Rifle Eyez

Still not solved this, so bumping.

Sorry to bump but...bump.

I haven't tried Experimental yet - might be worth trying to see, thanks for the suggestion. I haven't created a ticket yet either so I'll try that as well. Still haven't managed to solve it, my only options are play in Windowed and deal with lower FPS and stuttering from time to time, or play in full screen and deal with it not being able to spot people effectively. Hopefully the photo below works and you can see what I mean - it's terrible quality because it's just a picture of my monitor up close, but you can see how the right side looks more defined, the left is Fullscreen and just looks washed out like I've got my Gamma up incredibly high with a low contrast almost (especially notable in the forest on the right side, but even in the distance it looks much better but the pic doesn't do that justice). Same place, didn't move, just swapped between Fullscreen and Windowed. Photo link works for me - weird. Even with the brightness down at it's lowest it still looks like it does on the left side of the picture. All started back in .60 with the Renderer work and the gamma slider being removed, which makes me think it's something to do with that. But I've re-installed everything including my OS, so surely it wouldn't remain an issue and carry over between multiple installs? Sometimes it looks better in Full Screen when I initially start the game but if you change a single setting (not the brightness either) it goes back to looking terrible. Just don't understand it.

Bump - still suffering. Convinced this is unsolvable 😞

Firstly, I've attached a video and pictures. Apologies for the noise, hot as hell and my fan is full blast. Also I'm taking photos of my screen so naturally the quality is incredibly bad. https://streamable.com/q3p2nw You can see how straight away in Windowed mode once I swap the treeline becomes more 'solid' - all the edges pop more etc, still the awful fog, but that's just the game. Here's a photo, see how the left is just whitewashed with the right side more solid - it's really as bad as it looks on Fullscreen in the Left image - that mess of brightness and colour around the trees on the right. https://imgur.com/a/4vnHmu1 Essentially the problem is in Full Screen the game looks like I'm playing at an incredibly high Gamma even with the Brightness slider right down to low - spotting people just 15-20m away in a treeline is nigh on impossible because everything is almost white-washed, especially with the fog. Everything just blurs into one. When I switch to Windowed mode, like in the video, it's like a night and day change. Still needs some tweaking, but much better. I used to (Arma, DayZ mod, Early Standalone) be able to spot people moving 100's of meters away through treelines etc, everything appeared to have a nice contrast, but now everything just blurs into one messy mix of pixels. I've got thousands of hours on Arma/DayZ (Jul 2012 join date just on the forums) so I'm decent at navigating the files and troubleshooting things - no luck on this one. I'm sure it started around the .60 patches with the Renderer work and all of the adjustments with night gamma and the removal of the sliders. I've noticed if I alt-tab like when the game starts and there's a second of delay I notice the change on my desktop (higher gamma/brightness), and it immediately goes back to my normal monitor settings. Tried : Reinstalling DayZ, reinstalled Windows, reinstalled Windows from 7 to 10 (unrelated to DayZ but still - no change). Deleting the .cfg. Changing my monitor settings even to extremes and it just makes it even worse or varying degrees of terrible. Changing the gamma setting in the .cfg to 0.5, or various others - unsure if this even works and adjusts anything but I tried all the same. Any ideas?

Sweet, that's the kind of answer I was hoping for as I was leaning heavily on a GPU upgrade first, so thanks man. With DayZ being so WIP engine wise atm from the ground up it's difficult to find any definitive benchmarks obviously, and Arma doesn't count anymore. Every time I searched on the topic it just found discussion from 2012-2015 before the new Renderer was thing so none of it was relevant to upgrading now. Anyway, the 660 is about evens with the 7850 from what I can tell, with each card being better at different aspects/games, although I feel the 660/Nvidia would handle DayZ better, no idea why. So I'm hoping that with a 8GB 480 (in the 1060 range) would give me a decent FPS gain. As I said, I'd be happy to grab a GPU now even if it gave me a solid 60+ FPS more often, even if the CPU upgrade would be a good choice now also. Just less of a headache installing a GPU and also I can save & wait on a CPU upgrade to pick up a decent mobo and RAM too. And the texture popping issue, yeah a SSD would make sense actually. It's one of those purchases I've always thought about and seen recommended for Arma/DayZ but never picked one up, might have a look when I get a GPU. I don't know if you saw my video or not but I posted it today and the popping is just insane. I can zoom in on a tree, zoom in a bit more, pop. Bit more, pop, Out again a bit, pop's back. And when it's an entire forest doing it, it's a nightmare.

Thanks, I actually have a video of this I was gonna add to my original thread. Also occurs to stuff not a couple 100m's away, even when I'm less than 50m away it happens. Happens with basically any texture too, trees, grass, bushes, rocks, signs, anything so ATOC or whatever doesn't change anything. Also tried it with different ATOC settings and it's a similar thing, but that opens a new problem as some cause the ever-present white dots AA problem so I usually don't use it. Tried changing Texture Detail/Filtering too, and also my View/Object settings in the CFG, on that video (and normally) it's 1200 for both.

Yeah it's a tough one really. Like it can still get 60 FPS while recording outside of the big cities, and even then it's playable at like, 30-45. Which isn't so bad, but after years of Arma and DayZ mod I guess anything is better. I've been reading posts from all over since the new Renderer work and looking at their specs and what FPS they get, but people can't really be super specific about what frames they're getting so it makes it hard. Plus everyone is using different CFG files and so on. The best way is when someone has upgraded and comments on the performance afterwards, but those sorts of posts are pretty rare. Sometimes people have upgraded GPU and got big gains, and said it's really noticeable, sometimes not. Sometimes the CPU has been the difference, sometimes (and in other games) it really doesn't justify the expense in upgrading the CPU at all. Like you can get the guy posting with the strong i5 7600 and a old GPU, but gets super low FPS. And then people with strong CPUs and med/low tier GPU's, who get (or claim) pretty high FPS. I find it interesting how we have basically the same CPU, with mine OC'd a full 1.3ghz more, and I think my GPU is slightly better (feel like DayZ prefers Nvidia though) and we still get basically the same exact FPS. I should take mine back to stock and see if it makes any difference. If it doesn't, I wonder if that means it's my GPU that is the issue? Troubleshooting an Alpha in this way is tough and I really don't wanna start using MSI to monitor the usage of everything over and over again :D My mind feels like upgrading CPU would have more of an impact somehow, maybe it's because Bohemia, DayZ mod and Arma are on my mind with how insanely CPU reliant they are, but as you said in the future things will change and it's moved on from Arma and R.V. already But my heart says 100% upgrade GPU because it's in budget right now, there's much less involved when it comes to installing it, and I would still be happy with the decision to upgrade the GPU even if it got me 60 FPS everywhere and only boosted literally 5-15 FPS in places. What wouldn't be worth it is if it made essentially no difference at all because it's not even fully utilizing the 7850 I already have, or if it just meant I could turn some settings up that I don't care about with the same FPS I had before. Plus upgrading the CPU second means I can wait on Ryzen and see how that performs and if Intel prices change at all, save some more for RAM/Mobo, and still get good FPS in other games where the CPU isn't so much of a burden. Hard choice.

Seems a popular issue, but with no real definitive way to fix it. With tons of variants too, like flickering buildings at long distance, etc. I know it's been an issue plaguing Arma/DayZ for a while, I mean I joined here in 2012 and one of my posts were about similar topic, and I know everything is WIP right now. Anyway, the issue I have is where textures even 10-20m away will be clearly low, then normal, then low, which obviously makes it a nightmare in a game where spotting any small movement can make the difference. From a distance zooming with alt look, texture changes. Zoom out, texture changes back. Zoom in, you get the idea. Up close or far away doesn't really seem to make a difference, but in my amateur assessment I dunno why trees I'm 20m from need to constantly change and can't just stay how they are. Trees, bushes, rocks, buildings, signs, sometimes the fronts of whole buildings will be solid just a dozen metres away and as I get close the correct texture pops in. Guess it's a LOD issue. Now, I'd be happy if I could just force everything on just low, or normal, or high - and it just stayed that way. Anyone else experience it/know of a fix to reduce it? I've tried messing with the settings on High, Normal, Low, V.Low, no change.

Not too sure where this needs to go, I thought Troubleshooting but meh. Simple question, I've got an old machine I'm passing on, and it's overclocked with a i5 760 stable at 4ghz, with a Radeon 7850. Obviously it needs upgrading, but despite it's age it still runs most titles at decent (not close to max, on say Witcher 3, of course) settings. 1920x1080. Now, with the new Renderer (and obviously future iterations), which out of CPU or GPU upgrade would directly improve DayZ's performance most now? The plan is to obviously upgrade both, but it's one or the other right now. Wondering if people have actually had direct experience themselves with this, e.g a bigger boost in performance after a graphics card upgrade, or after the CPU. Or even a substantial improvement with a GPU upgrade as I'm leaning towards that. With the new Renderer things are different from old DayZ/Arma being an obvious CPU hog, and searching usually brings up posts from years ago discussing how CPU reliant it was. And that also means any benchmarks done on Arma aren't really applicable now either, and they're not always 100% anyway. With DayZ being in limbo with the engine and not complete, there's no definitive testing out there, so word of mouth from actual players who have upgraded seems the best way to go. There's a post just today in the Troubleshooting section with someone complaining they're getting low FPS like sub 20, with a i5 7600 and an ancient Nvidia GeForce GT 630. Which leads me to believe it's not all CPU, as it doesn't ever drop to sub 30 on this rig with a first gen i5 while recording and is usually 45-60 outside of towns/cities/NWAF, and never sub 30 in them. The thinking is upgrade the GPU now, as the budget is 200-250£, and I can pick up a Radeon 8gb 480 for that, or a 6GB 1060. A CPU upgrade means Mobo, and RAM, and more headaches than just dropping in a GPU. Also, it's gonna cost more with picking up a ''k'' variant to overclock. Unless I can be proven wrong, but I feel I'm looking at more 350-400£ for a CPU upgrade. But if the feeling is overwhelmingly ''the CPU will improve performance more, and the GPU won't really'' or something ridiculous, then waiting and upgrading the CPU first is definitely an option. Thanks guys. EDIT: Just noticed my account is 5 years old, wow...time flies. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWpoUJba7f8 If you just KoS constantly you'll never get beautiful moments like this - apologise for the whiney dude on skype that ruins it as we ''push'' the dude away, but it's still a beautiful moment. I have just ''started'' a fresh channel and have tons of stuff to upload - so sub :) Playing some Dayzero meeting a few friends on the shore and bump into this dude - he's fantastic. I wonder if he survived long?

hope so. when i record to a second hdd (i have 1 for OS, one for games, one for recording - all over 100mb/s write speed on dxtory)i do go from say 60-40 fps to 45-30 playing and recording @ 30fps locked on dxtory on dayz. and i notice it on bf3 too. was thinking of this http://www.scan.co.u...d-record-button thanks again mate :)

i guess my final question is : for recording/streaming is it worth getting the avermedia card + the asus or the benq and pray my i5 overclocked can handle it? what would you do? asus is 120 + 120 for the avermedia or 230 for the benq. thanks so much :)

Specs of monitor - (ill type em, but ill link to the main page) panel type : tn, response time : 2ms, pitch size 0.276mm, resolution 1920x1080, refresh rate 120hz, contrast ratio 1000:1 / 12000000:1, http://www.scan.co.u...1-2ms-black-red techradar.com love it - And it's just, well, brilliant. It may be around £100 cheaper than the equivalent 24-inch 144Hz screen from Asus, but there's not a hint of budget aspiration in sight. This is a great screen, with top TN technology inside it and all for an excellent price. also, in my shoes (for streaming/recording) would you get the first ASUS recommended @ 60hz w/ the avermedia card or could the i5 760 overclocked to 3.6hz-4.2hz handle it?

Thanks again man. That monitor looks sweet, I'm buying the ''bundle'' of stuff from scan.co.uk and it's £123 with a 9.7/10 rating. + yeah, the monitor has a single (thin, no more than 1cm) white line near the right edge that runs vertical Plus it would be nice as a ''backup'' monitor - always wanted dual monitors. Also would it be worth spending a extra £100 for a 120hz Benq monitor? Same size. Would have to lose the avermedia card though, however i'm hoping that once I have a overclock stable on the i5760 on more optimised games i'll be able to stream/record at least at 30fps or is that wishful thinking?