Can someone explain this awful performance?

[Turbo Nozomix]

In-game performance:

41 FPS
40% GPU utilization
31% CPU utilization (no individual core has more than 50% utilization)


System:

2600k@ 4.6 Ghz
16 GB RAM
GTX 1070


Why are my GPU and CPU not being used more to give me better performance?

[hello啊树哥]

Because your computer configuration is much higher than the maximum occupancy rate of this game

[GraveNoX]

Maybe Vertical Sync (VSYNC) is enabled in the game or forced by video drivers (check the list of games and what settings nvidia were set up for this game).

[GHOST]

try use this...

paste this line in SET LAUNCH OPTIONS


-nosplash -noPause -world=empty -cpuCount=6 -exthreads=7 -maxMem=8192 -maxVRAM=3596

 

-cpuCount=6 ------>your cores 2,4,6 etc

-maxMem=8192 ------>Ram to use, never use the total anmount you have, you have 16gb so this quantity is enough.

(supposedly the maximum memory is 2047)


-maxVRAM=3596 ------>Video Memory, never use the total anmount you have

4gb video 4096 use --> 3596

(supposedly the maximum memory is 2047)


These high memory values, I really don't know if ArmA uses them or not, some people say yes, others say no, supposedly the maximum memory is 2047, but so if you want to try...

[Anarkitty :3]

Arma 2 is just a horribly optimized game.
I have a:

GTX 1070Ti
Ryzen 7 2700X 8 Core @ 4.20GHz overclock,
32GB of DDR4 3000MHz RAM,
RAID 0 Samsung Evo SSD

and it still runs like absolute ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ even on the very high preset nevermind the maxed out settings 10k view distance at 4K at an absolute minimum of 75FPS that i have come to expect when playing games this old on a rig so far ahead of what was available at the time.

The only solution is to play Arma 3 instead or just set the preset to high and bear with ~54 average FPS on a rig that could probably run a machine learning algorithm that will self-teach itself to optimize the engine better than the devs did.

At the end of the day, Arma's origins are that of a consumer version of a military simulator, it's a simulator first and a video game second, and as such it will never feature optimizations that an AAA game will have because it's simply just a niche product, not a jaw-dropping screenshot generating machine.

One thing i found that significantly improves the quality of the game is to use 3D Resolution scaling instead of AA as it seems much better quality-to-performance ratio, i play at 1440p and leave AA as disabled, i have my monitor relatively far away though, so find what suits you best, also disable Post-Processing, as the bloom and blur ages the game more than anything else quality wise and hits performance.

You can of course try the various necromancy posted above and found on arma forums and reddit, install mods, etc, and while it might help it will never fix the core issues with the engine and especially this particular iteration of it, it might perform better, but it will never perform like you'd expect it to. Like it should.

Even in a 100 years on a quantum super computer rig cooled by the vacuum of space and the cold indifference of the universe itself the game will run at cinematic framerates if you dare look at a building from the wrong angle

[GHOST]

Originally posted by Ｄｅａｄｆｒｉｅｎｄ:

Arma 2 is just a horribly optimized game.
I have a:

GTX 1070Ti
Ryzen 7 2700X 8 Core @ 4.20GHz overclock,
32GB of DDR4 3000MHz RAM,
RAID 0 Samsung Evo SSD

Let's see if you understand this ... ArmA 2 is 32-bit, so having said that, you should know that it cannot use even 4 gigs of ram, do you understand that? it doesn't matter that you have the best computer in the universe, since A2 is not going to use those resources.

you don't need to write a complaint book.

PS: with an AMD it will always work worse than with an intel. (I say it from experience)

[HerZie]

If you want know why this game runs so poorly just install their first ever game, Operation Flashpoint: Cold War Crisis also now known as ARMA: Cold War Assault. BIS are just terrible at optimizing game engines even though they've been at it for 20 years now.

[Anarkitty :3]

Originally posted by GHOST:

Originally posted by Ｄｅａｄｆｒｉｅｎｄ:

Arma 2 is just a horribly optimized game.
I have a:

GTX 1070Ti
Ryzen 7 2700X 8 Core @ 4.20GHz overclock,
32GB of DDR4 3000MHz RAM,
RAID 0 Samsung Evo SSD

Let's see if you understand this ... ArmA 2 is 32-bit, so having said that, you should know that it cannot use even 4 gigs of ram, do you understand that? it doesn't matter that you have the best computer in the universe, since A2 is not going to use those resources.

you don't need to write a complaint book.

PS: with an AMD it will always work worse than with an intel. (I say it from experience)

This was literally the entire point of my post. Learn to Read.

As i said,
"Even in a 100 years on a quantum super computer rig cooled by the vacuum of space and the cold indifference of the universe itself the game will run at cinematic framerates if you dare look at a building from the wrong angle"

I fully understand what 32-bit means, i'm a programmer so i should, i have no idea why you're trying to explain this as if it's not common knowledge to anyone who has ever used a computer, regardless there are many games of this era that scale beautifully on modern hardware, 4GB of Addressable RAM or not.

The game is also not optimized to use multi-threading efficiently, this is easily visible by just opening task manager while the game is running, Core 0 will always be more taxed than other cores, in fact one bit of voodoo magic you can perform for games like these is to disable 4 or so cores in BIOS and leave the other 4, this way you can probably OC the CPU frequency to be higher as voltage requirements for 4 cores is less than 8.

Your comment regarding AMD is irrelevant on Ryzen processors as they are of Zen architecture, not related to non-Zen pre-Ryzen processors that were common at the time this game was made, unless testing is done on modern Ryzen processors there's no way to tell what it will perform better on, and at the end of the day it's irrelevant because the game runs like ♥♥♥♥ regardless.

I can write whatever i'd like, i was answering a question posted in discussions, something i also was curious about because i've never played an Arma game until recently, and i imagine other people come here who have also not played Arma before but own it through humble bundles and such and wonder if the poor performance is on them or on the game.

[Royce]

Why does anyone whine about game optimization on a 10+ year old game is the real question. Just fiddle with your settings or move on.

[Turbo Nozomix]

Originally posted by Royce:

Why does anyone whine about game optimization on a 10+ year old game is the real question. Just fiddle with your settings or move on.

Because, despite it being 10 years old, it doesn't get decent performance on a PC that's semi-powerful by modern standards.

[Anarkitty :3]

Originally posted by Royce:

Why does anyone whine about game optimization on a 10+ year old game is the real question. Just fiddle with your settings or move on.

Because people sometimes buy old games that they've missed out on, they're not familiar with how poorly performing the game is, the natural and common expectation would be for it to work perfectly on a modern computer, that's what most games of the era end up doing, and that's part of why playing old games on a PC is a nice affair generally, not to mention most people probably bought Arma way back for DayZ, and are only now trying the actual games out after sifting through their library for stuff to play.

[HerZie]

Originally posted by Ｄｅａｄｆｒｉｅｎｄ:

Originally posted by Royce:

Why does anyone whine about game optimization on a 10+ year old game is the real question. Just fiddle with your settings or move on.

Because people sometimes buy old games that they've missed out on, they're not familiar with how poorly performing the game is, the natural and common expectation would be for it to work perfectly on a modern computer, that's what most games of the era end up doing, and that's part of why playing old games on a PC is a nice affair generally, not to mention most people probably bought Arma way back for DayZ, and are only now trying the actual games out after sifting through their library for stuff to play.

Correct. A lot of old games run fine with minimal tinkering, such as games using Unreal or Quake engines. But then you get this game, where no setting or rig makes any difference to how the game runs. This game was designed to get at least console performance.

Imagine if this team was tasked to make a DOOM game? Jesus Christ.

[Atomicdeath]

The best bang for the buck improvement you can make to increase your performance is to overclock the Cpu and ram. Arma thrives on single core performance, Ram speed has some bearing but not a lot.

I've got a 8700k @ 5.2 and i still get barely 60fps under pretty heavily scripted events.

[Japa Amazônico]

welcome to ARMA

[Chad Thundercock]

My framerate drops with a 5800x and a 3060ti.................