NicotinKickballovich

I'd say something is wrong with your configuration there. Got a similar system and I run at 45 frames on multiplayer, in the very worst case drops down to 25 when the server gets bad. And if you upgraded your system 2 weeks ago did you make sure to install all the chipset, ATI catalyst and all the other drivers? Also make sure to play around with your graphics settings, like disabling vertical sync, using most settings to medium/high and lowering down your view distance. Last, but not least did you format your hard drives before upgrading? Because old chipset drivers might be interfering with your current chipset. My system: i5 3570k (Stock clock at 3.4ghz) HD 7750 1GB GDDR5 Standard 7200rpm HD Dual channel Crucial Ballistix 8GB DDR3 at 1600Mhz

I had the same exact CPU as yours and had it clocked to 3.6Ghz, which wasn't much of a help, also had 4gigs of DDR2 RAM and a HD7750. Could play at high settings at around 15-25 frames on multiplayer, while singleplayer was around 50. Recently made a pretty big upgrade as I went to a i5 3570k, Crucial Ballistix Sport DDR3 8GB RAM and a new motherboard to support it and the difference was immense. Can finally play at around 40-45 frames on multiplayer, on a good server that is and crank up the viewdistance even and that's still on stock speeds. And if you were to overclock it to around 4.5Ghz then that will give you a hell of a boost on top, best bang for the buck when it comes to this CPU, or you could go for an i5 4570k instead. Also I'd suggest to upgrade your graphics card, because my old NVIDIA GT240 wasn't really up for the task for ArmA 3 or any other newer games for a long time now.

Am afraid that the only thing you can do to boost your experience is to move to an intel processor. Gotta have at least an i5 2500k or so, I previously had a Q6600 overclocked to 3.6Ghz and that still wouldn't do as I got terrible frames in multiplayer, even on a good server after it runs for a while. Just recently moved to an i5 3570k and I was shocked about the results, as it increased to a stable 45 frames, but when the server starts to go bad I ussually drop to 25-30, which is enough for me. Don't think they'll optimize the engine for AMD CPU's, as their engine is based on single core performance and that's where AMD chips fail at sadly.

Mhm, modern arty should also be able to calculate their shots in a way all those shots would hit all at the same time, instead of just one after the other in a 2-3 second interval. For example the first shot, being the longest one is fired and right after that the turret changes the angle to a lower position before firing the next one, resulting in that shot catching up with the first one in order to land with it at the same time. Think it might be actually possible to pull it off with what's already in-game, but for really short distances as you can't aim where you can't see, but it would be nice to see to have that in the arty computer too.

I find that hard to believe that you're getting 80-100fps in SP with a Q6600+HD7770. Did you overclock it too or is it at stock? Mine's OC'd to 3.2Ghz so far and am getting 60 frames in SP at most. How much and what type of RAM are you using and also what's your motherboard? And also are you using a SSD? As for my graphics card it's pretty much the same as yours, which is a HD7750.

Think your only option now is to rebind your controls yourself. Mine got messed up too after one of the patches, so what I did was reset them manually, one by one.

Did it help though? I remember some people having their game break after the recent patches, if validation doesn't work might have to do a full reinstall, because this surely doesn't sound like a hardware error. If that doesn't work then maybe something's wrong with your driver's. Try updating your nvidia and so forth drivers.

You need to be more specific, like name the exact specs. What processor you got, which graphics card model, how much and what type of RAM etc. Your problem however sounds like corrupted data or something. Try right clicking ArmA 3 in steam, go to properties and there should be an option to verify integrity of your files. See if that helps

You have to wait for it to finish seeking and locking on. There will be an orange circle on the left that looks like a "No smoking sign" once that dissapears and you still got the seeking circle green that's when you are fully locked in.

Nah... we're talking about the raw CPU power. The problem is ArmA uses so many scripts/calculations and so forth it performs more like 3DsMax, Photoshop and so forth that will eat up your resources quite fast. Intel is made to better handle that area, while AMD CPU's are more meant for gaming. A Q6600 like mine for example scores 6.7 in benchmarks against a FX 8350 which is only a little ahead at a score of 7.9 and keep in mind the Q6600 is a 2007 processor and pretty old and without hyper-threading technology, while the FX 8350 was released in 2012 or so. I don't mean to start any war or what so ever, I do agree they haven't optimized AMD CPU's for ArmA, which is silly. But is that even possible with the current engine? Doubt so. Because ArmA simply requires all those scripts/calculations to perform the way it does. The only way I see how that can be achieved if all cores can be used to their full potential, but it doesn't ever reach that. Or a complete engine rewrite in the very worst case.

Warfare really is something, especially benny's edition in ArmA 3. Not sure if there are any better ones out there yet, but if there are let me know! So far am having a blast on what it can offer, especially commanding my own squad and lead an attack with them. Most people just go with tanks and such, but they're such a hassle just too easy to lose if going in alone. And a lot of people fail to realize the full potential of AI on the maps too. I however love to bring a squad of AI with me and set up ambush spots with static AT launchers and so forth on hilltops and what not. Not to mention the lovely mines along important routes hahah.

My single 7750 does well so no complaints there. Previously had a GT 240 and that wouldn't cut ArmA 3 that's for sure, while it did with ArmA 2.

Haven't tested it myself, but my guess is you have to have a laser designator equipped + batteries. Pick your target and bring it out and just press LMB to target it and give out the command to shoot. At least that's how it worked in ArmA 2.

Yeah, while the plane drones have more fuel capacity which is less noticable if you use darter's that have a really small fuel capacity you'll definitely notice it. Don't know how long they really last, but might be 30-60mins tops.

Yeah, if you load in tracer rounds in a 6.5mm or a 7.62mm gun and shoot it through doors, really thin walls like the shacks in ArmA 3 you'll actually see how they penetrate and get their velocity and angle messed up. But I do find it a little rediculous when shooting through glass, almost acts as if it was as thick as the glass on armored vehicles.

There's a quick temporary solution for that until you get yourself a decent mousepad. What you can do is find yourself a book or anything that has a pretty even, hard and solid cover. I got a wooden table myself so it did the trick perfectly fine until getting a pad for myself. Had no trouble aiming or what so ever.

Unbelievable. Shows how much AMD performs compared to intel per core. I run at 20-30fps in MP even on wasteland with my ancient rig, but if it's a poor server that can't handle things then it does drop to 15fps, as for warfare like benny's start with 45fps until it drops down to 20 at very worst case. What I got is this: Overclocked Q6600 G0 stepping from 2.4 to 3.2GHZ so far, planning to still increase to 3.6 or more depending how far this chip will go. Cooler Master Evo 212 OCZ Ripper DDR2 RAM PC2-6400 at 800Mhz - 4GB Standard Samsung 7200RPM HDD MB: P35-DS4 rev 2.0 (Beast of that time, ideal for overclocking) ASUS ATI HD 7750 1GB GDDR5 OC edition As for in-game options keep my view distance at 2000, object distance 1600 and most settings high. Motion blur enabled, AA x8, can't say I remember the rest.

Who knows, if I remember right back in ArmA 1 the devs brought the warfare mode in the later stages of the game, with one of their patches as a surprise. After all the people, especially mission makers fell in love with it they most likely decided to leave it to the community's wits and imagination after ArmA 2. Benny pretty much made the perfect thing already so why would they waste time on making a new one? All it needs of course is polishing/balancing, especially with the uniform/vest bugs and so forth. Remember ArmA 3 has just officially released and my guess is there is a lot to come still, even if it comes bit by bit.

I'd say nights are pretty accurate if there are no nearby light sources, even if there's some moonlight should be barely able to see anything at all. I've been to Turkey before and they have the exact climate/terrain and so forth as Stratis and Altis and I couldn't see shit either if I walked through dark places. I figured since the terrain in general is lighter then it would make things easier, but nope. On a clear night it was dark to a point I had to bring up my cellphone just to see if I don't trip over anything.

Loved the performance on Altis, looks like you guys really do an amazing job at making your scripts work nicely, unlike all them wasteland missions that drag you down to 10fps. Had a stable 40 on your server and definitely looking forward to wait till it gets finished and polished up with all the new content that's coming out soon :)

You should be lucky you're even getting 30fps, most get 5-15 on such MP missions, especially wasteland. Anything above 24 frames should be more than playable, especially with post-process settings enabled.

I got a feeling they're already working on it, I just hope it will come out nice and smooth, unlike all the current "rushed" missions that are currently there on Altis. Some offer 30fps, while some already managed to make a wasteland mission which looks decent action wise, but horrible fps wise. Only managed to get 10 frames on it hahah.

Hand-grenades in ArmA 3 are actually pretty deadly, I've thrown more than a few and most of the time it ends up with the enemy dead. Just look at this video where someone demonstrates how they work if for example thrown in the middle of a crowd. My guess is you had them thrown too far or they had some sort of an obstacle, blocking all or most shrapnel from reaching your target. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_jM6Pz3qqw

Yup, if you'd get hit by a .408 and other anti-material rounds like that then you'd pretty much lose your arm or leg, so it's realistic. Hell it can even penetrate brick walls and tanks in real life, so you could imagine what a hit like that would do to a living person. And Jurra is right, this isn't battlefield or some standard fps and never will be, you took down a chopper and that's the most important thing, if you want scores, rewards, ranks or anything like that then ArmA can't be for you.

Use the T key and then the Seek signal will turn green and there will also be a hold fire signal in orange. Just wait until it locks on and fire as soon as the hold fire signal goes away on the left side of the screen.