arotished

Then we almost have the same computer, only I have two 780Ti@ 1200/2000Mhz, 2xSSD and 32GB ram.. Shitty optimized game...

Then you must have a supercomputer :)

Not fun to play with 1000 meter view distance.

Having to play with 30-40FPS in this game with my 4,5Ghz/780Ti SLi even if I go to default Standard videosettings is so crap.....

So, I was gonna sit down with the new Adapt campaign this weekend but....my FPS on anything related to Altis is just so terrible and its NOT fun to play thing game. Even my 4770 @ 4,5Ghz and 780Ti SLi cant handle default high settings. Have the developer completely looked away from any optimizing fixes?

Meaning you still are at least missing 20-30FPS

Tell me, what does NOT degrade your FPS in this crappy game?

My rig can bearly run this game on 30fps on default ULTRA settings. 4770K@4.5Ghz | EVGA GTX 780 Ti SLi @ 1200/7800Mhz | Asus Maximus VI Formula | 4x8GB Corsair Dominator Platinum 2133Mhz | Samsung 840 PRO 512GB SSD Raid0 | Corsair AX 1200i PSU

People that wants REAL realistic games should take a look at Project Reality....its a 8GB mod for battlefield 2. Currently the are working on a stand alone version based on the cry engine 3 and best of all, its free. http://www.realitymod.com/

I remember I used to do similar 5-6 years ago with every unnecessary programs running in the background of Windows XP just before I was starting 3DMark test and I saw some improvement on the FPS but I barely see that anymore. You have programs (game optimization) now that automatically shuts down stuff you dont need but these are more ment on the people with "low end" computers which needs the gain they can get there hands on.

Exactly! They simply dont know how to fix (or optimize) its very own engine and ofcourse, BIS is the last people on earth who is gonna admit just that. Its so sad because ARMA series is very good but I haven't even bothered trying the new ADAPT campaign yet because I know how laggy everything will be on Altis and sorry, Im not gonna turn down all my graphic options just to be able to get passed 60FPS (which is minimum FPS in any game for me) But, just to be clear...ARMA 3 looks amazing but you know what? so does Battlefield 4 and I can run that game on ultra with 150+ FPS 99% of the time. Not telling that you can compare these two games when it comes to gameplay BUT, when it comes to grapich you can...both games was released at the same time. One thing that I dont understand, is how people with much worse computer (on paper) than me can play this game. ---------- Post added at 09:21 ---------- Previous post was at 09:07 ---------- Yes, we have all different opinion and we should all respect that :) The thing you dont include in your reply is the general feeling in the game. With my settings I get around 30FPS in any SP missions on Altis and sorry, to not be able to even turn my character smooth and also, some FSP drops below 30FPS is destroying the gamefeeling for me. So, the low FPS dont have anything to do with gameplay as you mention, I agree with that. I also agree that CryEngine was the same when it came out, same with Cry Engine 2 and the last Cry Engine 3. When Crysis 3 first came out I got barely 15-20 FPS with everything on max on my previous primary rig, now I get a solid 50-60 with the same computer. This is called improvements because the developer have control and knowledge about their own engine and know how to fix the problem based on what feedback they get. ARMA 3 have seen been out for 1 year now Including the BETA time and to be honest, I haven't felt any improvements in the game...have you? Being on this forum for only a short time, I see that there are many clever minds here and many are trying to get to the bottom on WHY the game is performing so bad.....but sadly, their effort and threads seems to just be a discussion with them self and others who share their opinion. Anyway, I wanna finish this post with telling that I love ARMA and dont know how many hours I had with Operation Flashpoint when it came out. I hope BIS will be able to fix the game so that you actually can injoy both good graphics and have a good feeling in this game which already have a very good gameplay.

Knowlegde, nothing els.... :)

Yeah, don't get me started on the horrible FPS in DayZ. Down in the major towns, I barely get 30FPS on Very High settings and every rendering and AA disabled/low. And yes, their excise is that.....Engine Limitation...bullshit....

Wow....I bet you (not saying you are but just betting) are one of the people that think "ARMA IS BE BEST GAME IS THE WHOLE WORLD, DONT NEED ANY OTHER GAME" and "YOU DONT NEED GRAPHIC TO PLAY THIS GAME BECAUSE ITS NOT ABOUT GRAPHIC BUT ABOUT THE REALISTIC COMBAT SIMULATION"....hey, thats okey because you can have whatever opinion you want :) Anyway, for those who needs a refresh... http://boallen.com/fps-compare.html ---------- Post added at 13:49 ---------- Previous post was at 13:44 ---------- Or even better... http://frames-per-second.appspot.com/ I wonder if ARMA4 is also gonna be poorly optimized due to engine limitation? ---------- Post added at 15:20 ---------- Previous post was at 13:49 ---------- Thanks, tried these settings now on a custom mission on Altis and my avarage FPS running around on the ground on hill is 40-45 FPS with these settings. Not impressed..

I have posted the videosettings before but dont harm to post them again. Sampling: 100% Texture: Very High Objects: Very High Terrain: Very High Shadows: Standard Particle Quality: Very High Cloud Quality: Standard PIP: High HDR Quality: Standard Dynamic Lights: Very High PPAA: SMAA High Dynamic Lights: Ultra Overall View Distance: 3000 Object Draw Distance: 2000 Shadow View Distance: 100 Post-Processing: Bloom/Radial&RotationBlur/Depth Of Field = 0 SSAO: High FSAA: 4x ATOC: All Tree+Grass PPAA: FXAA - Very High Anisotropic Filtering: Very High V-Sync - Disabled. I know the FAN-BOYS have no problem playing ARMA3 on lowest settings because its the best compate simulator ever (guess they havent tried Project Reality) but I think its very sad that in 2014 we need to lower the graphics so much just to be able to play the game (meaning getting over 60FPS) with a "top-end" computer. I started playing ARMA3 in Alpha with my laptop (i7@3.8Ghz, 16GB 1600Mhz ram, SSD and GTX 680M SLi with was kinda happy with the performance because it was a Alpha BUT, to be honest....the performance didn't increase much when I tried the release version with my new stationary computer. I was always talking good about BIS because they were listening to the community but kinda loosing faith in them now, almost 1 years after Alpha release the performance still sucks and if we look at how badly ARMA2 was during its hole lifespan, I dont think BIS will be able to suddently pull a rabbit out of the hat now.

OS: Windows 8.1 x64 PCU: Intel i7 4770K 3.9GHz @ 4,5Ghz GPU: Geforce GTX 780Ti SLI @ 1150Mhz/7500Mhz RAM: corsair dominator platinum 4x8GB 2133Mhz CL9 PSU: Corsair 1200i Watt HD: 2x Samsung 840 PRO 512GB And with 3000 View Distance and 2200 Object, (the rest of the settings is a variation of High/Very High, no settings are put on max) I get barely 30 FPS on Atlis and massive drops...

OS: Windows 8.1 x64 PCU: Intel i7 4770K 3.9GHz @ 4,5Ghz GPU: Geforce GTX 780Ti SLI @ 1150Mhz/7500Mhz RAM: corsair dominator platinum 4x8GB 2133Mhz CL9 PSU: Corsair 1200i Watt HD: 2x Samsung 840 PRO 512GB And with 3000 View Distance and 2200 Object, (the rest High/Very High) I get barely 30 FPS on Atlis and massive drops... Guess my computer is a LOWEND computer :)

Sure you do :) Guess my 780Ti SLi cards are really just a pair of GTX 650 :)

Same computer gets 5331 points in Vally 1.0 (1920x1080 8xAA fullscreen, Extreme HD) and 3202 on Heaven (1920x1080 8xAA fullscreen, Ultra and Extreme Tessellation). Battlefield 4 runs a solid 200+ FPS in ULTA (but who plays on ultra anyway) with some drops down to 150 and 9000points in FIRESTRIKE Extreme HD... No, its not my computer, its the developer....BUT, at least ARMA 3 looks good now if we compare it to ARMA2 :)

wiiii, finally I can play a campaign on the laggy Atlis map :-D Gonna be fun to see FPS drops down to 5 on the campaing with my i7@4,5 and 780Ti SLi rig.....

What have BIS said about this subject? Sorry but I have just entered the forum so havent read every thread about optimalization (bet there is MANY) but have BIS told officially that they are working on it or is it like "This is what you get, we have tried to improve the performance since Alpha but we cant, you just have to live with it" attitude?

Upgrade the 690? To what? If you look at the post I just made, you can see that even I struggle with frams on my 780Ti SLi system. The GTX690 might be the best "single" card for gaming on the market right now so no point in chaning it. PS: Do you get 100% usage on "both" your cards in the 690 or are they struggling around 40-50% each as I have on my system? Better to invest in better cooling and overclock your CPU to 5,5Ghz or something as this game is so CPU demanding.

Someone have been watching to much Exorcist.

Thank you.

Bro, please tell me which part of my post you didnt understand and I will gladly explain it better for you...