Have Arma 2 patches optimized the game?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for KHAndAnime
KHAndAnime

17565

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#1 KHAndAnime
Member since 2009 • 17565 Posts

The demo ran terrible for me on all settings. It was definitely the game's optimization and not my PC. Is the full game much more optimized? With a 3.5 ghz Core 2 Duo, 4gb of RAM, and a 9800GTX+ I'd expect at least medium/high settings.

Avatar image for kozzy1234
kozzy1234

35966

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 86

User Lists: 0

#2 kozzy1234
Member since 2005 • 35966 Posts

Comparing the demo to the full version is HUGE, thats all im gonna say.

Demo didnt run all that good for me but the full version patched up to latest patch runs good.

If im not mistaken there have been 5 patches now.

Avatar image for the_mitch28
the_mitch28

4684

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 the_mitch28
Member since 2005 • 4684 Posts

The demo ran terrible for me on all settings. It was definitely the game's optimization and not my PC. Is the full game much more optimized? With a 3.5 ghz Core 2 Duo, 4gb of RAM, and a 9800GTX+ I'd expect at least medium/high settings.

KHAndAnime

Well you have the same graphics card as me and a better CPU and more RAM and I can run the game just fine.

Avatar image for rastaman219
rastaman219

3032

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 rastaman219
Member since 2006 • 3032 Posts
Yeah, definatly. Plus with user created maps that don't have the scale of Chernarus, so thus use less RAM. It's worth a purchase imo, especially as it's came down in price.
Avatar image for skrat_01
skrat_01

33767

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 skrat_01
Member since 2007 • 33767 Posts
I'd certainly say so. Game runs well for me, ACE2 and a couple of a.i. mods sweeten the deal.
Avatar image for dakan45
dakan45

18819

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#6 dakan45
Member since 2009 • 18819 Posts
Yeah but not in a amazing way. Still the full game is far better than the dmo in all ways. Its wise to use a quad core though!!
Avatar image for MPHhunter
MPHhunter

652

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 MPHhunter
Member since 2006 • 652 Posts
Yes. It runs much better for me. I can max all of the settings(including AA) with a view distance of approximately 6400 and still get around 30 fps.
Avatar image for frizzyman0292
frizzyman0292

2855

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 frizzyman0292
Member since 2007 • 2855 Posts

I have a far worse desktop and i can still play it on high. I'd say you would be good.

Avatar image for dakan45
dakan45

18819

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#9 dakan45
Member since 2009 • 18819 Posts
Yes. It runs much better for me. I can max all of the settings(including AA) with a view distance of approximately 6400 and still get around 30 fps.MPHhunter
With that rig? Why wouldnt you max it?
Avatar image for dos4gw82
dos4gw82

1896

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 dos4gw82
Member since 2006 • 1896 Posts

The demo ran terrible for me on all settings. It was definitely the game's optimization and not my PC. Is the full game much more optimized? With a 3.5 ghz Core 2 Duo, 4gb of RAM, and a 9800GTX+ I'd expect at least medium/high settings.

KHAndAnime
Depends on what OS you're running and what resolution you'll be running it at. I have around the same system as you with windows 7 and a 1920x1080 monitor. The only way I've been able to get a playable framerate is to turn it down to 1280x720 or below. Adjusting the graphical settings got me mixed results. There were many areas where decreasing the resolution was the only way to keep thing going smooth. In fact, Arma 2's performance issues were a huge part of why I disliked the game. It seemed like I could never find a "sweet spot" in the settings; it either looked fantastic but was unplayable or look dreadfuled and was playable. Anyway, my advise would be to wait until your next upgrade.
Avatar image for The_Quarian
The_Quarian

135

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11 The_Quarian
Member since 2010 • 135 Posts
I wouldn't advocate a dual core for this game.
Avatar image for MPHhunter
MPHhunter

652

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 MPHhunter
Member since 2006 • 652 Posts

[QUOTE="MPHhunter"]Yes. It runs much better for me. I can max all of the settings(including AA) with a view distance of approximately 6400 and still get around 30 fps.dakan45
With that rig? Why wouldnt you max it?

I could, but it would run a bit choppy. Do you have any tips on how I could make the performance of my machine better? I don't really have any software to optimize performance, and the Windows and Nvidia settings are all at pretty much at defaults. I had to completely format my PC because of a nasty virus, and pretty much just have the basics. And my games, of course.

Avatar image for the_mitch28
the_mitch28

4684

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13 the_mitch28
Member since 2005 • 4684 Posts

I wouldn't advocate a dual core for this game.The_Quarian

Game works fine on dual core.

That 1000 AI video in ArmA 2 was done on an OC'd Dual core.