Jump to content

dasa

Member
  • Content Count

    44
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Everything posted by dasa

  1. dasa

    co10 Escape

    This mission seems to be limiting view distance to ~3k overriding game and server settings for view distance but I cant find the setting in any of the files. If you could point me in the right direction would be great. Thanks.
  2. Every time I try to remove the nightstalker from the black list or add it to a white list the server spawns me on the island with none of the normal options I know its op but its also convenient when its just a few friends taking it easy Am I doing something wrong? Thanks
  3. The performance gains are much bigger than i expected but i triple checked the results and there is well under 1fps difference between most runs at the same settings so if somebody else would like to give this a go to confirm or disprove my results it would be interesting Arma 3 stratis 1600-2133 15.369 % increase Arma 3 altis 1600-2133 11.477 % increase Test System 2600k ASUS Z77 MAXIMUS V GENE 2X4G SAMSUNG 2133 (10-10-10-24-1T used for all tests) Two 7970@1050\5600MHz crossfire is enabled not that it makes any difference at 1080p 2TB 7200RPM with OCZ Synapse 128G Cache Seasonic 1000W Platinum win7 64 cat 13.10 beta2 Tests were run at high detail 1920x1080 unlike last time on the alpha http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?153524-CPU-VS-RAM-Performance-amp-CPU-Threading-Benchmarked with 16g 2400 c10 ram being within $20-50 of 1600 c10 ram i think this is useful information for those considering replacing there pc and goes against the results of other ram performance tests in games due to most other games being gpu bottlnecked --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Late edit with some new tests i have run some new tests on ram timings but there is obviously some inconsistency with the tests since i only bothered to run them all once with 1600 8-8-8 performing the same as 9-9-9 in one test and 9-9-9 performing the same as 10-10-10 in another this is just a hickup one 7970 is now dead so im back to a single gpu for these tests minimum fps in altis was to inconsistent to bother including current ram prices in au 2x4g 1333 9-9-9 $93 1600 11-11-11 $89 1600 9-9-9 $103 1600 8-8-8 $109 1866 9-10-9 $105 2133 11-11-11 $102 2133 9-11-10 $115 2400 10-12-12 $125 2x8g 1333 9-9-9 $152 1600 11-11-11 $175 1600 9-9-9 $203 1866 10-11-10 $199 1866 9-10-9 $205 2133 11-11-11 $205 2133 9-11-11 $225 2400 10-12-12 $229
  4. Back again after doing a cpu vs ram comparison in 2013 with a 2600k Hope some of you find this of interest Test System 3770k -- 6700k Asus Maximus V Gene Z77-- Asus Maximus VIII Gene Z170 Samsung DDR3-1600c11 2x4GB 1.35v dual sided -- G.Skill DDR4-3200c14 2x8GB single sided EVGA GTX1070 SC (OC=+75 core +750 mem +112 powertune use on all tests) 64g Samsung 830, 1tb Sandisk ultra II, 3tb WD green Seasonic XP 1050 < tad overkill for the current system which has topped out at 306w from the wall Silverstone TJ08-EW Swiftech Apogee drive II 200mm Phobya rad + Silverstone Air Penetrator AP181 EK VGA Supreme HF Windows 10 Nvidia driver 372.70 Arma Detail settings Ultra 1080p aa off + increased view distance ~5000-6000 object ~3500 sorry cant remember exactly should have screenshot them Stratis benchmark_0.51 3770k was benched about a month before 6700k and there was some small updates that didnt seem to affect performance Also posted performance tests with Fallout 4, R6 Siege and AIDA64, XTU over here http://www.overclock.net/t/1611359/3770k-vs-6700k-in-fallout-4-arma-3-rainbow-six-siege-with-core-cache-memory-scaling-ddr3-1600c11-2133c9-ddr4-2133c15-3000c12-4000c17 Been playing on a liberation apex server with the new system and its sure running much nicer mostly 60fps+ but it has dropped to ~39fps a few times
  5. no ht doesn't help this is a very old test so things may have improved a bit with core scaling but as far as ht goes it still doesn't really help and this is true with most games even those dx11 games where it does help its mostly towards the max fps rather than the minimum and only ~5-7% gain dx12 may change this a bit and bring that up to ~15% in some situations but its still to early to know there is an exception to this rule and that is in games that are only optimized for more cores than your system has for example a dual core i3 cpu running a game that only supports a quad core cpu then ht can bring massive gains to average fps although you may still get some stuttering you wouldn't get with a real quad core
  6. ok stratis 103fps yaab 58fps first run while recording data 62fps second run when i wasnt i will reboot and run it a few more times cpu usage could be interesting but with 8 threads bouncing all over graphed its not exactly readable maybe i should try with ht off edit: with ht off cpu usage bounces around 40-80% over 4 cores performance may drop a few fps with ht off not much there does seem to be ~4fps variance in the yaab benchmark not sure if its just from the ai doing things different like destroying apc vs missing and maybe part of it is a performance hit from recording fps\usage ect.
  7. if so but it must be at a level well above ultra as at the ultra preset it scores 102fps and with 12k\12k view distance it drops to 70fps while ~5k\3k it was 84fps i can record a few more tests on the 6700k with the ultra preset tomorrow if you like just strat and yaab at the 24\7 oc ultra preset or something else?
  8. ddr3 will default to 1333 till you load its xmp profile for 1600c8 a 2400c10 kit will also default to 1333c9
  9. thanks for the feedback nothing wrong with the tests as far as i know just my crapy mistake with not taking a screenshot of the settings i upped the view distance a lot to ~5000-6000 and objects ~3000-3500 going by performance of the current system don't think it affects performance much but i also play with blur & dof off sharpness increased these may have been changed in the settings to 6700k system at 24\7 oc gets 102fps at ultra preset 1080p aa off no other changes http://cdn.overclock.net/f/f7/f77dcbef_hci1000aida64.jpeg thats a nice clock speed you got our of your 3770k and ram i had to deli the 3770k just to get it stable at 4.5ghz it only did ~4.1ghz before that the ram at 2400 c10 was stable if it posted but it often failed to post over 2133
  10. apex is a fair bit heavier on the gpu the gtx1070 is working fairly hard some of the time at 2560x1440 8xaa on everything
  11. first up sorry i believe my memory was way out with the view distance used in those tests i think it was closer to 5000\3000 after running it again ok gave yaab a quick run at 1080p ultra aa off 5000\3000 view distance stock clocks 44fps stable oc i settled on 4.7\4.6 3866c16-16-16-2t 62fps with sub timings tweaked its performing as good or better than the settings i used in the first lot of tests valken was running 1333 CL9 thats a hell of a lot slower than 1600c8 which matches 2133c11 im not saying dont do it as the gains may be noticeable but they will only be half what valken is seeing maybe try overclocking your current ram first who knows maybe it will do 2133c9 which is a bees dick away from 2400c10 as for testing stability testing i have just been going through this http://www.overclock.net/t/1569364/official-skylake-haswell-e-broadwell-e-24-7-ddr4-memory-stability-thread Google stressapp test via Linux Mint does a excellent job of finding stability problems with ram in a fraction of the time other tests take HCI does a very good job of stressing the link from ram to cpu cache you have to run one instance for every cpu thread and want to use most your available ram Realbench is a good cpu stability test
  12. some setups of the os? added extra detail to the op with os win10 latest nvidia driver that was used and basic arma settings i should have mentioned in the op that the 3770k vs 6700k isn't a perfect comparison as i did the first tests about a month before the 6700k tests due to the mb being listed as in stock when it wasnt then getting left at a startrack depo for two weeks by the time the lazy sods got around to delivering it i was on holidays there was some updates released in that time although they didnt seem to have much affect on performance the benchmark was extremely cpu limited with the gpu only running ~40% load at times while downclocking itself to ~1000mhz i can post some of the extra data that was recorded if you would like for example this is from fallout 4
  13. the main difference there is clock speed and ipc quad channel memory does result in higher latency though once overclocked to similar speeds haswell-e is almost on par with skylake but skylake does usually oc a little better http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=7&hl=en&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=pl&tl=en&u=http://pclab.pl/art69780-16.html&usg=ALkJrhi7wXIJK6YXYeAmrBYtTKRZnxzRVQ infiltrator_2k i would love to see you compare single vs dual vs quad channel ram performance in arma
  14. Yes it is If you click the link you will see that in aida64 it makes a huge difference to bandwidth and it seems that amra\skylake benefit from both bandwidth and latency Sorry should have screenshot it Ultra 1080p aa off i think view distance was around 3k object was probably ~1.5k cant remember exactly im afraid Depends a bit if your ram is 1600c8 then its fairly good as the old tests show and probably wont make a noticeable difference if you upgrade But if you have a slower 1600mhz kit then 2400c10 could bring a noticeable improvement As for weather or not this is worth the price to upgrade it i cant say benchmark_0.51 https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/142875-arma3mark-benchmark-your-arma-3/ I will take a look at YAAB nice results
  15. If this is accurate then the l4 cache while much faster than slower ram may not be all that much quicker than high speed ram so ddr4 may surpass it one day I guess that also explains why the performance drops off a bit in the second review as they were running higher ram speeds http://forums.aida64.com/topic/2864-i7-5775c-l4-cache-performance/​
  16. They have a 128m L4 cache​ which arma loves Here is another review with overclocking http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=7&hl=en&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=pl&tl=en&u=http://pclab.pl/art65154-26.html&usg=ALkJrhj0alS52oor9_1qlHHzwwoFrn2_1g
  17. found something that may interest some people here while looking through skylake reviews they test ddr3 & ddr4 performance in arma http://www.hardware.fr/articles/940-5/cpu-ddr4-vs-ddr3-pratique.html
  18. other than for a test to see if it works i wouldnt bother with 1.7v for 24\7 use it may be worth increasing the cpu pqi\vtt\vccio though incase its the memory controller is holding you back 1.05v is default anything up to 1.2v should be ok for 24\7 use from memory some run 1.35v apparently
  19. Its nice to see more people getting results there is so many gpu bottlnecked ram benchmarks out there its easy to doubt that my results were accurate till more people have a go St. Jimmy how did you go with tightening timings? best i managed was 2133 9-10-10 1t Now that you have your oc up to 4.7ghz your gains from the ram have probably gone up at least 1% due to the cpu being a bit more starved for bandwidth Its a shame this old 2600k cant post with the ram at 2400mhz
  20. i still have all the data but i did post up a few fps graphs on the first page there is a few clickable thumbs there although some of them look like there just the one there is also another in post 43 the improvement seems to be fairly consistent from everything i have seen other than a flat spot that may be a bit gpu limited in altis and some dud runs your system having triple channel ram and a cpu that has less performance per clock would be far less starved for memory bandwidth which would also explain the lower gains you are seeing from increasing it in most z77 ram performance reviews most game tests are done in a gpu limited scenario and faster ram makes no difference to gpu performance only cpu there is a few reviews i have seen that used a decent gpu and games like total war\starcraft 2 that had ~7% improvement and corsair made some wild claims about the bf4 alpha\beta before they tweaked the game to lower its cpu usage
  21. anything over 1600mhz is technically overclocking and i think it needs a z87 mb any higher speed ram that is made for haswell should allow you to just set it to spd in bios and it will take care of rest haswell also only supports 1.5v ram so for any ram that is over 1.5v i would suggest you have cooling better than stock on the cpu although its probably not needed that link was posted on whirlpool forum and somebody there with 1600 9-9-9 ram overclocked it to 2133 10-12-11 and had there performance increase in starcraft 2 by 10% there fps are also higher so maybe the corsair review system was slightly gpu limited corsair also noted when somebody had big gains from high speed ram in the bf4 alpha http://www.corsair.com/en-us/blog/2013/october/battlefield-4-loves-high-speed-memory many people flamed this as just corsair trying to sell more expensive ram as updates were released to improve cpu efficiency in bf4 thus reducing the cpu bottleneck and increasing the gpu bottleneck the gains from faster ram have probably shrunk but i havent seen it retested
  22. back on the alpha arma only used 2 cores well and to a lesser extent 3-4 i doubt this has changed much i also remember seeing benchmarks of phenom x6 outdoing higher clocked x4 so maybe it can make some use of six threads as well but these results seem to have been a one off as six core intel cpu and the newer 6-8 core amd fx dont seem to have those gains
  23. its a shame i dont have enough high speed ram to setup a ram drive for benchmarking arma as i suspect the head parking on my seagate 2tb 7200rpm may be throwing in the odd stutter despite the ssd cache which makes it very hard to get consistent min fps in my tests i did try a ram disk when i had 16g 1600mhz ram in and it didnt really effect the average fps edit i have just run some similar tests on thief for anyone that is interested http://forums.atomicmpc.com.au/index.php?showtopic=55771
  24. run the benchmark altis & stratis found in the workshop record the fps with fraps chart them with libreoffice calc
  25. i have my doubts about it being worth upgrading the ram over old ram just for the extra performance but it sure looks worth the extra cost to me for people that need new ram anyway the older tests i ran back on the alpha i also tested at 3.8ghz http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?153524-CPU-VS-RAM-Performance-amp-CPU-Threading-Benchmarked my cpu is clocked high but its 3 years old now i guess the performance of a i7 4770k is roughly equal to my 2600k@4.3ghz and at ~4.3ghz a 4770k would be about as fast as my 2600k at 4.9ghz the minimum fps are very random i wouldnt read to much into them i would need to average them over several runs to get a clear picture the difference between 1600c9 and 2133c9 looks about as big as the jump from 1333\1600c11 to 1600c9 to me ~5fps in stratis and 4-5fps in altis edit here is the 1600c10 vs 2133c9 runs so you can see where the min fps are edit again oops got them around the wrong way in that last graph stratis=altis and vice versa
×