Is Arma Engine not AMD processor friendly ?

[gho5tl3git@gmail.com 13]

I really want to know if its true because some of my steam friends whom I talked to had a less powerfull GPU but had an i5 or i7 and were getting more than double the fps I was !

 

I currently use FX-6300 , MSI Gtx 760 tf/oc , 4gb corsair xms3 ram and windows 8.1 

 

I have tried all those document tweaks but I just don't seem to get high fps ... except when I put my FOV to the least or look at the ground . 

 

Even in forests I get like 30 fps :( But in towns and cities it really drops . The only thing that has impact on my performance is for some reason Object quality ... which can give me a 10 fps boost ( I get 30 fps while keeping it on low/normal )

 

Everything else just increases or decreases my fps by 1-2

 

._.

 

Do you see that face ? That face is sad !

 

[krihelion 175]

Your ram is pretty low, close out of every other process except the game

 

ive always been fine on amd processors, try setting it to use all your cores

[desryachri 95]

2.8ghz 6 core 1055t and I am fine with fps, something g you will need to get use to arma in General is no good with fps

[gho5tl3git@gmail.com 13]

Your ram is pretty low, close out of every other process except the game

 

ive always been fine on amd processors, try setting it to use all your cores

I set it ... but I don't actually know what value I should put in "exthreads-" 

[szfeps@gmail.com 2]

I have fx-6300 + gtx 760 + 4gb ram and i have on very low 30fps in city, 50fps+ forests.. stock 3.5

[SaveMeJebus 164]

Not saying AMD isn't capable of running arma well but it sure does seem like a lot of the performance issues stem from amd hardware.

[CREDiBLE 42]

ARMA is not processor friendly, period.

[gho5tl3git@gmail.com 13]

I have fx-6300 + gtx 760 + 4gb ram and i have on very low 30fps in city, 50fps+ forests.. stock 3.5

Brother ?!

[szfeps@gmail.com 2]

Our processor must have 4.5 or more to be good :P

[dgeesio 1034]

intel is better because they are faster. no fanboy its just how it is.

[daze23 549]

Not saying AMD isn't capable of running arma well but it sure does seem like a lot of the performance issues stem from amd hardware.

 

well almost any benchmark will show you that intel cpu's tend to perform better. it doesn't matter in most games, because they're not so cpu dependent

[Jaygoon 240]

I have i7 16gb ram, Radeon R9 270x 2gb  and Dayz runs like a dream for me, even in the city.

 

So amd is fine tbh, i would stick with amd mate, even with your next card.

[ImageCtrl 719]

intel is better because they are faster. no fanboy its just how it is.

this^^

[daze23 549]

I have i7 16gb ram, Radeon R9 270x 2gb  and Dayz runs like a dream for me, even in the city.

 

So amd is fine tbh, i would stick with amd mate, even with your next card.

 

pretty sure we're talking about cpu's, since the OP said he has an nvidia gpu

[Jaygoon 240]

When we finally lose microsoft from the gaming world we will see how powerfull our machines really are.

 

Direct x & windows created a bottleneck and hold our computers back so consoles can thrive.

 

A pc with exactly the same specs as an xbox one or ps4 cannot compete with the consoles, why?

Because Direct x & windows hold the pc back.

 

So if you need to vent some hate, vent it towards microsoft, for costing you money over the years when you have had to buy an over the top gpu or extra ram just to play games that an inferior console can run easily.

[kazeen 15]

phenom1090 6core @ 4.2ghz runs just fine

 

Have not setup any of tweaks yet

[nik21 287]

I really want to know if its true because some of my steam friends whom I talked to had a less powerfull GPU but had an i5 or i7 and were getting more than double the fps I was !

 

What matters is the raw power of the CPU and not it's manufacturer. Current Core i CPUs simply have more power per core than current AMD processors which makes them perform better in most games..

Ofc it also depends on your video settings, the scene that is currently being rendered etc.

 

But I am really tired of seeing bs threads stating that the performance is dependant on the hardware manufacturer - why the hell should it be? You can't "optimize" a game for a specific CPU manufacturer... claiming that is just stupid and proves lack of knowledge.

 

It's like saying "This game is badly optimized for nvidia cards, my GTX 8800 can barely run this while my friend has a HD 7970 and it's from AMD... OMG!!"

[desryachri 95]

phenom1090 6core @ 4.2ghz runs just fine

Have not setup any of tweaks yet

yeah 6 core beats intel my 2.8 old 1055t round absolutely fine no tweeks Edited December 21, 2013 by Desryachri

[davschall 11]

ARMA is not processor friendly, period.

Lol this, my brother has a 4670k and he only gets about 5-6 fps more than me with my 8350. He has a 7970 and I have a 7950. I have noticed a lot less of a cpu bottleneck though, and objects detail is a gpu intensive setting afaik. Im trying to tread carefully since people will interpret it as fanboyism which it is not. Id have to know their cards to really give you an answer. Its hard for me to believe that they are getting twice the fps as you. My brothers min frames are a bit better than mine, but he doesnt jump anywhere near 2 times my frames.

[gho5tl3git@gmail.com 13]

What matters is the raw power of the CPU and not it's manufacturer. Current Core i CPUs simply have more power per core than current AMD processors which makes them perform better in most games..

Ofc it also depends on your video settings, the scene that is currently being rendered etc.

 

But I am really tired of seeing bs threads stating that the performance is dependant on the hardware manufacturer - why the hell should it be? You can't "optimize" a game for a specific CPU manufacturer... claiming that is just stupid and proves lack of knowledge.

 

It's like saying "This game is badly optimized for nvidia cards, my GTX 8800 can barely run this while my friend has a HD 7970 and it's from AMD... OMG!!"

 

 

Well there's a reason am saying this . It is really happening so am saying it... 

[davschall 11]

When we finally lose microsoft from the gaming world we will see how powerfull our machines really are.

 

Direct x & windows created a bottleneck and hold our computers back so consoles can thrive.

 

A pc with exactly the same specs as an xbox one or ps4 cannot compete with the consoles, why?

Because Direct x & windows hold the pc back.

 

So if you need to vent some hate, vent it towards microsoft, for costing you money over the years when you have had to buy an over the top gpu or extra ram just to play games that an inferior console can run easily.

This as well, maybe they'll pick up mantle....idk how its gonna work out but it looks great on paper.

 

Also I to hate the threads, where people who arent informed say it is because it is. You just make yourself look like a sheep. Well intels better because..it is. OFC I dont really care because I have both systems in my home so I can actually see/compare side by side. I've been enjoying playing on both systems.

 

Saying intels better thats why his friends are getting double the fps doesnt even make any sense to me, its not even helpful. Honestly he might think he has a better gpu than his friends, but might not.....or they are lying about their fps lol. To op if you have your 6300 at stock and have a decent cooler might be worth it to try ocing if possible. My 8350 is at 4.6 ghz and the difference between 4.5 and 4.6 for me is actually larger than the difference between 4.6-5.0. So even bumping up the multi a bit might help. If it is indeed a cpu problem, but it could be a wealth of issues such as drivers and such.

[daze23 549]

When we finally lose microsoft from the gaming world we will see how powerfull our machines really are.

 

Direct x & windows created a bottleneck and hold our computers back so consoles can thrive.

 

A pc with exactly the same specs as an xbox one or ps4 cannot compete with the consoles, why?

Because Direct x & windows hold the pc back.

 

So if you need to vent some hate, vent it towards microsoft, for costing you money over the years when you have had to buy an over the top gpu or extra ram just to play games that an inferior console can run easily.

I'm not sure that's fair. for obvious reasons (that have nothing to do with consoles or any conspiracy) Microsoft does not look at the PC as a pure gaming platform. you can't run MS Excel on a PS4

 

that is what Valve is trying to do with their OS. but they are looking at the PC as a pure gaming platform

[gho5tl3git@gmail.com 13]

This as well, maybe they'll pick up mantle....idk how its gonna work out but it looks great on paper.

 

Also I to hate the threads, where people who arent informed say it is because it is. You just make yourself look like a sheep. Well intels better because..it is. OFC I dont really care because I have both systems in my home so I can actually see/compare side by side. I've been enjoying playing on both systems.

 

Saying intels better thats why his friends are getting double the fps doesnt even make any sense to me, its not even helpful. Honestly he might think he has a better gpu than his friends, but might not.....or they are lying about their fps lol. To op if you have your 6300 at stock and have a decent cooler might be worth it to try ocing if possible. My 8350 is at 4.6 ghz and the difference between 4.5 and 4.6 for me is actually larger than the difference between 4.6-5.0. So even bumping up the multi a bit might help. If it is indeed a cpu problem, but it could be a wealth of issues such as drivers and such.

I was actually thinking of buying a after market heat sink and oc'ing butI have to upgrade my ram too ! So what should I upgrade ? Ram or Heatsink ?

[Lady Kyrah 1110]

What matters is the raw power of the CPU and not it's manufacturer. Current Core i CPUs simply have more power per core than current AMD processors which makes them perform better in most games..

Ofc it also depends on your video settings, the scene that is currently being rendered etc.

 

But I am really tired of seeing bs threads stating that the performance is dependant on the hardware manufacturer - why the hell should it be? You can't "optimize" a game for a specific CPU manufacturer... claiming that is just stupid and proves lack of knowledge.

 

It's like saying "This game is badly optimized for nvidia cards, my GTX 8800 can barely run this while my friend has a HD 7970 and it's from AMD... OMG!!"

Well for cpus it's foolish, all cpus run the same instruction sets and excepted a couple of vendor specific gimmicks, there really isn't anything differenciating them other than the amount of cycles they can cram per second. however for GPUs, you have DirectX and OpenGL. ATI/Amd's implementation of openGL is notoriously abysmal compared to NVIDIA's, it rarely show because most windows games are on DirectX, and that's where ATI used to focus their dev time.

[davschall 11]

I was actually thinking of buying a after market heat sink and oc'ing butI have to upgrade my ram too ! So what should I upgrade ? Ram or Heatsink ?

Well I know that the RVE 3 can only utilize up to 4 gb if what ive been told is correct. Idk about RVE 4 im assuming more. So i cant really say how much the SA can utilize. 8 gb seems to be the best way to go, are you running your 4 gb in dual channel? If so I would suggest just getting a set of 8 (2x4) gb, if you buy off newegg. It isnt going to cost much more, and a higher speed will help you with ocing (f you do an fsb oc which i suggest learning). I would look for some cas 9 1866 or 2133 ram depending on which your mobo supports. It will help it so you dont have to loosen your timings as much and wont have to run dividers on your memory as quickly.  

 

You can get an evo 212 which will be fine for a while for 34 bucks Id watch for it go down in price. Ive seen it drop to 15 with MIR, then its a no brainer.  

 

Its hard to say which to get first, ram is going to benifit you more in other games coming up thats for sure. Idk what you have in mind for a budget, but imo picking them both up would be worth it if you can get the 212 for cheap. Id have to know what you want to spend right now to really help you.

 

Edit: While I hate wasting old tech if you run the 4 gbs with the 8, it will work but if the cas latency and clock speeds are lower, you'll be limited by the 4 gbs, it can negatively affect your ocing. Plus if I remember right Amd likes to run in dual channel when ocing.

Edited December 21, 2013 by Davschall