Forum Jump :

Author Message


Posts: 2
Rank:


Level: Member

Country: uk
Location:
Occupation:
Age:
In-game name:

 
#31 Posted at 2009-06-03 19:28        
     
3D_Performance=80000; //no effect recorded by me
HDRPrecision=8; //I repsume settings can be 8, 16 and 32, as with ArmA 1

Silly question but what actual value do you set HDR to turn it off?


Author Message


Posts: 325
Rank:


Level: Member

Country: br
Location:
Occupation: deanosbeano
Age:
In-game name: deanosbeano

 
#32 Posted at 2009-06-03 19:30        
     
A lazy mans FPS report (mine)
well i have had Arma2 a few days now and my FPS is about 16 -20 on average , i havent messed with anything so i am giving info , in the shape of what its like without using any tweaks , shortcuts vsyncs , aax etc etc.

I have Home xp Sp 3 with intel core2 e6600 at 2.41 ghz 2 gig of memmory and a nvidia 8800gtx
so far i havent been off the airport in utes , i havent loaded chernaruss yet and i haven`t started the campaign .
In essence if you are to get 1.01 you will need to accept that you got to have a better pc than mine or overclock
or do all the tweaks , for me i will wait until 505 patch until i try campaign or chernaruss , i never expected arma2 to be any better than it is , i have modding to do and thats why i got it early to get to know the engine.
why do i write this, becuase there are people who may expect to put in disk patch up and play with a similar machine and without some work , it aint gonna happen , you have been warned.
The first person to not read what i wrote here and go all fanboy ,will win a fastrope up there ass and out there mouth :)

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?40226-ECL's-record-breaking-attempt-players-on-one-serve&p=619994&viewfull=1#post619994

Advertisement


Author Message

Dead3yez  

I am evil


Posts: 3113
Rank:


Level: Member

Country: en
Location: North Yorkshire
Occupation: dead3yez
Age: 28
In-game name: dead3yez

 
#33 Posted at 2009-06-03 19:30        
     
@pvt.pile

You can't, simple. :)


Author Message


Posts: 2
Rank:


Level: Member

Country: uk
Location:
Occupation:
Age:
In-game name:

 
#34 Posted at 2009-06-03 19:51        
     
Thats what I thought, well does changing the HDRPrecision values help in performance?


Author Message

msy  



Posts: 7
Rank:


Level: Member

Country: cn
Location:
Occupation:
Age:
In-game name:

 
#35 Posted at 2009-06-04 15:54        
     
Tomahawk : Okay, thanks for the info. I'll consider about bying that, even though it would take me a good 4-5 months to raise the money for it, but; you said that I need a powerful CPU, right? well, I spotted this CPU called Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 which has 3,16 GHz freguenzy + 6MB L2 Cache and that would cost me 175€, so you think I should get that, or just buy the GTX 285?
I know how to overclock, but I got a HP so can't.
Since your PC is a brand PC (is it right to call HP PC like that?) , I think it becomes a little complex. Your Cpu can't OC by setting BIOS, buying another one is another expense. And you might change your power if you want to use High-end video card as talking above because a HP Pc will never put a 500W or even 400W power to supply only a GF8400GS...
I often think a DIY PC is better for PC games.

This post was edited by msy (2009-06-05 04:02, ago)


Author Message


Posts: 6
Rank:


Level: Member

Country: be
Location:
Occupation: jusefd
Age:
In-game name:

 
#36 Posted at 2009-06-04 17:24        
     
Tomahawk : [quote]MechaStalin :
[quote]Tomahawk :
[quote]jusefd :
GTX 260, Dual core @ 2.50 GHz, and 3 Gb ram, and XP home

I have Nvidia 8400 GS, dual core 2,20 GHz, 2000 Mt RAM and Windows Vista, and you say you can run on max? Is my system even close to the performance of yours? because it would be sweet to run Arma 2 with atleast normal settings + 20 FPS.
[/quote]

You should be able to run at 20ish fps on normal settings.
[/quote]

20ish? ah well, I'll give it a try when Arma 2 shows up in the local store. If it's unplayable I might as well get a new processor or buy a PS3 and play OFP Dragon Rising when it's released
[/quote]

if you want a good system you should build one yourself, my pc costs were in total 500 euro, dual core 70 €, GTX 260, i think it was 180, motherboard (P5Q), 119€, and additional power source 600W, OCZ, 100€ i already had, xp, hard drive and disks, for 3 GB ram its just like what? 40 euro? you'd normal pay 700 euro - 900 euro for that pc, so best thing to do is to build your own, if you want some help with the specs, i can help ya, ;-) i need good karma anyway :D:D:D just email me at or add me to msn ,

ps: got texture to work on max :D i just had to reduce the sight range, :D took me a while :D

[URL=http://www.neobux.com/?rh=6A7573656664][/URL]

Author Message

fox09  



Posts: 183
Rank:


Level: Member

Country: us
Location:
Occupation:
Age: 45
In-game name: fox '09

 
#37 Posted at 2009-06-04 23:32        
     
Well, i'd like to show you guys something i found.

Resolution_W=1600; -Screen resolution (Width)
Resolution_H=900; -Screen resolution (height)

Render_W=1600; -Render Resolution (Width)
Render_H=900; -Render Resolution (Height)

As far as i know, the render resolution is what is rendered, and then the screen resolution is what is outputted on the screen. So by changing the render resolution to match the screen resolution, it renders the screen size rather than the max resolution (CRT 18XXx15xx(Not sure what resolution, but around there)

That' gave me the opportunity to run it maxed out completely.

My specs: GTX 275; E8400 @ 4.05 GHz; 4GB DDR2 1080MHz

My whole config:
language="English";
adapter=-1;
3D_Performance=-80000;
Resolution_Bpp=32;
Resolution_W=1600;
Resolution_H=900;
refresh=59;
Render_W=1600;
Render_H=900;
FSAA=0;
postFX=2;
HDRPrecision=0;
lastDeviceId="";
localVRAM=896;
nonlocalVRAM=1900;
sceneComplexity=160000;

REMEMBER TO SET THE FILE AS READ ONLY SO ARMA 2 DOES NOT CHANGE IT!!!!

nice and clean...

Author Message

Dead3yez  

I am evil


Posts: 3113
Rank:


Level: Member

Country: en
Location: North Yorkshire
Occupation: dead3yez
Age: 28
In-game name: dead3yez

 
#38 Posted at 2009-06-05 00:36        
     
Nice find axffox, it certainly worked for me as I know of. Definitely worth trying for everyone.

Running at 1680x1050 here is a result of an earlier test, SceneComplexion 160k
Frames: 4219 - Time: 101274ms - Avg: 41.659 - Min: 30 - Max: 60

And now a newer one using those render settings and higher complexion, SceneComplexion 180k.
Frames: 4983 - Time: 115663ms - Avg: 43.082 - Min: 34 - Max: 66


Author Message


Posts: 55
Rank:


Level: Member

Country: us
Location: Indiana
Occupation:
Age: 27
In-game name: binkowski

 
#39 Posted at 2009-06-05 01:17        
     
Thanks axffox, it improved my performance as well!


Author Message

catar  



Posts: 4
Rank:


Level: Member

Country: au
Location:
Occupation:
Age:
In-game name:

 
#40 Posted at 2009-06-05 16:02        
     
[quote=localVRAM=896; nonlocalVRAM=1900;][/quote]

any idea what those 2 comands do?


Author Message

fox09  



Posts: 183
Rank:


Level: Member

Country: us
Location:
Occupation:
Age: 45
In-game name: fox '09

 
#41 Posted at 2009-06-05 23:33        
     
As far as i think, that is what the VRAM USAGE for your video card. So, if you have a 512MB card, it will optimize it for a 512 MB card.

That's what i think it is.

This post was edited by axffox (2009-06-05 23:40, ago)

nice and clean...

Author Message


Posts: 20277
Rank:


Level: Super Admin

Country: nl
Location: The Netherlands
Occupation:
Age: 41
In-game name: Foxhound

 
#42 Posted at 2009-06-06 09:52        
     
Yes, if I remember correct localVRAM=xxx is the RAM of your GPU and nonlocalVRAM=xxxx is the virtual memory.
If I am wrong feel free to correct me, so much Arma 2 info which I need to get used to its hard to follow everything.

Visit my family webshop desteigerhoutshop.nl.

Author Message

Dead3yez  

I am evil


Posts: 3113
Rank:


Level: Member

Country: en
Location: North Yorkshire
Occupation: dead3yez
Age: 28
In-game name: dead3yez

 
#43 Posted at 2009-06-06 10:28        
     
I think nonlocalVRAM is the max 'borrowed' memory from the virtual memory. I'm not even sure that these values can be adjusted or if they would even have any effect at all if they were to be changed.


Author Message

fox09  



Posts: 183
Rank:


Level: Member

Country: us
Location:
Occupation:
Age: 45
In-game name: fox '09

 
#44 Posted at 2009-06-06 15:37        
     
Thanks. Dead3yez, maybe you should put all the useful posts into your 1 post, so people can see it in 1 thread.

nice and clean...

Author Message


Posts: 431
Rank:


Level: Member

Country: pt
Location:
Occupation:
Age: 39
In-game name:

 
#45 Posted at 2009-06-06 19:57        
     
deanosbeano : A lazy mans FPS report (mine)
well i have had Arma2 a few days now and my FPS is about 16 -20 on average , i havent messed with anything so i am giving info , in the shape of what its like without using any tweaks , shortcuts vsyncs , aax etc etc.

I have Home xp Sp 3 with intel core2 e6600 at 2.41 ghz 2 gig of memmory and a nvidia 8800gtx
so far i havent been off the airport in utes , i havent loaded chernaruss yet and i haven`t started the campaign .
In essence if you are to get 1.01 you will need to accept that you got to have a better pc than mine or overclock
or do all the tweaks , for me i will wait until 505 patch until i try campaign or chernaruss , i never expected arma2 to be any better than it is , i have modding to do and thats why i got it early to get to know the engine.
why do i write this, becuase there are people who may expect to put in disk patch up and play with a similar machine and without some work , it aint gonna happen , you have been warned.
The first person to not read what i wrote here and go all fanboy ,will win a fastrope up there ass and out there mouth :)

Thanks for that, i have similar specs (but Vista and 4 GB of ram) so im a bit disapointed since i dont see such a huge graphical diference (betwean Arma and Arma II) to justify the extreme requirements and performance.
I've been thinking of going quad but im not sure yet, performance reports of ubber spec'ed PC's are disapointing to say the least.

But even more important is the low performance: Even on overclcoked highest-end hardware (Core i7; 12 GiByte RAM and a GTX 285 with 2 GiByte VRAM) ArmA 2 becomes a slide show (less than 15 fps) running at 1,280 x 1,024 pixels with very high details. You have to go to low or medium details and have to activate Pixel Doubling (which is ugly) to get playable framerates. Given the performance you shouldn't even think about Anti Aliasing, but the Real Virtuality Engine doesn't support it, as well as any SLI or Crossfire modes, anyway.

Less than 15 fps in 1280x 1024... is this game playable?
I cant see myself upgrading to play Arma II and go from 5 to 10 fps :D .