When is Arma 2 going to be fixed for vista?

When I first got the game I assumed that it was such a machine killer that my system just wasn't quite up to the task getting no more than 25 fps in any given area dipping as low as 10 at times. the strange thing however is how little these numbers changed between very low and very high settings.

Im running it on

core 2 duo q6600 2.4 OC'd to 2.7,

8 gig of DDR2 ram,

Nvidia BFG 280GTX

Vista 64

Now I know that my possessor isn't the fastest in the world but with my combined rig I should definitely exceed 25 fps on very low settings.

From reading other threads on this forum its come to light that Vista is to blame for these shortcomings And would like to know when this is going to be fixed because its ruining a great game for me.

I don't feel that I should have to go through the hassle of installing xp just so that a game that should run fine already does.

When I first got the game I assumed that it was such a machine killer that my system just wasn't quite up to the task getting no more than 25 fps in any given area dipping as low as 10 at times. the strange thing however is how little these numbers changed between very low and very high settings.

Im running it on

core 2 duo q6600 2.4 OC'd to 2.7,

8 gig of DDR2 ram,

Nvidia BFG 280GTX

Vista 64

Now I know that my possessor isn't the fastest in the world but with my combined rig I should definitely exceed 25 fps on very low settings.

From reading other threads on this forum its come to light that Vista is to blame for these shortcomings And would like to know when this is going to be fixed because its ruining a great game for me.

I don't feel that I should have to go through the hassle of installing xp just so that a game that should run fine already does.

You say Vista is to blame

What did microsoft say when you contacted them about his problem ?

When I first got the game I assumed that it was such a machine killer that my system just wasn't quite up to the task getting no more than 25 fps in any given area dipping as low as 10 at times. the strange thing however is how little these numbers changed between very low and very high settings.

Im running it on

core 2 duo q6600 2.4 OC'd to 2.7,

8 gig of DDR2 ram,

Nvidia BFG 280GTX

Vista 64

Now I know that my possessor isn't the fastest in the world but with my combined rig I should definitely exceed 25 fps on very low settings.

From reading other threads on this forum its come to light that Vista is to blame for these shortcomings And would like to know when this is going to be fixed because its ruining a great game for me.

I don't feel that I should have to go through the hassle of installing xp just so that a game that should run fine already does.

Runs great on my laptop with Vista 32. Core 2 Duo, 7950GTX Go 512.

Stable even with Vista64 :)

Has anyone actually got anything helpful to say?

Has anyone actually got anything helpful to say?

1. You ask for help blaming something.

2. Someone comes here and agrees.

3. Someone comes here and disagrees, saying it works fine for them, its your fault, then they get fired up.

4. 10 pages later an admin/mod locks your topic with no official support offered.

5. The cycle continues.

My guess is your 8gb of RAM may cause some problems, have you tried limiting to 3gb or so?

Did you tried the older Nvidia driver 182.50? Maybe you are victim off http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=73232.

Give it a try and delete you ArmA2.cfg before you start the game with the "new" driver version.

Suma That's interesting, what fps do you get and at what settings?

Maxter Its worth a go, I will try it when I get home.

Philll I meant no offence, I just wanted suggestions as to how I can fix my issue rather than sarcastic comment about me blaming microsoft rather than the game. I'm happy for the people who the game is running well for but I still doesn't help me much. still I was a little blunt in my response and for that I apologies. :)

---------- Post added at 12:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:51 PM ----------

technolgickill I am running 182.50 but i havnt tried deleting the ArmA2.cfg, I will give it a go thanks.

perhaps arma 2 was not optimized for vista.

which OS was used for the development of arma 2?

Also, try installing and running this;

http://www.iobit.com/gamebooster.html

It's excellent and free!

I keep hearing about setting a winxp flag to help boost performance or even renaming the exe to crysis64. How and where do I set this flag?

Having same issues as you mate

I run:

Vista Ultimate 64

Q6850 3ghz

8 gig DDR3

GTX295

Also i renamed my exe to Crysis64.exe and i must admit i get an extra 10 fps :)

I get 20 to 30 fps now, even withmy rig most of the config is set to normal/disabled and a couple on high

I should be able to have everything set to MAX :)

I have same problem and I am getting same fps (20-30) as you even when I have alot shittier computer.

Vista 32bit

AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ 3Ghz

4 gig RAM

GF 8800 GTS old version

I know that there are people on this thread that they that use vista wiv no problems but it seams that majority are seeing best results on xp with mid range machines. What are the people who are succeeding with vista doing that the rest of us are not?

I keep hearing about setting a winxp flag to help boost performance or even renaming the exe to crysis64. How and where do I set this flag?

I'd also like to know............

Anybody care to assist?

:)

Using high end rigs seems to be what Vista likes best, vista itself is a resource hog as i'm sure most of you are aware, despite many recent patches & improvements i believe XP to be the better gaming platform until W7 goes official.

I think all people have vista-only give xp a chance: 20-30% more fps. Thats the experience of many people with dual boot system in many forums. win7 give lower fps too. Its nonsense to say "vista runs great". Its the question, HOW great...

win7 4900 armamarks

xp 5300 armamarks

in gaming scenarios (big city) the difference is bigger (28fps (win7) to 40fps (xp))

Hi Guys ,

My Specs

Q6600 2.4

8gigs ram= For ARMA2 only need 4!

Vista 64

Zotac GT8800 Ampted

P5Q Pro MB

sorry to jump in but I had a major problem with graphics in this game even though you could throw whatever game at it before and it worked like a dream. I have all the latest drivers and thought I should remove 4 gigs and give it a go:yay: bloody game works like a dream now.

Why shouild you have to do this in a 2009 game I do not know, I hope this helps someone.

Zone That's interesting, did it just improve graphicly or did you see a framerate increase as well?

I found out how to apply the winxp flag in an other thread and thought id post it here as well for the few of you also unsure.

Right click on the shortcut on your desktop, select properties. Go to the end of the "Target" field, and type "-winxp". Make sure there is a space between it and the location of the .exe file. So it should look like

Code:

C:\Program Files\...\ArmA2.exe -winxp

I found out how to apply the winxp flag in an other thread and thought id post it here as well for the few of you also unsure.

Right click on the shortcut on your desktop, select properties. Go to the end of the "Target" field, and type "-winxp". Make sure there is a space between it and the location of the .exe file. So it should look like

Code:

C:\Program Files\...\ArmA2.exe -winxp

Ta

Attempt at above met with failure..........

IMG]http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee266/Viper159GAR/winxp.jpg[/img]>100kb

Where am I erring?

I found out how to apply the winxp flag in an other thread and thought id post it here as well for the few of you also unsure.

Right click on the shortcut on your desktop, select properties. Go to the end of the "Target" field, and type "-winxp". Make sure there is a space between it and the location of the .exe file. So it should look like

Code:

C:\Program Files\...\ArmA2.exe -winxp

did it improve performance for you?

i have poor performance in Vista as well, but maybe blame should be assigned to my processor.

Q6600 (3.2Ghz)

4870 512MB

- also tested GTX285 1GB -

4GB RAM

Vista 64

my ArmaII Mark score is consistently ~3000. i average 25-30 fps while playing the campaign. i get this performance regardless of settings (all very low, all very high...doesn't matter). performance between the 4870 512 and GTX285 1GB is identical. so from this it looks like i may be limited by my CPU.

I'm going to install Windows 7 tonight and see if it makes any difference at all.

you guys say "verylow or low settings, every one of you have NVDA.

1) what is your display and fillrate?

2)Vista can lock Vsync, so a 60hz LCD will be in the 30s or lower if you cant hit the 60hz. Maybe why the "-winxp" flag is helpfull...

3) make sure your NVDA 3D CP is not using AA ect, and you can try different Profiles aka crysis ect.