Arma 2 Benchmarks

Arma 2 is not CS:S, BF2, or UT3. If you consider a kill a "frag", this is not the game for you.
 
SoAndSo said:
SORRY SIR!
/salutes

a kill is a frag. Get over yourself.
Click to expand...

Calm down. My point is that Arma is on a different playing field, one that does not cater to the typical "twitch-shooter" style of play. Games like the three I mentioned above are not complicated, they have simplified controls and simplified realism to make it easier and faster to play. Most FPS gamers, at least in my experience, are more in the moment, spending 30 minutes to set up a couple shots from range is not in their scope of enjoyment.

Of course I've been an avid CS player for longer than I can remember, and I find BF2 good mindless fun as well... In my advancing age I'm slowly becoming bored with walled maps and deathmatch gameplay. :eek:
 
saedrin said:
Calm down. My point is that Arma is on a different playing field, one that does not cater to the typical "twitch-shooter" style of play. Games like the three I mentioned above are not complicated, they have simplified controls and simplified realism to make it easier and faster to play. Most FPS gamers, at least in my experience, are more in the moment, spending 30 minutes to set up a couple shots from range is not in their scope of enjoyment.

Of course I've been an avid CS player for longer than I can remember, and I find BF2 good mindless fun as well... In my advancing age I'm slowly becoming bored with walled maps and deathmatch gameplay. :eek:
Click to expand...

yup same here. COD4 was boring for me
 
saedrin said:
Calm down. My point is that Arma is on a different playing field, one that does not cater to the typical "twitch-shooter" style of play. Games like the three I mentioned above are not complicated, they have simplified controls and simplified realism to make it easier and faster to play. Most FPS gamers, at least in my experience, are more in the moment, spending 30 minutes to set up a couple shots from range is not in their scope of enjoyment.

Of course I've been an avid CS player for longer than I can remember, and I find BF2 good mindless fun as well... In my advancing age I'm slowly becoming bored with walled maps and deathmatch gameplay. :eek:
Click to expand...


i am a twitchy deathmatch gamer. i cut my teeth on ut2k3, ut2k4 and the CoD series. I LOVE operation flashpoint, its so much more satisfying to be sneaky and work as a squad etc than just to run and gun. ARMA 2 will be this way for me as well. Not everyone is a stereotypical "fps doug" gamer :)
 
Demo is running like a POS

Found out that Vsync if forced on (WHY FFS?!) anyhow it turns out theres no option for it, so people have been using ATI Tray Tools to force vsync off (it doesn't work from the CCC) However ATI Tray Tools doesn't install correctly on x64 OS's because of driver signing.

I'm running Win7 x64, is there any way to force vsync off in this damn game...I have the steam demo version BTW. I'm also fairly sure that Crossfire isn't working, but one unburnable bridge at a time eh?
 
there are workarounds to get tray tools to play nice with Vista/Win7. none of them appealed to me though. for testing purposes, when you boot you can press F8 and select the "disable driver signing enforcement" option. this is obviously not a permanent solution. there's some program that automates the boot w/o driver signing process. not an elegant fix IMO. really the developers just need to add an in-game vsync setting. i really hope this is planned for a future patch, but ARMA1 still doesn't have this option.

read up on the BIS forums. several people claim to have CF working. i can't remember the exact fix, something along the lines of adding "-winxp" to the command prompt...or maybe it was changing the executable to "crysis.exe". i can't remember.
 
Porter_ said:
there are workarounds to get tray tools to play nice with Vista/Win7. none of them appealed to me though. for testing purposes, when you boot you can press F8 and select the "disable driver signing enforcement" option. this is obviously not a permanent solution. there's some program that automates the boot w/o driver signing process. not an elegant fix IMO. really the developers just need to add an in-game vsync setting. i really hope this is planned for a future patch, but ARMA1 still doesn't have this option.

read up on the BIS forums. several people claim to have CF working. i can't remember the exact fix, something along the lines of adding "-winxp" to the command prompt...or maybe it was changing the executable to "crysis.exe". i can't remember.
Click to expand...

Yeah i've investigated this a little further.

I disabled UAC and grabbed a little hack to disable drivier signing, I eventually got it working but found out the option is force vsync = ON?

Either way it didn't work, locked at 60fps on the menu still.
 
PrincessFrosty said:
Yeah i've investigated this a little further.

I disabled UAC and grabbed a little hack to disable drivier signing, I eventually got it working but found out the option is force vsync = ON?

Either way it didn't work, locked at 60fps on the menu still.
Click to expand...

i responded to your post in the ARMA2 hype thread. you need to download the latest beta version of ATT to get the force vsync off option. it's all a giant pain in the ass IMO.
 
Porter_ said:
i responded to your post in the ARMA2 hype thread. you need to download the latest beta version of ATT to get the force vsync off option. it's all a giant pain in the ass IMO.
Click to expand...

Oops missed that, thanks I'll give that a go now.

*edit*

Thanks, thats kicked it into gear, getting about 120fps in the menu now, dumped it at 2560x1600 with all low and jumped in a 32 player game and getting about 20-40fps...

And there is still massive amounts of input lag for the mouse, the aiming is just terrible.
 
Last edited:
PrincessFrosty said:
Oops missed that, thanks I'll give that a go now.

*edit*

Thanks, thats kicked it into gear, getting about 120fps in the menu now, dumped it at 2560x1600 with all low and jumped in a 32 player game and getting about 20-40fps...

And there is still massive amounts of input lag for the mouse, the aiming is just terrible.
Click to expand...

tweak your mouse sensitivity settings.
 
Can someone explain this to me:

armaBS.jpg


Had a friend on another forum with the same cpu (but his is running stock speeds,) 2gigs of ram and XP use the same settings and run the same test but he scores 83fps.
 
MickeyKnox said:
Can someone explain this to me:
...
Had a friend on another forum with the same cpu (but his is running stock speeds,) 2gigs of ram and XP use the same settings and run the same test but he scores 83fps.
Click to expand...

are you running XP as well?
 
Lol just did a fun experiment with the gf. Set all IQ settings as high as they'd go, cranked the draw distance to 10km, max aa/af at 19x12 and ran the benchmarking scenario that came with the demo.

13fps avg.

My money had been on 5 though so I can't really be upset.
 
jonneymendoza said:
tweak your mouse sensitivity settings.
Click to expand...

It's not the mouse sensitivity settings, a more sensitive mouse shouldn't cause lag anyway.

Look at this video here - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xryLypk7I9c

Theres actually several more like it on youtube showing the exact same thing, even with vsync off I can confirm this still happens even if you have 60fps in battle (this is hard to acomplish with a high end rig even on medium settings)
 
anyone having Arma 2 randomly freeze? I checked my CPU temps, GPU temps, checked voltages. Logged my CPU temps. Dunno, Upped my ram voltages. I read a lot of people are expiriencing a random freeeze issue. I have no clue whats going on. Im testing my overclocks (from 3.5ghz-4.0ghz) and no matter what i do it freezes. Even running stock. I ran memory tests, nothing bad. lol.

anybody havin this?
 
lol, I love all the people bagging the game because their Q6600 ( >2 year old hardware) is bottlenecking.

It's an incredibly good looking game at max settings with ridiculous map sizes filled with AI - heck even the wildlife in the game has simple AI.

This game is both CPU and GPU intensive and WILL make use of an i7 over C2Quads..
 
voip! said:
lol, I love all the people bagging the game because their Q6600 ( >2 year old hardware) is bottlenecking.

It's an incredibly good looking game at max settings with ridiculous map sizes filled with AI - heck even the wildlife in the game has simple AI.

This game is both CPU and GPU intensive and WILL make use of an i7 over C2Quads..
Click to expand...
+1;)
 
I just couldn't get into it, I couldn't find a way to turn mouse acceleration off (even thou its forced off EVERYWHERE in my PC)
 
Here are my two test results for Default settings and Play settings, all scores taken from the second run, and System settings listed below.

Default:
1680x1050
All settings on NORMAL, except
Post processing on LOW
Anti-aliasing on LOW

Test #1 = 28.7
Test #2 = 33.1
Test #3 = 25.9
Test #4 = 35.9
Test #5 = 20.6
Score = 2888.53


Play:
1920x1200
All settings on HIGH, except
Post processing on LOW
Anti-aliasing on NORMAL

Test #1 = 17.6
Test #2 = 23.2
Test #3 = 19.3
Test #4 = 25.0
Test #5 = 14.8
Score = 1999.09

System:
Vista 64 - SP1
nVidia 186.18 driver - SLI patch
Arma II patch 1.02 (latest)
C2Q 6700 @ 2.66GHz
4GB DDR2 800
nVidia 9800 GX2
Asus Xonar
 
Last edited:
While playing multiplayer I can play with everything on high/very high and a view distance of 10k, 1680x1050 with 100% fillrate at an average of 30 fps during firefights/in heavily wooded areas. 40-50 fps while transporting in "barren" areas.

Single player I have to drop everything to normal, view distance to 3k and I average about 25 fps. My 940 BE is currently at 3.4 on air, but I need to get a new pump for my exos 2 and see what it'll do on water and I'll report any improvements as I up the clock speed.
 
Im gonna be the one guy on this I guess.

The game is friggin hideous. everything is very detailed...sorta?most detailed grass ever and then the windows on the houses are pre 2004? the graphics in this game weird its supposed to feel real but it doesnt meh.
 
piscian18 said:
Im gonna be the one guy on this I guess.

The game is friggin hideous. everything is very detailed...sorta?most detailed grass ever and then the windows on the houses are pre 2004? the graphics in this game weird its supposed to feel real but it doesnt meh.
Click to expand...

Agreed it looks shitty and fake, rather than visceral and real.
 
N3mi5is said:
While playing multiplayer I can play with everything on high/very high and a view distance of 10k, 1680x1050 with 100% fillrate at an average of 30 fps during firefights/in heavily wooded areas. 40-50 fps while transporting in "barren" areas.

Single player I have to drop everything to normal, view distance to 3k and I average about 25 fps. My 940 BE is currently at 3.4 on air, but I need to get a new pump for my exos 2 and see what it'll do on water and I'll report any improvements as I up the clock speed.
Click to expand...

a lot of servers set view distance server-side. so when you think you have it set at 10K, it's more than likely something significantly less. i'd be willing to be that's the cause for the framerate discrepancy you're seeing.
 
N3mi5is said:
While playing multiplayer I can play with everything on high/very high and a view distance of 10k, 1680x1050 with 100% fillrate at an average of 30 fps during firefights/in heavily wooded areas. 40-50 fps while transporting in "barren" areas.

Single player I have to drop everything to normal, view distance to 3k and I average about 25 fps. My 940 BE is currently at 3.4 on air, but I need to get a new pump for my exos 2 and see what it'll do on water and I'll report any improvements as I up the clock speed.
Click to expand...


You do't run much A.I in multiplayer, compared to singleplayer...
 
Slim Charles said:
Agreed it looks shitty and fake, rather than visceral and real.
Click to expand...

The goal of ARMA2 is to make camouflage work, not render buildings with "awe"-effects.
And to make you use your grey cells to think ahead, not just spay 'n pray at the next spawn-wave.
 
Atech said:
The goal of ARMA2 is to make camouflage work, not render buildings with "awe"-effects.
And to make you use your grey cells to think ahead, not just spay 'n pray at the next spawn-wave.
Click to expand...

agreed.
 
I've been away from home all summer, but finally getting back at the end of this week. I'll have to try ArmA2 on my PC when I get back. I'm *hoping* that it runs alright at 1900x1200 with these specs:
-C2D @ 4.3 GHz
-4GB DDR2 (1066) RAM
-4870 1GB
I know that this game favors quad cores, but I'm hoping the performance is still ok with my dual. I guess we'll see....
 
You'll be okay at lower settings, it's a real CPU hog so if you're thinking about upgrading a used quad would be huge bang for the buck.
 
Awful game imho, sorry but just my opinion. If you like it, so be it. Has a realistic motion to it and foliage, but other than that, MEH.

C2Q @ 3.7 here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top