performance issues: is it my cpu?

[󠁳⁧⁧CYN1X]

I get around 30 FPS on most servers, Singleplayer or Multiplayer, and I'm not sure if it's my PC alltogether or just my CPU? I've heard Arma is a very CPU-intensive game, but I think I should be just fine playing the game at, at the least, 50 frames. I've done several online tests to determine if I can run the game, and it says on all of those that I meet the recommended system specs. Any ideas?

My PC specs can be found below.

AMD FX-8350 4.0GHz 8-Core CPU
Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3P ATX AM3+ Motherboard
Corsair Vengeance Pro 16GB DDR3-2400 RAM
Seagate Barracuda 2TB 3.5" 7200RPM Hard Drive
SAPPHIRE DUAL-X Radeon R9 280 GPU
Apevia X-Trooper X-TRP-GN ATX Case
EVGA SuperNOVA NEX 750W Gold ATX Power Supply
Microsoft Windows 10 Home OEM 64-bit OS

Thanks in advance for your help! :)

[Snoopkirby]

It is depressing to see that, even after 7 years and a half a high end PC still cannot run this game correctly.

Here's my few tips :

1. Overclock your AMD CPU(AMD has poor single thread performance because they didn't focus on it until recently with Zen, so increasing clock speed will benefit you by a few %)
2. Make sure that your RAM is in dual/quad channel mode and that it is performing at its appropriate 2400Mhz speed(if your motherboard supports it enable xmp and "Memory try it" profiles)
3. make sure that your GPU isn't overloaded(yes, ArmA 1 did overload a GTX 690 I had and so did ArmA 2 on my GTX 980 Ti), you can use MSI Afterburner to see GPU usage. If it is at 100% sometimes you can always try to reduce graphics settings.

[Dada]

on Arma 2 you cant have high FPS on server, just try in singleplayer if you get 50-60 your good

[[40-1]King_Kosher]

A build with an FX-8350 (which at time of release in 2012 was intended as a direct competition to the i5-3570k) is by no means high-end but you should be able to reach 50 frames in most if not all singleplayer situations.

Aside from doing these online tests like "canirunit",which are misleading in this case, did you look for performance guides under the "Guides" tab here in the steam section (and maybe of ArmA2:OA in case you own that aswell?)
There are a lot of them and while most carry the same information,it should help you to squeeze more frames out of the game than before without you having to overclock the already hot&juiceeating FX chip

[NickIsGroovy]

Pretty much the entire AMD series is out of the question when it comes to getting good fps in arma.

[󠁳⁧⁧CYN1X]

Originally posted by NickIsGroovy:

Pretty much the entire AMD series is out of the question when it comes to getting good fps in arma.

Appreciate it. Will upgrade soon.

[HR304VDOHCRST]

Originally posted by RockThatScoober:

Originally posted by NickIsGroovy:

Pretty much the entire AMD series is out of the question when it comes to getting good fps in arma.

Appreciate it. Will upgrade soon.

just wait until ryzen comes out amd should be good this year

[Dada]

Originally posted by RockThatScoober:

Originally posted by NickIsGroovy:

Pretty much the entire AMD series is out of the question when it comes to getting good fps in arma.

Appreciate it. Will upgrade soon.

In Arma 2 you can t get more than 30 fps on MP, AMD or intel...

[Dada]

if you want to upgrade buy a nice SSD for Arma your cpu is good for this game, i think only 40% of your cpu will be used when you play Arma 2 or 3, intel fanboys will say "i get 80 fps in arma" but in a open field with nothing around, i know people with i7 and i try the game with a i7 skylake 6700k, and they don't get better performance than phenom x4, a i7 can get a higher view distance thats all if somebody tell you he get 50 fps on a server on Arma 2 its a lie cause you can t get more than 30 fps its the engine, same in SP max fps its 60, don't trust the lie, same in Arma 3 intel cpu vs AMD cpu its the same, nvidia gpu works better than AMD gpu in Arma 3 cause the nvidia gpu can handle the physics with a AMD gpu your cpu is in charge for the physics, so if your are often around 30 on a server in Arma 2 its good. For Arma 2 just buy a SSD, for Arma 3 buy a SSD and upgrade with a GTX.

[NickIsGroovy]

Damns is not correct, I get 50 FPS easily on high settings pretty much everywhere but cherno where i get 40 FPS. I5600k and GTX 950FtW

[=CrimsoN=]

Originally posted by NickIsGroovy:

Damns is not correct, I get 50 FPS easily on high settings pretty much everywhere but cherno where i get 40 FPS. I5600k and GTX 950FtW

Same. I7-4790k and GTX 980Ti

[[40-1]King_Kosher]

Originally posted by Dams:

i know people with i7 and i try the game with a i7 skylake 6700k, and they don't get better performance than phenom x4

then i wonder what type of people you know. it takes a lot of skill to cripple state of the art hardware to a level of 12 years ago.

Needles to say that your whole comment is uneducated and very,very far from the truth (as you can see by the posts of the people avove me, so its not only me calling you out on your lies).

Compare technical documentation of Phenom II´s and i5´s from 3570k upwards, compare instruction sets and single core performance yourself. The results are clear and well known, there is no fanboy´ism involved in that.

[Dada]

Originally posted by 40-1King_Kosher:

Originally posted by Dams:

i know people with i7 and i try the game with a i7 skylake 6700k, and they don't get better performance than phenom x4

then i wonder what type of people you know. it takes a lot of skill to cripple state of the art hardware to a level of 12 years ago.

Needles to say that your whole comment is uneducated and very,very far from the truth (as you can see by the posts of the people avove me, so its not only me calling you out on your lies).

Compare technical documentation of Phenom II´s and i5´s from 3570k upwards, compare instruction sets and single core performance yourself. The results are clear and well known, there is no fanboy´ism involved in that.

Yeah for sure a i7 or i5 get higher result on bench software, like i say with a i7 you can get a higher view distance than a phenom on Ultra setting, and the people with a i7 get the last GTX with a PCIe 3.0 so they got 30-40 fps on a 10000 view distance on ultra.
Phenom its a old cpu and the people with that cpu got often a old GC, so with the right setting a phenom with a nvidia gc like a gtx 750 ti on high with 1500m view distance they got 30-40 fps.

A FX-8350 its enough for playing he just need a SSD and a nvidia GC.

I know that because i play this game from OFP, and i build computer for extra money and i try this game with many config, AMD vs Intel cpu its the same, Nvidia vs AMD=Nvidia win.

With a i7 6700 or a FX-8350 the cpu will work at 30 %, you can get the last intel+nvidia config if you play on a bad server you will get 25-30 fps.

In Arma 2, we talking about arma 2 right ? Single player 60 fps cap, MP 30 fps cap so stop lying, if you say you got 80 fps on arma 2 with intel its a big lie cause you can't get more than 60 fps.

[[40-1]King_Kosher]

Originally posted by Dams:

In Arma 2, we talking about arma 2 right ? Single player 60 fps cap, MP 30 fps cap so stop lying, if you say you got 80 fps on arma 2 with intel its a big lie cause you can't get more than 60 fps.

Yes,mostly. Not what anyone works or how long anyone plays games or whatever.

I never posted exact frames (since,as you posted yourself, MP performance gets crippled by bad scripting,too many players on cheap hardware and whatnot) nor did i lie in any made statements.

You are fast in calling other people liars while,either by simply not knowing it better or pure intention, try to light things that aren´t true as set-in-stone facts and its derailing the topic. OP´s questions are answered and this starts to feel more and more like genital-waving (which there is no need for)

[NickIsGroovy]

lmao there is no 60 frame cap buddy. Single player arma 2 i run at 70-100 FPS all max settings aside from Post Pro. Your pc just is not very good.

[Zegun]

An ssd with this game works wonders, your hdd will actually bottleneck this game. xD