• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

ARMA III Alpha Benchmarks GPU

C

csbin

Senior member
http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/arma-iii-alpha-test-gpu.html

At a resolution of 2560x1600 at maximum settings acceptable rate FPS video showed the level Radeon HD 7970GE or GeForce GTX 590. Optimal graphics solutions will be Radeon HD 6990 or GEFORCE GTX 690 and above

9XaWKNx.jpg




Qk17blk.jpg


3WH6PBG.jpg


OaLvwiS.jpg


Rjg47ko.jpg


Ytl7a71.jpg
 
The Arma series (prior to 3 at least) has got to be one of the worst, best looking engines ever created. It's so frustrating.
 
It is really frustrating, I love the game but I wish they'd rebuilt the engine properly five years ago as it simply won't take advantage of the resources you give it. I know how demanding it is with all the AI etc but if they'd redesigned the engine (admittedly a very expensive and time consuming business) they'd sell far more copies because it would run much better on mid weight machines. Single player is fine for me but MP struggles to be playable (around 20-30fps) while my hardware is twiddling it's thumbs at 50% utilisation. The engine hasn't substantially changed for Arma 3 and is actually 12 years old. That said performance improved markedly today after opting into beta, it's whizzing along and the old 6990's are still earning their keep.
 
Last edited:
Hi!

Based on these benchmarks, I'm just wondering if my system will be able to run Arma III at a decent amount of FPS.


HP xw8600 with the following setup:
  • 2x Quad-Core Intel Xeon Processor E5440/ 2.83 GHz,1333 MHz FSB, 80 watt, 12MB L2 cache)
  • 20GB PC2-5300F DDR2-667 ECC Full Buffered DIMM CTO
  • 1x 120GB SanDisk SSD for OS and 2x 500GB 7200rpm disks in HW Raid0
  • AMD Radeon HD6990 (With the Accelero Twin Turbo 6990 cooler)
  • 30" 2560x1600 display
  • 800W PSU
 
No drivers will be optimised yet for this engine so id expect better performance after release
 
Jacky60 said:
It is really frustrating, I love the game but I wish they'd rebuilt the engine properly five years ago as it simply won't take advantage of the resources you give it. I know how demanding it is with all the AI etc but if they'd redesigned the engine (admittedly a very expensive and time consuming business) they'd sell far more copies because it would run much better on mid weight machines. Single player is fine for me but MP struggles to be playable (around 20-30fps) while my hardware is twiddling it's thumbs at 50% utilisation. The engine hasn't substantially changed for Arma 3 and is actually 12 years old.
Click to expand...

Your machine with 2x HD6990s isn't what I call "mid weight".. So why you're only getting that kind of low FPS is strange..
 
ChrZZ said:
Your machine with 2x HD6990s isn't what I call "mid weight".. So why you're only getting that kind of low FPS is strange..
Click to expand...

Probably cause it really is more of a CPU limited game most of the time. The AIs suck down on the processor, and it has been this case since the original Operation Flashpoint, and then ArmA.

He also probably plays huge maps, with more than Single Player levels of AI.
 
Bearach said:
Probably cause it really is more of a CPU limited game most of the time. The AIs suck down on the processor, and it has been this case since the original Operation Flashpoint, and then ArmA.
Click to expand...

But what FPS-numbers are you getting in Arma II then?

Is the benchmark-scenario a good indication on what FPS the GFX-card deliveres?

EDIT: didn't see before now that I replied to the wrong guy 😉
 
Last edited:
I'm CPU limited and the multiplayer/network code/dedicated server stuff hasn't been resolved yet. It will be but in single player infantry showcase I get 50-60fps. I'm sure (well I hope) multiplayer fps will get a lot better but I'm joining public servers of unknown quality which from Arma2 experience is more usually miss than hit on performance terms. I get 40-70fps in big arma2 multiplayer maps with lots ai on fast server. My machine is an ageing quite fast light heavy weight but not a 19year old Mike Tyson, 5ghz 3960 and 2 Titans or 690's is going to unify the heavyweight division!
 
Last edited:
Yeah Alpha benchmark is a bit too much to ask-I just gained 10fps Arma 3 with opting into beta update. I must admit it's way too early to draw conclusions about its final performance (even though I may already be a bit guilty of this) as it's got noticeably better in the last 24 hours.
 
Still no reason to upgrade. Apart from people telling me my 6990 is a horrible stutterery mess of a graphics card..... Without ever using one.
 
I spoke too soon re poor performance I'm flying along in multiplayer at 50-70fps. That's the problem with 6990's they don't work -apart from they do and they rule!
Agreed no need to upgrade, move along now please nothing to see here!
 
Does infantry movement still feel like a tank simulator?

That was by far the worst part about Arma II you should not feel that moving your character around is like driving a tank. It should be fluid because it's supposed to be your body. I always HATED that about Arma.
 
It is absolutely brilliant and beautiful-just dove into editor and it's a joy. I didn't really notice or was in denial about arma 2 stuttering til I experienced this which is really so much smoother (subjective impression). It looks amazing and plays better than Arma2 did on release. Annisman I can imagine your system is handling it rather well!
 
Last edited:
Jacky60 said:
It is absolutely brilliant and beautiful-just dove into editor and it's a joy. I didn't really notice or was in denial about arma 2 stuttering til I experienced this which is really so much smoother (subjective impression). It looks amazing and plays better than Arma2 did on release. Annisman I can imagine your system is handling it rather well!
Click to expand...

Well, I've only got one Titan right now, sold the other one and forgot to update my sig !

But yeah, it is handling it very well, considering how my my GPU/CPU utilization % is while playing. I expect much in terms of performance gains when new drivers are here.
 
Well weapons and vehicles are limited as is landscape-only 1 of the Islands, Multiplayer is still buggy and fps varies a lot according to server, the numbers of players and the high pings of lots of players. But it's playable and can be fun.
 
Jacky60 said:
Well weapons and vehicles are limited as is landscape-only 1 of the Islands, Multiplayer is still buggy and fps varies a lot according to server, the numbers of players and the high pings of lots of players. But it's playable and can be fun.
Click to expand...
ok, thanks.

I maybe try it out then .
 
I can't access the main site. THANK YOU for posting these. Frankly speaking, most of the benchmarks people (BF2,Batman, Crysis...) are quite useless for my case. I pretty much only care for how ArmA runs. I wonder if the charts are going to be updated for the GTX 780 and eventually haswell.

Again, thank you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top