Dayz FPS

[KirbyTech]

I am trying to play dayz and am only getting 20-30 frames max. Changing the graphical settings seems to have zero affect on fps or if it is there I could not notice it while using msi afterburner for fps counter. My system is i7 3770 and a 660 ti. I have tried stock and overclocked gpu with no performance gain ( granted it was only 100mhz).

 

Any idea on improving fps? This is unplayable, it was fine till I explored other games that I could run at 60 fps and not 20-30 sucks. 

[Atmos]

Better gpu, better cpu both needed.

 

DayZ uses the arma engine, which is one of the worst designed and optimized engines ever. That was a big selling point to me on the 4970K i now have, because it has the best single-core performance on the market. DayZ & Arma use literally, a single core, it's aweful... Not to mention the way the engine handles draw calls is funky fresh, sending them first through the server before going to the player meaning that the power of the server you're on affects fps greatly.

 

If you absolutely NEED higher fps, get a better cpu, gpu makes little difference. My 270X lets me play in towns @ butter smooth 60fps. (I don't count heli's crashing every 5 seconds in that equation btw.)

[KirbyTech]

Better gpu, better cpu both needed.

 

DayZ uses the arma engine, which is one of the worst designed and optimized engines ever. That was a big selling point to me on the 4970K i now have, because it has the best single-core performance on the market. DayZ & Arma use literally, a single core, it's aweful... Not to mention the way the engine handles draw calls is funky fresh, sending them first through the server before going to the player meaning that the power of the server you're on affects fps greatly.

Better gpu does not make sense since overclocking is not helping in the least. As for cpu I am going to be going x99 sometime soon. 5820k is the cpu I am looking at.

[Notree]

There's some guides on dayz tv that may help. Dont expect to ever get a solid 60 fps in dayz. I've set my video settings to where I get a 50 fps and in towns it drops to like 32. All my friends I play with have similar issues. Even with 290/x or 970/980 they cant maintain 60 fps.

http://www.dayztv.com/standalone/dayz-performance-guide-crash-fix/

[Oshino Shinobu]

Better gpu does not make sense since overclocking is not helping in the least. As for cpu I am going to be going x99 sometime soon. 5820k is the cpu I am looking at.

In terms of single core performance, the Haswell-E CPUs are actually slightly weaker than the 4790K. 

 

DayZ performs like crap on pretty much any setup though. 

[KirbyTech]

There's some guides on dayz tv that may help. Dont expect to ever get a solid 60 fps in dayz. I've set my video settings to where i get a 50 fps and it towns it drops to like 32. All my friends I play with have similar issues. Even with 290/x or 980 they cant maintain 60 fps.

I am not hoping for 60 fps, I think most can't get that. I would really like a stable 30-40 in the woods so in the city it is not lag hell

[Atmos]

Better gpu does not make sense since overclocking is not helping in the least. As for cpu I am going to be going x99 sometime soon. 5820k is the cpu I am looking at.

 

The 5820K will give you better fps, yes. But the 4790k still would give you the theoretical best on average. Don't let that be the soul reason you buy one though.

 

And there are two factors that are playing in when your fps is dropping in the Arma engine.

 

FPS drop #1) cpu is at 100% load from processing AI movement, and physics calcs for bullet drop, obj interaction, and general stability. This is the main hitter on fps, and why you notice big changes between towns and open fields. It accounts for about 70% of lag I'd guesstimate most of the time.

 

FPS Drop #2) Graphics processing power. Arma stresses the gpu when it has to make physics calcs and renders on destroyed craft, hence why blowing up 5 heli's at the same time results in huge lag. Also the way the engine renders in textures, as well as shadows just sucks. This is why during a firefight or during a bombing run your fps will tank even more than normal.

 

For your case, you're not using a particularly powerful gpu, and a 100mhz oc will change nothing. The biggest change is still cpu bound, but if you get that 5820K, suddenly now that 660 will hold you back quite a bit.

[KirbyTech]

The 5820K will give you better fps, yes. But the 4790k still would give you the theoretical best on average. Don't let that be the soul reason you buy one though.

 

And there are two factors that are playing in when your fps is dropping in the Arma engine.

 

FPS drop #1) cpu is at 100% load from processing AI movement, and physics calcs for bullet drop, obj interaction, and general stability. This is the main hitter on fps, and why you notice big changes between towns and open fields. It accounts for about 70% of lag I'd guesstimate most of the time.

 

FPS Drop #2) Graphics processing power. Arma stresses the gpu when it has to make physics calcs and renders on destroyed craft, hence why blowing up 5 heli's at the same time results in huge lag. Also the way the engine renders in textures, as well as shadows just sucks. This is why during a firefight or during a bombing run your fps will tank even more than normal.

I am playing the standalone so no helis yet

[Atmos]

I am playing the standalone so no helis yet

 

Esp in the standalone it has to render a lot of cells, and lighting for the cells that arma 2 normally doesnt have to. (ie, more rooms, more ways light interacts) So, it's as i said above. For arma its about a 70% cpu / 30% gpu equation. which is usually the opposite of most games. But once you get a 5820k, then that 660 will hold you down a great deal. I'd suggest getting a far better gpu if you're not already,

[Notree]

I am not hoping for 60 fps, I think most can't get that. I would really like a stable 30-40 in the woods so in the city it is not lag hell

Yah. Well try those performance tweaks I linked. Check some youtube videos also theres tons of them showing tweaks you can do.

[KirbyTech]

Esp in the standalone it has to render a lot of cells, and lighting for the cells that arma 2 normally doesnt have to. (ie, more rooms, more ways light interacts) So, it's as i said above. For arma its about a 70% cpu / 30% gpu equation. which is usually the opposite of most games. But once you get a 5820k, then that 660 will hold you down a great deal. I'd suggest getting a far better gpu if you're not already,

I had no plans to get a new gpu for gaming anytime soon as I was hopping my 660 ti would last until the next gen of Nvida cards. Only gpu I was planning on installing is a Quadro K620 for 10 bit support. 

[iludez]

Unfortunately the others are right if you want to play dayz witha decent fps you will need better hardware.There is alternatives such as disabling postprocess setting video memory to high and shadows off 

[Atmos]

I had no plans to get a new gpu for gaming anytime soon as I was hopping my 660 ti would last until the next gen of Nvida cards. Only gpu I was planning on installing is a Quadro K620 for 10 bit support. 

I'd suggest picking up one of the new AMD cards when they come out. HBM is promising to have huge improvements, whereas Nvidia won't be able to get their hands on hbm for a few years now.

[KirbyTech]

Unfortunately the others are right if you want to play dayz witha decent fps you will need better hardware.There is alternatives such as disabling postprocess setting video memory to high and shadows off 

Sucks but I'll look into it.

 

I'd suggest picking up one of the new AMD cards when they come out. HBM is promising to have huge improvements, whereas Nvidia won't be able to get their hands on hbm for a few years now.

Yes but AMD does not have CUDA. CUDA is great for Adobe premiere and After Effects, which I use more than I game.

[iludez]

If you are going to upgrade get either a used gtx 780 or a 970 you will be very happy.Otherwise try what i suggested it does help 

[KirbyTech]

If you are going to upgrade get either a used gtx 780 or a 970 you will be very happy.Otherwise try what i suggested it does help 

I did it helped and I went into Geforce Experience and used the setting from there

[freexavier]

I am trying to play dayz and am only getting 20-30 frames max. Changing the graphical settings seems to have zero affect on fps or if it is there I could not notice it while using msi afterburner for fps counter. My system is i7 3770 and a 660 ti. I have tried stock and overclocked gpu with no performance gain ( granted it was only 100mhz).

 

Any idea on improving fps? This is unplayable, it was fine till I explored other games that I could run at 60 fps and not 20-30 sucks. 

 

A simple fix is to set object quality to low. Boom FPS!

 

Edit:

Better gpu, better cpu both needed.

 

DayZ uses the arma engine, which is one of the worst designed and optimized engines ever. That was a big selling point to me on the 4970K i now have, because it has the best single-core performance on the market. DayZ & Arma use literally, a single core, it's aweful... Not to mention the way the engine handles draw calls is funky fresh, sending them first through the server before going to the player meaning that the power of the server you're on affects fps greatly.

 

If you absolutely NEED higher fps, get a better cpu, gpu makes little difference. My 270X lets me play in towns @ butter smooth 60fps. (I don't count heli's crashing every 5 seconds in that equation btw.)

Wha????????? My single CPU barely reaches 80% to 90% usage in DayZ. And for GPU, I get like 50% to 80% most of the time. Its just not optimized that is all. The game isn't just optimized well. That is all. Not some becaues your CPU is crap....

 

Edit:

The 5820K will give you better fps, yes. But the 4790k still would give you the theoretical best on average. Don't let that be the soul reason you buy one though.

 

And there are two factors that are playing in when your fps is dropping in the Arma engine.

 

FPS drop #1) cpu is at 100% load from processing AI movement, and physics calcs for bullet drop, obj interaction, and general stability. This is the main hitter on fps, and why you notice big changes between towns and open fields. It accounts for about 70% of lag I'd guesstimate most of the time.

 

FPS Drop #2) Graphics processing power. Arma stresses the gpu when it has to make physics calcs and renders on destroyed craft, hence why blowing up 5 heli's at the same time results in huge lag. Also the way the engine renders in textures, as well as shadows just sucks. This is why during a firefight or during a bombing run your fps will tank even more than normal.

 

For your case, you're not using a particularly powerful gpu, and a 100mhz oc will change nothing. The biggest change is still cpu bound, but if you get that 5820K, suddenly now that 660 will hold you back quite a bit.

 

The CPU processing of the AI movement is mostly done by the server and not by the client. Its not the CPU fault man. Its just poor optmization.

 

 

Edit:

Sorry I may sound angry. Its just that I'm not having a really good day.

[sgtcool]

Better gpu does not make sense since overclocking is not helping in the least. As for cpu I am going to be going x99 sometime soon. 5820k is the cpu I am looking at.

 

the 5820k is gonna perform worse than a 4790k, beacuse it has more cores

 

[sgtcool]

snip

put this in steam startup parameters,itll load the game faster

-noPause -noSplash

 

if you have a hyperthreaded CPU put this in

-enableHT it should increase fps

 

, turn off clouds,motion blur,post process,ambient occlusion,shadows low or off,the "better looking trees and grass" settings, turn it off, just harder to see and takes about 6? fps

 

overclocking help A LOT, 10 fps boost  on my 4690K 4.4 ghz

maybe ram OC help a bit but im not sure

 

if you have crashes put this in -maxMem=2048

 

my fps: 28-45 cherno

80++ fields,forrests

specs on my profile

[Guest]

-

A 660ti is more than enough for DayZ, the CPU is the bottleneck. I had zero frame difference going from a 7770 to a 7950,.

[Atmos]

A 660ti is more than enough for DayZ, the CPU is the bottleneck. I had zero frame difference going from a 7770 to a 7950,.

The cpu is most definitely not the bottleneck. The 3770k is a monster of a cpu. A 660ti however is a now dated card. Even more so than a 7950.

The op was looking for a replacement card, I gave my suggestion which even a month later still stands. The op was looking to get a next gen Nividia card, so I gave him a most likely better option, since the green team kicked the bucket in terms of hbm.

Nice thread revival spell by the way.

[KirbyTech]

The cpu is most definitely not the bottleneck. The 3770k is a monster of a cpu. A 660ti however is a now dated card. Even more so than a 7950.

The op was looking for a replacement card, I gave my suggestion which even a month later still stands. The op was looking to get a next gen Nividia card, so I gave him a most likely better option, since the green team kicked the bucket in terms of hbm.

Nice thread revival spell by the way.

It is a 3770 non k, so no overclocking which I bet would help a fair bit. Is hbm that important though? What advantages does it have outside gaming? Say Adobe Suite?

[Guest]

The cpu is most definitely not the bottleneck. The 3770k is a monster of a cpu. A 660ti however is a now dated card. Even more so than a 7950.

The op was looking for a replacement card, I gave my suggestion which even a month later still stands. The op was looking to get a next gen Nividia card, so I gave him a most likely better option, since the green team kicked the bucket in terms of hbm.

Nice thread revival spell by the way.

@totjup5

^Has a 3770k, previously a 660ti now a 970. 

[totjup5]

The cpu is most definitely not the bottleneck. The 3770k is a monster of a cpu. A 660ti however is a now dated card. Even more so than a 7950.

The op was looking for a replacement card, I gave my suggestion which even a month later still stands. The op was looking to get a next gen Nividia card, so I gave him a most likely better option, since the green team kicked the bucket in terms of hbm.

Nice thread revival spell by the way.

The CPU is absolutely the bottleneck. I have my 3770k at 4.5 ghz and it's still the bottleneck. I saw zero performance improvement going from dual 660tis to dual 970s. DayZ doesn't require a super powerful gpu, it's just severely bottlenecked by cpu performance due to the fact that it isn't multi-threaded even slightly.

[Atmos]

It is a 3770 non k, so no overclocking which I bet would help a fair bit. Is hbm that important though? What advantages does it have outside gaming? Say Adobe Suite?

 

Hbm, according to fairly substantial rumors is going to be released on the flagship card for amd's 300 series. Giving, what is being toted to be roughly a 4096bit rate on the memory, far, far higher than the 512bit of other top line cards. So as far as increases in performance go, it's hard to say exactly, but experts in the field are predicting something along the lines of 980/titan black performance. Although, that's not counting the efficiency those cards tote, which is not to be thrown to the side. 

 

 

 

 

The CPU is absolutely the bottleneck. I have my 3770k at 4.5 ghz and it's still the bottleneck. I saw zero performance improvement going from dual 660tis to dual 970s. DayZ doesn't require a super powerful gpu, it's just severely bottlenecked by cpu performance due to the fact that it isn't multi-threaded even slightly.

 

 

^Has a 3770k, previously a 660ti now a 970. 

 

 

I'm fully aware that dayz requires a beefy cpu. Arma 3 and arma 2 OA where some major points to consider when i purchased my 4790K, and thanks to it's best class single-core performance it maxes out the game with my 270X at solid FPS. 

 

The issue is, you report even that you saw no improvement going from "dual 660tis to dual 970s" 

 

The op isn't using dual 660ti's. He's using one, singular 660ti, which alone isn't much to speak of these days. Yes, the 3770 is getting on in age, but can still perform. My best judgment is telling me its a combination of the old gpu, and old cpu. But out of experience i made a call that the it was primarily the 660ti's lower end performance to blame. Asside from the point, Arma is never going to give anyone good FPS. Even running the best single-core performing chip, and overclocked to a monstrous 4.7ghz I can manage no more than 35fps in large scale fights. There's not really much we can say whether you or I is right, unless some variables can be eliminated. I don't doubt the 3770 is holding him back, especially since it's not a K series that can be overclocked.