Ezcoo

Download ATTO Benchmark and CrystalDiskMark, run the read+write speed tests and compare them with other results of your SSD and/or post the results here. How full are your disks? SSDs need to have at least about 10 % free space to perform properly. The performance drop can be caused by almost full SSD too.

Lol @ Alwarren So do you use multiple AVs in one PC? That's the worst possible thing to do, as the AVs fight from the same resources, which makes them effectively neutralize each other and cause false positives.

There's a difficulty setting that enhances the protection of infantry, don't remember what it's called (unable to check it now). Check your difficulty settings and make sure that the enhanced protection is disabled.

Hi F3r4_N3n3m, make sure that your GPUs have power saving mode competely disabled (the power saving setting should be something like "always full / prefer maximum performance" and that the power management mode of Windows is set to "Maximum/Best performance" in Control Panel. Check also BIOS (UEFI) settings to make sure that the power saving modes are disabled there too. Make also sure that the viewdistance settings in game are not too high (try eg. 1500, 2000, 2500, ... ,4000 meters).

I think there's no need to be butthurt even if we had different opinions about some subjects. I stated it quite clearly that it's fully possible that the stutter won't disappear with SSD. Congrats for the OP for getting SSD, I'm sure that you won't regret it. Install Win7 and the most important / heavy games on it, the speed gain is really nice with OS too! :)

The most important tweaks outside of the game: 1. Set your GPU to full performance mode (eg. in Nvidia Control Panel set the GPU to "Prefer maximum performance" mode) 2. Set Windows to "Best performance" mode in Control Panel 3. Make sure your cores are unparked (see OldBear's message above) 4. Disable Windows Aero theme 5. Especially if you have the game installed on HDD, make sure your anti-virus software is set to not to perform scan in the background when there's full screen application open / when CPU and/or HDD are stressed (note: this does not mean turning your AV and firewall off completely, that would risk the security of your PC)

Based on the frequency of the stutter it indeed could be related to anti-virus or firewall software interfering with the anti-cheat software Battleye, but if it keeps happening despite of turning them off (which I don't recommend at all btw!), it might caused by purely lack of SSD disk. Arma and DayZ use both Real Virtuality engine. RV has quite unique streaming technology, that renders the huge and detailed maps like Chernarus and Altis possible, but it comes with a small cost: the regular HDD disks are not very suitable and fast enough to handle it. It's not an issue with older PCs, as the players use lower settings that ease the job of HDD too, but with modern high-end PCs like yours (that have higher settings) the sluggishness of the HDDs becomes an issue, and they start to cause stutter. That's why you need to install at least the games, preferrably also OS, on a SSD disk if you wish to have fluent gameplay experience with games that use the RV engine, which are Armas and DayZ basically. So I'd recommend you to get SSD definitely and install both the games and Win7 on it. The frequency of the stutter is a bit odd though, so I can't promise that the stutter would disappear with SSD, but the overall gameplay experience would be much more solid anyway. Hope this helps!

Check the new website that the creator of Altis Life RPG, Tonic, set up recently: Altis Life RPG – [iNFO] Server Setup Potential Issues

I don't think using known incorrect arguments (such as ad hominem) would make your point valid. It rather tells that you're trying to cover the lack of proper arguments with unrelated personal attack. How is overclocking not a workaround if it can increase the performance of the game by multiple tens of percents? Or is it again the logical fallacy of perfectionism, that overclocking isn't acceptable solution as it doesn't fix everything even though it would still increase the performance? Or are you afraid of that if people overclocked their CPUs, devs would start to think that "Hey, we don't have to optimize the engine anymore because people are apparently overclocking to increase performance?" I don't understand you.

Excessive stress testing of the CPU after overclocking with programs like Prime95 and Intel Burn Test is standard measure that has purpose of testing the ability of CPU to work without errors when it has higher clocks. This is strongly emphasized in overclocking guides. If the CPU calculations result in errors, the guides advise you to lower the voltages and/or clocks. The erring during gameplay is result of not obeying the guides and general guidelines of overclocking instead of the overclocking itself. Note that DirectX draw calls don't support multithreading and it's something that the Arma/RV developers can't affect. Only Microsoft (as the developer of DirectX) can change that. Thankfully, it's going to change in future though. I didn't tell anyone to overclock their CPU in my posts, but rather explained why I find it good option personally, basing my opinion on facts. You're right in that overclocking decreases the lifetime of your components, but does it decrease it so much that it would matter is a whole different question. For example, it's estimated that the modern CPUs last over 15 years with default clocks, and overclocking would decrease the lifetime by from 1 to 5 years. So even if you fail in the OC a bit (not obeying the guides) and the lifetime of the CPU decreases to about 10 years, I don't think it would matter much. Not many of us will use the same PC in 2024, not for gaming at least. It's like playing today with PC that was built 10 years ago. How many of us uses regularly a PC that's 10 years old today? Not many, I think. It's true that the progress with CPUs is remarkably slower today than 10 years ago though, but I think no-one would use 10 years old PCs for regular gaming even in 2024. Overclocking doesn't fix everything, of course. The main thread bottleneck stays still. But should overclocking not be an option because it's not perfect? Nope - it is an option still, because it still makes the situation better. It's a common logical fallacy of perfectionism - if a solution is not perfect, it's out of question even if it was better than the original solution.

It would be nice to see arguments and facts that support your statement. Opinion alone means (well, should mean) nothing, as human being is an irrational creature and thus opinions without arguments tell nothing about the truth value of given statement.

I didn't quite get the point either. Could you clarify your point a bit please? Here's a quote from the same article: The performance increase in CPU-dependent and CPU-heavy games like Arma (WoW is very light game to run if compared to Arma) can, and is, much bigger than the performance gain in artificial tests like 3DMark. The main issue in Arma is that both of the most resource-heavy operations (DirectX draw calls and main AI calculation) are processed in the main thread. This leads to situation where the main thread becomes a bottleneck and other parts of the hardware are used less than what would be possible, as everything is dependent on the main thread and can't function before they get the necessary information from the main thread. When CPU is overclocked, the bottleneck of main thread becomes smaller and the usage level of other parts of hardware increases, as they get the critical information that is required for their functions to work faster. This kind of "echo" effect causes positive chain reaction which leads to multiplied performance gain if compared to artificial performance tests like 3DMark. Artificial tests like 3DMark are modularized, which means that each component like CPU and GPU have almost 100% usage during the tests, and because of there aren't any dependencies between components, the performance gains are much smaller than in actual applications like games. Because of the sim-like nature of the game, Arma has very many dependencies in the code, that cause the CPU dependency and furthermore, the main thread bottleneck and thus render the overclocking totally worth it. TL;DR: Overclocking is definitely worth it in Arma, as long as you know what you're doing (or if you're unexperienced in overclocking, as long as you follow the guidance of newbie guides). Most of the new motherboards have also a single-click mild OC button in UEFI (the replacer of BIOS), that overclocks the CPU a little and gives you performance boost especially in games like Arma.

Overclocking my i5-3570k from 3,4 GHz to 4,5 GHz gave me ~25 % FPS boost. I invested about €30 to proper CPU cooler (HR-02 Macho) to make sure that CPU won't overheat when it's stressed. Base performance was already (relatively) high. €/% ratio was almost 1, which can be considered extremely good cost-effectiveness.

There's the main issue. Arma is quite CPU dependent game. Single CPU core efficiency is much more important to Real Virtuality (the game engine that Arma uses) than having multiple cores, and that's an area where Intel CPUs are from 150 % to 200 % better than AMD CPUs. SSD would help too, if you experience stuttering (minor, continuous freezes in pic during the gameplay). "Very High" is way too demanding video setting for GTX 660 too. I have factory OC'ed GTX 670, and the "High" preset is the sweet spot for me - with Very High selected, my performance is remarkably worse. Every view distance setting is CPU-heavy, so you can improve your FPS a lot by setting the view distances to smaller values. Disabling shadows completely would help a lot too. Edit: Oh, and if there's setting named "SSAO" still in the video settings, disable it completely. It's huge performance killer and often makes the scenery look even worse than without it. For example my FPS increased by 25-30% when I disabled it.

This was also one of the goals of Mantle; to get the current industry standards to enhance their architechture at least, if Mantle itself won't become industry standard. We can thank AMD for that!

I agree with Undeceived. How about closing the submissions of mission category before voting? Either the submission of missions would be closed earlier than the other categories and the voting would be possible from that moment to the deadline of the other categories, or the public voting of the missions would start after the general submission deadline and last eg. a couple of weeks.

I don't agree. For example, I have GTX 670 that equals to GTX 760. I bought €30/~$40 air cooler (HR-02 Macho) and overclocked my i5-3570k from 3,4 GHz to 4,5 GHz successfully, the temps stayed below the recommended maximum temp even during extreme stress tests. I got about 20-30% FPS boost. So I got about 1 % performance increase with every €, which I wouldn't consider "not worth it". Considering that the base performance was already high as i5-3570k is one of the best CPUs available in terms of A3 performance, the relative performance boost was also remarkable.

Finish this article, please! https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/ArmA:_Introduction_to_Scripting It's the most important article to people willing to start scripting in Arma. The rest of the documentation is useless if the documentation of basics is lacking.

You could just change the affinity of every other process than arma3.exe via the Task Manager, but that might be quite workful solution.

The quality of SOS sounds surprised me. Some of the weapon sounds are very good indeed, but on the other hand, for example some of the vehicle sounds and weapon sounds sound a bit weird and/or unfinished. Based on the videos, I'd select JSRS because of the consistent quality of the sounds. SOS has both the best but also the worst sounds, and the inconsistency between the quality of different sounds got me to choose JSRS.

The CMSS-3D binaural simulation that Creative uses in its sound cards is superior compared to Dolby Headphones that Xonar uses, as Dolby is meant to simulate room-like or cinema-like 3D effect, which creates an awful echo effect when you use it with headphones. The CMSS-3D simulates the 3D effect without the horrible "room echo" that Dolby technologies use. Hardware test sites recommend eg. Creative Sound Blaster X series soundcards (that use CMSS-3D) to achieve the best 3D effect with binaural simulation. I have tested both Dolby and CMSS-3D binaural simulation personally too, and I agree with the test sites - while the 3D simulation sounds awful with Dolby, the level of 3D effect with CMSS-3D is impressive. I'd get personally Creative SBX with high-quality headphones (eg. from AKG, Sennheiser or Superlux) that produce vibrant and nuanced soundscape. Note that the quality of headphones affects the level of binaural simulation effect too, as proper headphones can play the binaural effect more accurately. Edit: christianmo is right, here's another high-quality vid with only two audio channels, left and right (stereo) but the 3D effect level is still almost creepy: Note that the recording behind the link contains strong violence, don't listen to it if you're sensitive person.

I'm having troubles understanding the general hate towards DayZ here. I think it rather improves A3 in the long run, as thanks to it, they got much more money and resources to fight against the issues with the engine now. It's all about the cross-benefits! :) PS. Chernarus Plus... please...! :p

Your idea is really good in my opinion, I bet that many realism units would love real humans as their opponents! :) A tip to streamers; battles like this streamed from spectate cam and commentated properly could be very exciting and unique!

I agree that AI should prefer sticking on the roads strongly. The roads should be like magnets to driving AI like it was described above, unless they happen to be in stealth mode. Could the AI scan their surroundings when they're driving on roads and have "memory" that would remember the last areas where there would be enough space to go offroad and intersecting roads that could be used to bypass the possibly upcoming obstacles? If there was an obstacle on the road, the convoy would go to "reverse" mode that would be otherwise like driving forward - bypassing minor obstacles and such - but just reversing, until they reached the point where they could use another road or simply go offroad to pass the obstacle. The reverse mode would be triggered primarily by unavoidable obstacle on the way and secondarily by proximity of other unit that's going to same direction in reverse mode (this would make the whole convoy reversing successfully possible even when there's intersecting traffig eg. at road junctions). There would be some free space between the reversing units in order to decrease the chance of bottleneck domino effect if an unit slows down temporarily for some reason. The reversing units in convoy would be like same magnet poles to each other - repeling each other the more, the closer they are to each other. The AI could also prefer U-turn to reversing, if it was possible on the given area.

Those are very good points Squirrel, I agree. The only issue I can think of that it would cause would be the overpowered CAS and in general air-to-ground vehicles. Maybe the mission maker would have to enable JTAC and/or target sharing (between units via comlinks) module in order to have the magic radar in the aerial vehicles? Without it the radar would be much less effective in spotting the enemies. I'd be very happy to see content related to electronic warfare in general in the game. C'mon Bohemia, why did you leave the only exciting dimension of the future setting out of the game...! :D