put in to bend the Vanilla system just enough for things not to be unrealistic. The bunny still cracks me up, it's a gem given the sped up audio/video of that example eheh It happened for real, it's in one of my recent streams.. even with all the possible coincidences, that marksman hiding on the first floor took 2/3 grenades and still did not die.. it was my AI that killed him. Facepalm!
  3. Hi there! Thanks for the hint, that could be a way but I don't want to head in that direction: I wanted the least obtrusive way to just add a little oomph (= killing power) to the grenades I throw, so the mod I wrote just basically follow the thrown grenade, verifies visibility and cover from all potential targets in the kill radius + shrapnel zones and adds a very small coefficient to the damaged unit, based on that. I believe this to be be the least obtrusive way and it obviously is something that I developed for Vanilla Single Player as - if you use other mods in multiplayer - my guess is this has been already more than addressed by bigger mod packs that everybody uses out there (especially given the amount of Coop vs AI that is played in ArmA 3). Grenades that were thrown AT ME by the AI were perfectly fine, .. even their aim is remarkable eheh so nothing to adjust on that (aka I got killed nicely more than once by thinking "they're never gonna get me in here.. OOPS THEY TOSSED A NADE :))
  4. I realize this is mostly for me as I am playing through the Vanilla campaign but I noticed that both hand grenades and 40mm rounds that I explode at less than 5m from targets are not as effective as I would like them to be. Other grenades (the ones thrown to my face) are actually very good at killing me. So I developed this script, currently under development and which I shall post soon.. stay tuned.
  5. Some sweet updates during testing. This is a fun clip!
  6. I just finished some hours of testing (and lots of recovering BIOS for wrong values) and I can confirm that RAM overclocking did help on Intel as well: On my i7 rig I was able to boot my 3200 CL14 2x8GB sticks to 4000 15-15-15-36 Anyway, the average improvement is +6% average fps on five tests I performed, for LOW settings. At ULTRA settings the benefit reaches +5%. The important value to consider is, however, the "lowest FPS" which got an average of +7% higher than before. Anyway, all good finds! 100.3fps in YAAB @ LOW was fun to watch, even if useless 🙂
  7. Some of you who followed my stream know that I was able to put my hands on two great rigs, thanks to the good colleagues and friends I have (kudos to them). I did spend a bit of time to benchmark both rigs - that differ only in the CPU and Motherboard - to get an idea on which one was "best" for ArmA 3 in 2020. Some details on the testing: the benchmark scenario is YAAB v1.0 created by Greenfist each setting (low/ultra) was tested 5 times and I picked the best of 5 the delta was consistently ~2 fps for each run, in both rigs this means that the difference in % between the worst AMD run and the worst Intel run is the same difference between the average AMD and the average Intel.. and the same between the best AMD and the best Intel I did run the same background tasks and killed unnecessary things, trying to keep things as consistent as possible I did keep the NVIDIA Drivers the same (the latest released at the time of the test) Things I want to make clear: I am not bashing any brand or taking a side, I do not own any of the two rigs I compared so I am not even attached to them on financial grounds I'd be happy to answer your questions in case you are about to spend money and want to have more info before committing I am not an expert at overclocking but I did document myself at the best of my possibilities before committing (especially in order to avoid breaking stuff that is not mine) I did get a lot of help from people in here, namely Oldbear, Groove_C and Tankbuster, plus on other channels by other people I am opening this thread so it's easier to find for future reference I had fun making this comparison and I hope this is as much fun to you when watching it I noticed AMD vs Intel topics can get pretty toxic (as if other threads wouldn't) but I know the ArmA 3 community knows better See you on the field
  8. Makes sense but trust me, I did ..and - if it was crashing in one of the five tests - I proceeded to trash all tests and find a BIOS setting that was stable. The 5 runs I had all benched within 2 fps delta. The worst bench from AMD and the worst bench from Intel at the same settings are still the same % apart. Even if I had taken the best of AMD and the worst of Intel, the Intel would still be over +10% better average fps. Again, I can't stress enough that this is what happened here in my beloved room 🙂
  9. Hi @Groove_C I am sorry to hear I did not give you anything back after all the help you gave me. I thought somehow this could be added to the pool of tests all people out there did, with the same degree of real-world bench. I thought actually benching two identical builds that differ only in motherboard and CPU ("only" being still a lot, obviously) was something else. 1) I did test 5x each setting and took the best result of 5. I have to say anyway that all results were equally far off of no more than 2FPS so the delta is maintained whether I use the best, the worst or the average of 5. I had no anomalies in the results in AMD or Intel. Just a normal 2 fps delta at most. When I say Intel was % better better than AMD I could pretty much keep that difference in all five tests (worst of, best of, average) 2) As I said I did not manage to OC the RAM on Intel but that was not the point of the video, I did overclock the two systems at the best that I could using their strong points. I guess if I had overclocked the memory on Intel I would have even had better results, thus making the Intel build even more ahead of the AMD (that's a natural guess) 3) I did close all unnecessary tasks and tests were done in the most equal conditions I could. Is there any video out there that you could point out that could give a clearer picture than mine? I am sorry I haven't found one before making my own, it could have been a good inspiration. I believe saying "it cannot be considered at all" is a bit of a stretch.. I mean I find it hard to believe I did something completely useless? To me (and I am just entitled as much as anybody else in here) it was a great hard proof to see that in both conditions (even my own two hands building the rigs) I was able to see the numbers of how things felt. I already said that both rigs were perfectly playable and enjoyable, I don't think I am even bashing any of the two? I've read that you are cable of unbiased thought and also added you to the credits in the video because of all the help you gave me, I cannot possibly fathom that I made something totally unacceptable 🙂 And then again, it's just some guy (me) making some test, come on, cheer up brother, come over here and gimme a hug 🙂
  10. I was able to finish the conclusions video before I get attacked on my brand new, unfixed i7! Less than 10 minutes, people, here it is, the final answer for me:
  11. Couldn't agree more. Stay tuned, tomorrow I'll add a chapter related to pushing the RAM in ArmA 3 from my 5GHz profile I have. I played a simple mission today 100% in urban area in Altis and I was like "uuuuuuh babeeeee" <--yes.
  12. Definitely worth talking about it tomorrow in an addendum episode, I was clearly able to get +5fps from 80 to 85 at low settings, just by randomly going from 3200 CL14 to 3733 CL16 without even being serious at it. At ULTRA settings I did not get any improvement but I guess because the CPU/GPU are more under stress (I kept the stock CPU values..) the faster RAM does not make that much of a difference. Once I bring it back to 5GHz I am sure it will be able to squeeze some more FPS out of the system, or possibly even raise the lowest minimum because of the lower latency (I'd rather have lower 1% minimum than higher FPS as I am a G-Sync player at 75Hz lol :)) I had not noticed that the motherboard was doing what it wanted after unsuccessful training.. in my Asus x470 I would either die not posting or post successfully (and maybe crash in Windows.. but still..) here the motherboard is assessing and lowering values in case of initial inability to post.. that was deceiving 😉
  13. Can't install that because I have a Gigabyte otherboard.. -- Anyway, thanks! Here's what I found out: I had not noticed that during training the BIOS was lowering my OC settings for RAM when not working.. and I though it was training fine as on the AMD I either got to POST or to not POST.. interesting! I just got 85fps instead of 80fps at low settings by going from 3200 14-14-14-34 to 3733 16-16-16-36 Command Rate: 1 .. and I did not even try a serious RAM overclock.. All secondary and tertiary are still on auto.. wow! This worth a second episode! Thanks,
×