Take On Helicopters

Take On Helicopters

ribuck Jan 24, 2014 @ 9:05am
Really Poor Graphics Perfomance - R9 280x - what gives
Hey all, I have a fairly high end gaming rig, a 4770K over clocked to 4.7Ghz, with 32gb of ultra low latency ram, Fasst SSD disk and a AMd R9 280x overclocked and this game is running like a dog no matter what setting i put in on, even on normal Graphics.

Anyone know if this is a know issues with AMD card or know of any reason why it might be running like Crap when every other game i own are running blazingly fast.
< >
Showing 1-15 of 28 comments
ribuck Jan 24, 2014 @ 10:46am 
Anyone got any clues ?
Stealth Jan 24, 2014 @ 12:07pm 
same here on GTX780
ribuck Jan 24, 2014 @ 12:32pm 
Can't believe how one graphics engine can be soooo badly written / optimized. You would need Quad 780Ti's to make that sucker run properly.
You most certainly do not need super duper graphics stolen from the NSA. I run all arma engined games fine, like an average of 50 fps in downtown Seattle on a mix of medium and high settings and I've only got an grandpa gtx 570, AND that's with it underclocked and undervolted a little because I'm stupid. The three biggest FPS killers are view/render distance, post processing and anti aliasing. So try turning post processing off, set the view distance to no more than 5000 for both the actual view and object render distance and make sure you dont have ingame antialiasing over 9000. Shadows are another little fps killer but I don't lose that much fps with them on. Oh, I also have traffic set to 100 because it's just distracting to be honest. Other than that... Welp no clue. Good luck.
Last edited by how to get away with memes; Jan 25, 2014 @ 6:16am
ribuck Jan 26, 2014 @ 7:16am 
I think it must an issues with the game, as it starts fine on any setting and runs for about 30 seconds in all the menu screens with the helicopter flying round in the background then suddenly just starts choking up and lagging massively, even the mussic starts lagging and stuttering, and that's just at the main menu system, not evev in the game.

Basically it's just really lazy crap coding, which make it run like crap, as it's not just driver related as user Stealth is reporting the same on his GTX 780.

So looks like an issue with newer cards.......what a parcel of crap.
rocksoldier_alex Jan 30, 2014 @ 5:46pm 
you are cpu limited, try to lower the view range untill you get satisfied with performances
Auslander Feb 6, 2014 @ 11:25am 
It's not a CPU bottleneck, it's an engine problem. Same thing happens in all the games made on the engine, regardless of hardware. Performance is somewhat sporadic, sometimes you'll hit 90fps, other times you'll struggle to hit 25fps in the exact same location...

Originally posted by rocksoldier_alex:
you are cpu limited...

You can't be serious? Send me some of whatever you've been smoking :)

Originally posted by ribuck:
...4770K over clocked to 4.7Ghz...

"CPU limited..." Guffaw! P:

Originally posted by ribuck:
Can't believe how one graphics engine can be soooo badly written / optimized. You would need Quad 780Ti's to make that sucker run properly.

Wouldn't make the blindest bit of difference sadly. I've seen ridiculously high end rigs suffer the same problems as mid and even low end ones... You'll see CPU usage around 20-30%, GPU usage around the same and you get stupid low framerates... But then sometimes when you start the game it will randomly use actualy use your system resources (I've seen 60% CPU + 99% GPU on my rig) and the framerate will be brilliant even at stupidly high settings...
Last edited by Auslander; Feb 6, 2014 @ 11:30am
ribuck Feb 9, 2014 @ 3:46am 
RockSoldier, are you smoking crack are something ? Cpu limited ? have you invented some new processor or have one from the future, as the like time i checked the 4770K overclocked to 4.7Ghz is pretty much the fastest cpu you canget fro gaming.

Please dont just throw in stupid comments unless you can justify what you are saying, as like other have said, it's the crappily coded engine that is the problem not the fact that i'm pretty much running one of fastest gaming cpu you can buy.
rocksoldier_alex Feb 9, 2014 @ 5:49am 
What's your problem guys? The game is crappy coded and even the best cpu in the world can't run it. The limit is the cpu, not the gpu or other stuff. Lower that damn view range will be fine.
Cpl Green Feb 9, 2014 @ 8:27am 
ArmA's always been hard on memory, system and video. I upgraded my computer a couple parts at a time for ArmA 3, keeping the same dual GTX 460 video cards. The biggest performance improvement I got was from the system RAM. CPU made a difference, but it wasn't the eye-opener that the memory delivered.

For the benefit of those who don't play it, TO:H is essentially ArmA 2.5 engine-wise.
ribuck Feb 10, 2014 @ 11:44am 
cpl Green, I have 32Gig of high speed low latency memory, and it doesn't seem to make much of a difference.

@rocksoldier.......I've tried lower all the view ranges and it just doesn't seem to make any difference. Shame they couldn't have used something like CryEngine
CryEngine? LOL Good joke.
ribuck Feb 15, 2014 @ 4:46pm 
well cry engine runs blistering fast on my pc with everything maxed out.
bothersome Feb 18, 2014 @ 7:42pm 
Well, TOH is probably modeling a lot of information and for each every unit going on in the game. It even accurately models a rainbow...

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=229733641

TOH is diamond in the rough. Even a large diamond. The only shortcomings is the lack of more missions. The base simulator/game is just to get you started. But it really shines in places like the multi-player missions like CO12_Shapur_Revisited. Especially the 100a version where you have a lot extra content added from Arma 2.

There are a few bugs still in the game like sometimes your men/team won't follow your orders just right.

But I think the game needs computing horsepower too, not just a fancy graphics adapter.

Also, a lot of people seem to think a laptop can be a good gaming platform. WRONG. Look and see how much power in watts that power brick can supply that laptop with. Even at 100 watts, it's not enough to crunch serious numbers. There is a reason why gaming desktop computers need 800 watts and they don't even have to supply power to the monitor/display. That's what it takes to play serious games.
Z.Ibrahimovic Feb 20, 2014 @ 1:02pm 
No1 has a faster CPU nor more low latency RAM then I do, caugh caugh.

But with 24ht Xeon cores, 48GB RAM and a budget GPU like the HD7750 Ultra I can play Far Cry 3 on ultra @ HD resolution, but not this game.

I have no idea what causes it, but I know that lowering graphical stuff solves the issue. Maybe it doesn't matter if you have tons of cores, maybe it is a single-core game :D
< >
Showing 1-15 of 28 comments
Per page: 15 30 50