Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Optimising Arma 2/OA

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Optimising Arma 2/OA

    Hey everyone!

    Ive been trying to squeeze every last bit of performance out my computer and achieve optimal FPS! I have noticed that performance generally stays the same regardless of settings. I have no idea why....? Bottleneck perhaps or poorly coded game?

    Here are my specs:

    AMD X4 640 3.0GHZ Quad Core
    4GB RAM (Arma only uses about 1.5GB when running)
    EVGA Nvidia GTX560 (superclocked edition) 336 cores, 865mhz core, 2GB DDR5 @ 2004mhz
    Corsair GS700 700w PSU
    Seagate 1TB 7200rpm 32mb cache

    System is completely clean, Defrag, temp files, registry etc.

    Seems to get bogged down whenever we play that big oil refinery mission, but I am assuming that is nornal lol. Any tips would be greatly appreciated!
    Last edited by JonathanEnger; 01-24-2012, 10:45 AM.
    sigpic
    It's always gone....

  • #2
    Re: Optimising Arma 2/OA

    Well, it really depends on the settings you have turned on/up in the game. If you find that you get a lot of FPS drops in more populated areas, such as some of the forests of Chernarus or in places with a lot of AI, then I'd suggest turning of Post Processing (if you have it on) and turning down Anti-Aliasing as well as Anisotropic Filtering, as this should increase you frame rate a decent amount. You computer seems to be a pritty good rig, you've got a decent amount of processor power and hard drive speed.
    Blackpython / ZephyrDark
    Former 31st RECCE Member

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Optimising Arma 2/OA

      Jonathan i'll let some of of the tech gurus chime in on your hardware but I'll say that putting ARMA on an SSD was the single best upgrade I ever made. I went from a 10K raptor to the SSD and it made a huge difference in texture rendering. No more flickering. Your Vid card looks killer and your cpu is quad core so I would consider one of the new SSD's.


      PS...ARMA is a resource hog. I played with many people who never got above 20-30 fps due to the considerable tech requirements. Dont' think that would be the case with your rig though.
      sigpic
      |TG-1st|Grunt
      ARMA Admin (retired)
      Pathfinder-Spartan 5

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Optimising Arma 2/OA

        Grunt is here :)

        Make sure vsync is off in addition to what Zephyr said.
        |TG-189th| Unkl
        ArmA 3 Game Officer
        Dean of Tactical Gamer University
        189th Infantry Brigade Member
        SUBMIT A RIBBON NOMINATION OR CONTACT AN ARMA ADMIN
        "We quickly advance in the opposite direction and take cover in a house on the SW side of town." - BadStache

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Optimising Arma 2/OA

          Thanks guys for the responses! Would putting ARMA on its own partition help any? Buying a SSD will have to wait until I save up more money :-P
          sigpic
          It's always gone....

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Optimising Arma 2/OA

            You can digest some info about partitioning just so you know what you're getting into. Personally, I wouldn't bother. The gigabytes of expansions and addons for this game would probably eat up the partition you setup for it anyway ;)
            On the plus side, if the game becomes corrupt or broken, format the partition and reinstall from scratch :) <-- Speaking from experience, you may end up nuking the game and reinstalling once or twice if encountering errors after some updates. I grew tired of troubleshooting for hours at a wack. Delete and resinstall! :D

            Originally posted by Wikipedia:
            [url
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_(computing)][/url]

            Benefits of multiple partitions

            Creating more than one partition has the following advantages:
            Separation of the operating system (OS) and program files from user files. This allows image backups (or clones) to be made of only the operating system and installed software.
            Having a separate area for operating system virtual memory swapping/paging.
            Keeping frequently used programs and data near each other.
            Having cache and log files separate from other files. These can change size dynamically and rapidly, potentially making a file system full.
            Use of multi-boot setups, which allow users to have more than one operating system on a single computer. For example, one could install Linux, BSD, Mac OS X, Microsoft Windows or other operating systems on different partitions of the same hard disk and have a choice of booting into any compatible operating system at power-up.
            Protecting or isolating files, to make it easier to recover a corrupted file system or operating system installation. If one partition is corrupted, other file systems may not be affected.
            Raising overall computer performance on systems where smaller file systems are more efficient. For instance, large hard drives with only one NTFS file system typically have a very large sequentially accessed Master File Table (MFT) and it generally takes more time to read this MFT than the smaller MFTs of smaller partitions.
            "Short Stroking", which aims to minimize performance-eating head repositioning delays by reducing the number of tracks used per hard drive. The basic idea is that you make one partition approx. 20-25% of the total size of the drive. This partition is expected to: occupy the outer tracks of the hard drive, and offer more than double the throughput less than half the access time. If you limit capacity with short stroking, the minimum throughput stays much closer to the maximum. This technique, however, is not related to creating multiple partitions, but generally just creating a partition lesser size than available on the disk.
            For example a 1 TB disk might have an access time of 12 ms at 200 IOPS (at a limited queue depth) with an average throughput of 100 MB/s. When it is partitioned to 100 GB (and the rest left unallocated) you might end up with an access time of 6 ms at 300 IOPS (with a bigger queue depth) with an average throughput of 200 MB/s.

            Disadvantages of multiple partitions

            Creating more than one partition has the following disadvantages, as compared to having a single partition spanning the same disk area:
            Reduces the total space available for user storage on the disk, as it forces the operating system to duplicate certain file system administration areas on the disk for each partition.
            Reduces overall disk performance on systems where data is accessed regularly and in parallel on multiple partitions, because it forces the disk's read/write head to move back and forth on the disk to access data on each partition and to maintain and update file system administration areas on each partition. It also prevents disk optimizers from moving all frequently accessed files closer to each other on the disk, which could reduce the number and distance of required head movements. Files can still be moved closer to each other on each partition, but those areas themselves will still be far apart on the disk. (See "short stroking" considerations above.) This issue does not apply to SSD drives as access times on those are neither affected by nor dependent upon relative sector positions.
            Increases disk fragmentation because it lowers the average size of continuous free blocks on each partition - as compared to a single partition of the same overall size - after the same amount of data has been written to them.
            May prevent using the whole disk capacity, because it may break free capacities apart. For example, if you have a disk with two partitions, each with 3 GBs free (hence 6GBs in total), you can't copy a 4GB DVD image file on that disk, because none of the partitions will actually provide enough space for that - even though you have more than enough free capacity in total on the disk. If the same files on those two partitions would have been stored on a single partition spanning the whole disk, then the 4GB file could be easily stored in the 6GB of free space.
            Slows down moving data between different parts of the same physical disk[5]. When moving data from one partition to other, the operating system actually has to copy the contents of the data file, even though it still remains on the same device in a single copy/instance. When using a single partition, moving data between directories will only require altering the file system administration areas, and the actual contents of the file will not be copied or moved inside the disk/device, thus resulting in a significantly faster completion of the operation.
            Hurts portability and might impose constraints on how entities might be linked together inside the file system. For example: the NTFS file system allows hard links to be created only as long as both the link and the referenced file reside inside the same volume/partition[6]. Also under Windows if you're referencing a file on another partition, you can do that only by specifying the partition's assigned drive letter - which, however, might change with time and depending on the drives installed. This renders references invalid and dependent on actual drive letter assignment, which is not an issue if you have to reference files/directories only on the same partition, as in this case you can use directory-relative or root-relative references, without including the drive/partition letter.
            Q: How many members of Congress does it take to change a light bulb?
            A: None. There is nothing wrong with the light bulb; its conditions are improving every day. Any reports of its lack of incandescence are delusional spin from the liberal media. That light bulb has served honorably, and anything you say undermines the lighting effort. Why do you hate freedom?!?

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Optimising Arma 2/OA

              Thank you for that! I agree it would be good to be able to format if something becomes corrupt, but after researching and testing my HDD with several HDD tuning programs, I have come to the conclusion my HDD is good enough to game off of as is. I am still trying to figure out what the bottle neck is... When I run Flight Simulator X (which will push your hardware to its limits as Arma does if not more) I get framerate spikes. 70 FPS one second 15 the next, 15, 70, 20, 35, 70 etc etc. I am stumped :( This may be what is happening in Arma as well....it seems even if I lower settings the frame rate only minimally increases which isnt worth the trade off for poor looks (No AA, Texture filtering or Post Process)
              sigpic
              It's always gone....

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Optimising Arma 2/OA

                View distance will be your biggest limiter on performace. If you find your FPS too low, try adjusting your view distance down. On Alpha, this is done via mouse wheel, Show Status, Settings, view/draw distance (slider). Turning off grass is also a quick FPS boost, on the same settings page.

                With Arma Launcher, or adjusting your launch parameters, you can set Arma to use more RAM (up to 2GB) and more processor cores.
                One very important piece of info you did not include is your OS version. If it is 32-bit, you will be greatly limited on how much RAM applications can use (and how much of your 4GB will be actualily seen by your system). If it's 64-bit Vista or Windows 7, things definitely improve (and doubling down to 8GB of RAM would be a cheap and quick way to make things speed up).

                The stuttering you described sounds like too aggressive View Distance settings to me (if I set it too high, it gets jerky around towns/villages/etc).
                sigpic
                [squadl][conduct]



                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Optimising Arma 2/OA

                  Do not be disheartened, if you go to the BIS forums you will see people that have chased the golden fleece of optimising Arma. They have thrown the highest, newest, costliest hardware at it only to have Arma scoff at their efforts. The first thing you need to do is quit chasing the frame count, turn it off, forget it completely, play the game on the settings that the game feels good to you. My best thing was the addition of the SSD (this game loads from your hard drive constantly), the SSD does it fast and without stutter. You do not need the big expensive SSD, the 64 gb is big enough for your OS and Arma but it is pushing it. Use your hard drive for all the apps not needed for the basic use of Windows, use it for storage ssd's should not be wasted for that. An 80 or 90 gb ssd would be just right, watch for sales at Newegg, I have a Crucial C300 that has run flawlessly for me.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Optimising Arma 2/OA

                    Thanks Chief for your wisdom! I have been looking and I saw the SSD you are talking about for $116! Might have to get it ;)
                    sigpic
                    It's always gone....

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Optimising Arma 2/OA

                      Originally posted by ChiefBoatsRet View Post
                      Do not be disheartened, if you go to the BIS forums you will see people that have chased the golden fleece of optimising Arma. They have thrown the highest, newest, costliest hardware at it only to have Arma scoff at their efforts. The first thing you need to do is quit chasing the frame count, turn it off, forget it completely, play the game on the settings that the game feels good to you.
                      ^^this^^

                      Watching my frame rates drove me crazy, so i turned them off and enjoyed the game much more since i was focusing on playing and not my framerates :)
                      Q: How many members of Congress does it take to change a light bulb?
                      A: None. There is nothing wrong with the light bulb; its conditions are improving every day. Any reports of its lack of incandescence are delusional spin from the liberal media. That light bulb has served honorably, and anything you say undermines the lighting effort. Why do you hate freedom?!?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by ThirdSin View Post
                        ^^this^^

                        Watching my frame rates drove me crazy, so i turned them off and enjoyed the game much more since i was focusing on playing and not my framerates :)
                        My framerate drives me crazy. unfortunately, I need the frame counter to know if I'm recording or not on fraps. It drives me crazy.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Optimising Arma 2/OA

                          Yah, I found that my frames are usual okay for about an hour and then they bog down. I ran my GPU monitor had it displaying in game GPU statistics and by 30mins of gameplay I was pushing 1.5GB of graphics memory. Luckily, I have 2GB of DDR5 RAM in my GPU (People with less VRAM would experience lower FPS more quickly) and I ran the flush command (done by pressing "Left Shift" + "-" on the numberpad and typing "flush") and cleaned out my VRAM. This instantly cured my FPS woes. I believe what it is doing is when you run out of VRAM it starts having to pull off textures constantly off of the HDD,(instead of loading them once) causing the lower FPS, as opposed to being able to pull it off of the VRAM. This would explain why when I lower my settings there isnt any noticeable increase in my framerates. Obviously, this is effective because you do not need the VRAM to be loaded with textures from a town 2 clicks away :P! Make sure you have Video Memory set to Default in your game settings so it utilizes all available VRAM. Hopefully somebody else can try this out and see if it fixes their problems!

                          Jonathan :)
                          Last edited by JonathanEnger; 01-25-2012, 02:10 AM.
                          sigpic
                          It's always gone....

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Optimising Arma 2/OA

                            i launch with arma 2 launcher and use the maxmem command of 2047, if i dont it will crash.
                            sigpic

                            Former Pathfinder
                            Former ARMA Admin
                            Former ARMA TGU instructor
                            Former TGU Headmaster
                            Current Noob
                            Im also pretty bad at World of Tanks -

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Optimising Arma 2/OA

                              Its obvious Arma has some serious issues when it comes to VRAM and RAM management and efficiency. Oh well, luckily the knowledge source out there is smart enough and large enough to come up with fixes to 95% of its issues!
                              sigpic
                              It's always gone....

                              Comment

                              Connect

                              Collapse

                              TeamSpeak 3 Server

                              Collapse

                              Advertisement

                              Collapse

                              Twitter Feed

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X