phatj

To be fair, I JUST started, but I think the AI's a bit better, the interface is pretty much the same and umm... wouldn't know about the script and the framerate.

Tried that, except for the mods, didn't help. You know, as my post implicitly suggests, the inadequate performance isn't caused by outdated hardware; it's something about the game that's messed up. Ergo, I really don't like the idea of tweaking my way to the "acceptable fps-range" and taking a slam on the nose in the graphics department. Thanks for contributing though.

Hi! I just purchased both ArmA2 and OA via Steam, and I'm happy to inform you that OA runs w/ >35fps @ all settings maxed out except for res, which's [1920x1080, 133%-3d]. ArmA2 on the other hand runs w/ 16<fps<25 @ practically ANY settings (changing them makes very little difference). First I couldn't get the second GPU to work at all in ArmA2, until I removed the ATI/AMD CCC. Now they run ~60%, unless I max out the distance, which causes them to run w/ <50% each. The drivers are Catalyst 10.10, tried the 10.4, no significant change. Any ideas on how to fix it? Oh btw, the -winxp parameter doesn't really help. The rig: Win7 x64 i7 950 (stock clocks, lol) XFX HD5970 Black Edition 3x2GB DDR3 Corsair Dominator RAM random WD SATA HDD for the OS - on that note, maybe I should upgrade