metalnwood

I have used sad on all my machines for a couple of years now. On this one a 120 gig windows drive and a 240 gig with arma on it. I am surprised that toms hardware loaded up the 780ti and got an average of 75fps when I get about half of that. While typing I went and checked something. When I put in my card I lost my OC. put it back to 4.5ghz and I now start off with 60fps instead of 40, certainly an improvement, the extra cpu cycles is letting the GPU hit 80+% instead of 50%

Today I put a 780Ti in my machine replacing a 6970. I don't usually play arma on this machine, usually on another that has a 7970 but with the 780ti in this one I thought things would change. My pc is an ivy i5 @4.5 and after seeing some benchmarks on toms hardware here http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-780-ti-review-benchmarks,3663-4.html I thought I might be able to replicate that 75 fps on the default ultra setting. No chance, I get around 40 with gpu utilisation at around 50. Like others I can get gnu utilisation up by going to sample 200% but the frames don't change so I don't want that. Reading the end of this thread I see that there may have been some performance loss in the latest releases. Am I chasing a rabbit here? Are the benchmark figures on toms hardware no longer attainable? Is 40-50 fps all I can expect on my current rig?

I don't know if there is something peculiar to AO but I cannot get AA going. I dont like the in game AA, it doesnt seem to work as well as I want it to. I run the 3d resolution the same as the interface resolution, I know it helps the jaggies to run it at more but I use a triple screen setup so it's not an option. I am running a 5970, I turned off AA in game and any AA setting I use in CCC has no impact on visual quality. Is there something I don't know? Thanks.