Geforce update claims to fix optimization with arma

[Jaylen Sarrett]

Anyone downloaded it yet? 361.91

[Sheriff Rick Grimes]

I did, i'm not entirely sure I saw much of a difference.  I get a solid 40 frames on Asylum.  I have a GTX 660

[Jaylen Sarrett]

2 minutes ago, Sheriff Rick Grimes said:

I did, i'm not entirely sure I saw much of a difference.  I get a solid 40 frames on Asylum.  I have a GTX 660

 

i have the same gcard, what cpu you got?

[rngr]

11 minutes ago, Jaylen Sarrett said:

Anyone downloaded it yet? 361.91

Where does it claim to fix?

[Jaylen Sarrett]

Just now, Ranger said:

Where does it claim to fix?

in the download, get the best "optimization for arma, etc. etc. with this new update"

Edited February 22, 2016 by Jaylen Sarrett

[Sheriff Rick Grimes]

1 minute ago, Jaylen Sarrett said:

 

i have the same gcard, what cpu you got?

 

Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-3450 CPU @ 3.10GHz 

[Pentax]

i7 4790k, 770, didn't optimize shit. You can't fix shit engine with gpu drivers, not how shit works.

[Sean // Fitty Bread]

4 minutes ago, Jaylen Sarrett said:

in the download, get the best "optimization for arma, etc. etc. with this new update"

Doesn't say that at all. It says it provides the most "optimal experience" for Arma. They could have fucking remade their old driver and said the same thing. 

[Jaylen Sarrett]

Just now, Sean // Fitty Bread said:

Doesn't say that at all. It says it provides the most "optimal experience" for Arma. They could have fucking remade their old driver and said the same thing. 

splitting hairs at this point

 

they could've done that, which is why i asked.

[Ghost0fDawn]

12 minutes ago, Jaylen Sarrett said:

in the download, get the best "optimization for arma, etc. etc. with this new update"

Just because they state optimization for geforce hardware does not mean you are going to suddenly get the performance of a Titan X out of a 660. I have noticed somewhat of an improvement, but like any hardware's software update is not going to be a major benchmark change. Arma has never been about the GPU anyway. sure, it may be GPU demanding to get the most out of it (4K ultra, high object/render distance) but either way you will seldom get 60 solid FPS in a multiplayer scenario with average action or above. It has little to do with GPU performace and strongly to do with CPU/server-side limitations. I sometimes will get 40-50 FPS in Kavala at 4K, and sometimes get 15-30FPS in Kavla in 4k, reducing my resolution down to 1080p does virtually nothing often those times, because that's purely a matter of GPU usage, which is not the cause of FPS drop.

In short for Arma III: A good GPU will get you a better looking game, but it's not going to give you the greatest FPS. Arma 3 itself is terribly optimized at it's core, only 32bit, and there's nothing NVIDIA can do about that.

The best hope for the series is that Arma IV is properly optimized when it's time is around as well as 64bit. Seriously Bohemia, 64bit should not even be a question at this point.

[CyanogenCX]

29 minutes ago, Ghost0fDawn said:

Just because they state optimization for geforce hardware does not mean you are going to suddenly get the performance of a Titan X out of a 660. I have noticed somewhat of an improvement, but like any hardware's software update is not going to be a major benchmark change. Arma has never been about the GPU anyway. sure, it may be GPU demanding to get the most out of it (4K ultra, high object/render distance) but either way you will seldom get 60 solid FPS in a multiplayer scenario with average action or above. It has little to do with GPU performace and strongly to do with CPU/server-side limitations. I sometimes will get 40-50 FPS in Kavala at 4K, and sometimes get 15-30FPS in Kavla in 4k, reducing my resolution down to 1080p does virtually nothing often those times, because that's purely a matter of GPU usage, which is not the cause of FPS drop.

In short for Arma III: A good GPU will get you a better looking game, but it's not going to give you the greatest FPS. Arma 3 itself is terribly optimized at it's core, only 32bit, and there's nothing NVIDIA can do about that.

The best hope for the series is that Arma IV is properly optimized when it's time is around as well as 64bit. Seriously Bohemia, 64bit should not even be a question at this point.

Arma 4 is probably gonna be another 2-3 years (if not longer) seeing as they are releasing tanoa this year.

[CyanogenCX]

10 minutes ago, Gnashes said:

Arma 3 is still in Beta, what are you talking about?

Arma: Armed Assault was released in 2007, Arma 2 was in 2010, Arma 3 was in 2013, Apex+Eden Released in 2016.

At this rate, it seems to be that the next one in the series would be released in 2019.

Also, this seems to indicate Arma 3 left Beta in September 2013, so I'm not sure where you're getting your information from.

http://www.pcgamer.com/arma-3-release-date-announced-leaves-beta-next-month/ 

"Arma 3's official launch is still going to be a significant enhancement for pretend soldiers, their pretend commanders, and the very real jerks who just want to mess with people . All of them will be able to get their hands on the full game, when it leaves beta on September 12."

Edited February 23, 2016 by CyanogenCX

[Jaylen Sarrett]

18 minutes ago, CyanogenCX said:

 

Also, this seems to indicate Arma 3 left Beta in September 2013, so I'm not sure where you're getting your information from.

http://www.pcgamer.com/arma-3-release-date-announced-leaves-beta-next-month/ 

"Arma 3's official launch is still going to be a significant enhancement for pretend soldiers, their pretend commanders, and the very real jerks who just want to mess with people . All of them will be able to get their hands on the full game, when it leaves beta on September 12."

i think he was making a joke

[CyanogenCX]

5 minutes ago, Jaylen Sarrett said:

i think he was making a joke

I highly doubt it, but w/e

[Ghost0fDawn]

52 minutes ago, CyanogenCX said:

Arma 4 is probably gonna be another 2-3 years (if not longer) seeing as they are releasing tanoa this year.

I am okay with that. A good time-gap between the games can mean that new, proper features can be introduced. I wouldn't want an Arma 3.5

[dj.devran]

1 hour ago, Pentax said:

i7 4790k, 770, didn't optimize shit. You can't fix shit engine with gpu drivers, not how shit works.

sorry pls dont get angry

[Ghost0fDawn]

57 minutes ago, CyanogenCX said:

10 minutes ago, CyanogenCX said:

16 minutes ago, Jaylen Sarrett said:

i think he was making a joke

I highly doubt it, but w/e

 

You're kidding right? Gnashes has been playing how long? Did you even read who that was making the comment? If you really don't think that was a joke you need to turn down your serious meter.

[Shepurd]

39 minutes ago, CyanogenCX said:

Arma: Armed Assault was released in 2007, Arma 2 was in 2010, Arma 3 was in 2013, Apex+Eden Released in 2016.

At this rate, it seems to be that the next one in the series would be released in 2019.

Also, this seems to indicate Arma 3 left Beta in September 2013, so I'm not sure where you're getting your information from.

http://www.pcgamer.com/arma-3-release-date-announced-leaves-beta-next-month/ 

"Arma 3's official launch is still going to be a significant enhancement for pretend soldiers, their pretend commanders, and the very real jerks who just want to mess with people . All of them will be able to get their hands on the full game, when it leaves beta on September 12."

 

[CyanogenCX]

7 minutes ago, Ghost0fDawn said:

You're kidding right? Gnashes has been playing how long? Did you even read who that was making the comment? If you really don't think that was a joke you need to turn down your serious meter.

I just didn't think it was a joke because I didn't find it funny. I'm not sure I get the joke... mind explaining it to me? (I'm being 100% serious right now)

[Ghost0fDawn]

Just now, CyanogenCX said:

I just didn't think it was a joke because I didn't find it funny. I'm not sure I get the joke... mind explaining it to me? (I'm being 100% serious right now)

Arma 3 is still terribly optimized and runs like shit.

[Gatorade]

i5 4670 k over clocked to 3.6 (base 3.4) , 12 gb ram , gtx 760 4 gb Super over clocked at stock - Runs just about everything ultra , on 50 frames average, 35-45 in cities and laggy car rides. Lowest ive gone yet since I over clocked CPU and got an SSD was like 27 when I was on ARCHTYPE server where there was 8 strideres out,  2 armed ghost hawks , and enough smoke in the fed to cause the sun to die out. : P

 

If you can, overclock your cpu a small amount like .1 ghz , it will improve shit alot in arma, and please auto detect your settings. If you are on low / med / maybe even high , it runs off of your CPU not your GPU. Arma already taxes the CPU

[Shepurd]

1 hour ago, CyanogenCX said:

I just didn't think it was a joke because I didn't find it funny. I'm not sure I get the joke... mind explaining it to me? (I'm being 100% serious right now)

It's funny because Arma has the optimization of a game in beta. It's honestly pathetic how bad it is.

[|Cam|]

3 hours ago, Pentax said:

i7 4790k, 770, didn't optimize shit. You can't fix shit engine with gpu drivers, not how shit works.

Say shit again

[Pentax]

24 minutes ago, |Cam| said:

Say shit again

You did it for me 

[|Cam|]

5 hours ago, Pentax said:

 

Sly dog