RSF TheCapulet

Hmm... thinking about it, I'm not entirely convinced you'd hear anything on a soft bullet hit unless it expanded (which they wont; we don't play with hollow points), or if it hit plate armor or something similar, which is also moot since we don't have armor.

Why? I can hit you in a second with an AK from a hundred meters away. If you can't find the Game play Options menu, play something easier.Are we talking real life or game?LOL no and options haven't really worked for me they're extremely accurate even right out of full sprint. I regularly shoot iron sights on AK style rifles (my ak47 and a friends ak74) and my ar15. At 100 yards, I have a target base with golf tees drilled into the top board to hold softballs for the AK. I hit them about 8 out of 10 times at 100 yards. With my ar, I shoot golf balls instead at that distance, otherwise it's an easy 10 out of 10 balls, and also because I didn't have a huge tub of random baseballs given to me instead of softballs. :P I tend to break a lot more tees shooting golf balls though, but I generally hit 3-4 out of 10 with the ar (I got 7 out of 10 two days ago; best score yet). Can't really get that accurate on irons without the A2 iron sight, so I'm pretty lucky if I hit one at all with the AK. And if my Acog is on the ar, I'll shoot spent 20g. shotgun shells instead. (shooting those is way more fun with a .22lr though) But either way, that accuracy isn't an anomaly, it's expected. If you can't consistently hit a stationary human sized target at 100 yards CoM , you probably shouldn't have been issued a rifle. And as for zeroing the ar, it's probably one of the easiest sights ever made to adjust on the fly. Every AK uses a leaf sight that only requires you to grip two buttons and push up or pull down in 100m increments. The A2 irons found on any iron sighted M16 variant in arma are nearly as easy, as long as you count your clicks and know what they're worth. So the likelihood of a trained rifleman being able to estimate your distance, adjust his sights, and shoot you at 100 yards or even 300-500 yards either IRL or in game is extremely likely if you're out of cover. That last bit is key... They key to staying alive is preventing bad guys from pointing their guns at you all together. Squad management and tactical awareness helps a bit too. ;)

When a studio licenses their engine out to third party developers, it's incredibly common for them to also give support for their engine for the 3p devs working with it. No dev studio in their right mind would buy an engine license from someone without engine support coming with it. And OMAC has a pretty good point. BIS should have a strong interest in seeing IF succeed, because one successful game built on a licensed RV engine will lead to other lucrative license sales.

You don't have to do either. Just set your original arma 2 game folder as a mod path, and it will run it as CO no matter where you have it installed. "-mod=C:\Program Files (x86)\Bohemia Interactive\arma 2;" Or better yet, use a good launcher. http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?89792-AddonSync2009-%28downloader-launcher%29 http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?81060-ArmA-II-launcher-by-alpinestars http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?89731-ArmA-2-Game-Launcher (my personal favorite) http://www.six-updater.net/p/download.html

Having trouble stringing together what you're trying to say. But if you already have the retail copy of Arma 2, I'd just get arrowhead from best buy like you've planned. You can't buy the DLC packs on steam separately for a retail game, as steam forces you to own Arrowhead through steam to purchase those. You can buy arrowhead on steam, and leave the ability to buy the DLCs on steam open for later. But also keep in mind that the DLC content is provided in the arrowhead patches as low rez-low poly assets so you can continue to play with those who have the DLC, and you're really not missing much. And you're correct, BAF and PMC both require Arrowhead, as far as I'm aware.

http://www.amazon.com/Meridian4-40365ned-Operations-ArmA2-Combined/dp/B003UV8RRE/ref=sr_1_1?s=videogames-download&ie=UTF8&qid=1333958658&sr=1-1 $10 combined ops Easter sale. Doubt it will last long. As for versions, there aren't really versions of anything. There's just Arma 2, the stand alone expansion pack Operation arrowhead, and the two DLC packs: BAF and PMC. Arrowhead and A2 are sold together in a pack called combined ops. Arma 2's folder can be run as a mod folder within the command line of an Arrowhead shortcut, or they can be launched together via a good launcher application. The DLC content is vaguely included in game as "lite" low definition content so there are no MP compatibility issues. "Arma X" is the complete Arma package, which includes literally everything "arma" ever made. So in conclusion, get combined ops. :P

I love that sound. :P But you'll rarely if ever hear it on a collapsible stock, due to a much shorter buffer tube and lighter buffer.

What's the difference between the two?

So should I get the THD version, or the non THD version? Have Tegra 2.

On this note, I'm also noticing some weird artifacts with sharpening. The one that comes up most fresh in my mind is the Aimpoint red dot reticule. At the beginning of a game start, it appears fine. But after passing it over certain areas of the screen, a light green ring appears around the dot. I'll try to get a screenshot of it later.

Ugh... Find latest post results are gone. : \

Why am I not surprised to see you here spouting your typical green team fanboism, bang? :P I'd show you dozens of charts from half a dozen reputable tech journalism sites, but I know you'd just deny what they say as well. lol. I won't deny that ATI has been late to the game with Xfire support on the last couple major releases. But ATI, with their most recent drivers, also started supporting user made Xfire profiles. As always, we'll just agree to disagree.

The 6950 in crossfire won't perform it's best in Arma2, but it does scale much better than Nvidia in most other games. And if PhsX is a deal breaker for you, you can always cough up another 30-40 bucks later and put in a gt240 or something similar in, and use the hacked PhsX drivers to run both cards at the same time. I'm currently using this method with a gs220, and can max out nearly any PhsX settings in games that use it. And I agree with the Corsair 650TX suggestion. I'm running the very same one, and it's perfect.

Judging my the sound of your experience, I'd stay as far away as possible from raising your GPU voltage. GPUs are much more delicate than CPUs in that regard.

I'm sitting at 67 celcius at 4.7 Ghz, on a cheap $30 coolermaster HS. So either something is wrong with your HS application, or the akasa venom sucks real bad. And don't plan on hitting 5 Ghz. It's not sustainable, even if you got lucky and got your hands on a chip capable of it.

€600 is just a very small bit lower than what I paid for my config. So I imagine he's probably pretty spot on with me.

This is my favorite quote. Lol.

I really hope the devs are taking advantage of DirectCompute in DX10/DX11 for AI in Arma 3.

On Takistan, I can run 10k without issue. But I don't run any AA. Just FXAA and max AF. (I'll never understand why people don't run max AF. It's nearly impact free) Chernarus is a different story though. During the TOH preview, I actually got a solid 30FPS from the air with 10k/10k view and object distance. But in regular arma 2, 10k kills me, and doesn't even look nearly as good as the TOH preview did. If I drop it to 7500, that will usually level me out to 38-40. i5 2500k at 4.7 Ghz (Just got it up to 7 from four today. :D) 16GB of ram at 1920 Mhz AMD 6970 (Have 2, but don't use crossfire for Arma) And the important PBOs put on a ramdisk.

Correct, i5's don't have it.

This is for AMD users: Try these modded drivers. Follow directions carefully, because current driver files MUST be deleted properly for the new driver files to write to disk on installation. http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=322616

1. Yes. In fact, I have. The driver installation code is unrestricted, and I can absolutely confirm that how I stated it is exactly how it works. At one point, I had played around with the idea of modding my own drivers to fix a few issues I had with a couple games. But since then, better modded drivers have come out, saving me the hassle. So when I say, "No, it doesn't work that way," I mean it. Any other results should be considered a placebo effect. (When I worked in IT, "reinstall your drivers/restart your PC" was always my first suggestion. Not because it worked, but because it got people off my balls when I was busy. And in many cases, it led to said placebo effect.) 2. Since we already know that this is a 2x00K series processor, we know that 1. the BCLK has no variance, since it is extremely limited this generation. 2. That he uses the 6x generation of Intel motherboards, which means he is using PCIe 2.1 support. And that means he gets 5gt and 500MB per lane throughput. And in the case of a motherboard limiting to x4 lanes, you'll have to provide sources. Because it defies logic, as the P67 were flagship enthusiast boards when released, and so the manufacturer would have never damaged their rep so bad as to let it pass through. And 2, after multiple internet searches, combined with the fact that I follow enthusiast technology pretty closely, there's absolutely no evidence of any P67 board having this issue. 3. Max frames to render ahead isn't a performance tweak. In the case of gamebryo engine games, that engine has long since had DirectInput issues that conflict with modern GPU drivers, specially when SLI and Xfire is used. In it's case, you edited the maxframestoreder setting to LOWER the game performance, and thereby removing the mouse lag. The same principal follows with other games. But issues with input lag usually only happen with 2 or more graphics cards. And the gamebryo engine is one of the very rare exceptions. In this case, the OP doesn't want less performance, he wants more. And I'm not writing these things in haste, but from 10 years of hobby and 6 years of career experience in the IT field, part of which includes system building, system balancing, and extreme overclocking. (My first job was building specialty systems for a local PC shop. Those were always fun.) I may have moved on to a different career (And way sweeter. lol. IT really does suck!), but I still spend decidedly too much time (and money) keeping up with enthusiast technology trends. And yes, I do mean 24 fps increase in Dirt3. For that game specifically, I actually think TomsHardware has some ram benchmarks that can confirm my findings. Some games, when run at absolute max settings, do in fact have a ram thoroughput limited environment. Ram bandwidth does make a significant impact in certain situations.

Yeah. The waterpaint effect is what I get as well. : \ Wish it worked better.

There are a lot of things wrong with this post, so I'll go through them systematically. This depends entirely on the game played and the hardware used. Like I mentioned in my original post to the OP, we have identical specs, barring memory. In my case, going from 1333Mhz to 1900Mhz+ has resulted in pretty decent performance increases in some games. Most Notably, Dirt3 saw a 24 FPS avg increase. That was my biggest FPS increase just from the OC, but not the only one. Unfortunately, I never bothered testing Arma 2 in that regard, and CBA to go back and reset the OC just to test it, since my current OC is rock solid and I don't want to risk not being able to reach it again. (Which was a common problem my last rig) Bios almost never has anything to do with performance. If his game is running, and other games run well, his bios version is fine. If he's using the 2xxxK series Intel processors, his first graphics slot will ALWAYS be x16. And PCI bandwidth speed is exactly that. They aren't two different things. We can assume other games run fine, otherwise he wouldn't have an issue with this game, as he'd understand something is wrong in the grander scheme of things. Arma 2 is notable for not utilizing the GPU fully in many situations. While I'm not discounting that this may be a driver issue, it's unlikely. Specially since the OP's attention has already focused on that facet. AMD drivers install exactly the same. The installation code doesn't have a mind of it's own. The only variables in driver installation that could change are installing modded drivers that have older files that wouldn't overwrite newer files from a previously installed driver. Render Frames Ahead is only relevant in crossfire performance, and so has nothing to do with this topic. I have both. But in my primary machine, the 6970. That's not the way crossfire profiles work. GPU drivers don't "split" the workload in half and divey it out to each GPU. And profiles aren't loaded when crossfire isn't in use. He's using the latest officially released Driver. Reinstalling it will only waste time, as "de-installing" via AMD's uninstaller interface doesn't actually remove a lot of the files, and so wouldn't be overwritten on reinstall anyways. ---------- Post added at 04:08 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:00 AM ---------- Is it confirmed that they're going to? I can't wait. :D AToC, as implemented in this game, is godawful ugly anyways. Everyone should turn that trash off by default. lol.

The sharpening filter is a "new" FXAA feature provided in the latest beta build. Give it a try, it really makes textures look a ton better. Also keep in mind that with FXAA, in terms of performance and quality, higher numbers and performance loss doesn't always translate into better image quality. For instance, at the max setting, there is no dithering and the most performance loss. But dithering is an important technique in AA and IQ in general that can more effectively remove jaggies. The blur issue is more of a personal preference issue, but removing the blur filter does increase framerates. http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=97853&highlight=noBlur And, for the memory, I'm really not sure. There aren't alot of reliable benchmark data sources for Arma 2. But in the case of other games, it's hit and miss. Some games see no difference at all in memory bandwidth increases. Others can see up to 25-30 FPS increases, depending on the system balance. Memory bandwidth is an important figure, to be sure. But it's often an unreliable mark in terms of performance. The only real way to find out is to try OCing your memory. Keep in mind that reliable overclocks on ram is much more difficult than CPU overclocks, simply because there are so many more variables to be considered, including timings, manufacturers, the specific memory chips used, and how much voltage said chips can handle without suffering damage.