Total

asparagin, ArmA2 uses less than 1GB of RAM. It's own limitations prevent it from using anymore than that. Turning off processes and such are not because of RAM usage, they're because of drive buffer usage. If ArmA2 used more memory, then it would probably perform better for everyone. What generally is the performance killer is the model swapping. Keep your view distance at the mid setting or lower and things should perform better :) On the flip side, I have to run LockOn at less than Higher/Highest settings because of my set up. The bottom of my cockpit view in the F-15 doesn't go below the 3/A Mode setting. Can't even see the top edge of the MFD or any of the center guages. If I zoom out to where I can see them, I will be running about 1FPS lol. Yet, there are others who can see more with their triplehead2go setups and have better performance. I haven't found the magic combination of settings and values for my rig yet. Others can do it, so it's not only plausible, it's possible. Just becuase it doesn't do it on my rig (which is better than some others with the TH2G) doesn't mean it can't be done. So, yeah, I do understand. I'll also never tell someone that they're lying on the performance just because I've never seen it (reference your first reply to me ;) )

Camstudio also works and is free for those on a tight budget ;)

Here's mine:

Tweet from 3sqn does and he noticed about a 25% increase in performance. If you RAMDisk it, you'll get even more.

ArmA's performance relies on more than the GPU and the CPU. How many processes are running? Any peer-to-peer programs running? How much stuff in your task tray? What OS? Capacity of your HDD? Free space on that HDD? Buffer size of the HDD? Capacity and speed of your memory? How much memory used without ArmA2 running? I keep my system running with as few processes as possible. In XP (the OS I ran on the dual core system) I had less than 30 processes. I think it was closer to 25. My memory usage was under 200MB at desktop. My hard drive had a 16MB buffer. I do not file share and did not run any type of messaging or P2P software when gaming (with my current rig, I'll run xfire, but that's about it). Here's a good read on ArmA2's demand on data transfer to the HDD: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=88629 Also, I found that Vista was a performance killer in ArmA2 with the older equipment. Also, I'm not arguing with you :) My roommate had crap for performance with the same GPU & CPU as me until I sat down at his computer and optimized his system. His registry looked like a landfill and temporary files were everywhere. His drive was at 78% capacity with only an 8MB buffer. He was also running Steam, XFire, and about 3 other peer to peer programs plus one file sharing in idle. I turned all of that crap off, cleaned his registry, freed up about 20% of his drive by getting rid of crap he didn't need, defrag the drive, and made a few other system tweaks. He went from running 20FPS in an open field and 5FPS in heavy areas to running 25-28FPS in the open fields with an occasional stutter in heavy areas. He eventually got a 16MB buffer drive and that eliminated the stutter in the heavy areas. That stutter and hang in the object heavy areas is due to ArmA2 pulling those objects from the drive to be rendered. They are not cached in memory unless you are actually in that area. They are pulled from the compressed pbo file, decompressed, and then loaded to be rendered by the GPU. So, the tighter the bottleneck at the drive, the more it's going to go south on performance. My current rig: Q9550 quad core, 4GB 1066 RAM, Gtx 260 GPU, and the game installed onto the secondary drive (16MB buffer) If I run my triplehead2go and three monitors at a 3840x720 resolution, then I run at 30FPS. If I use a single monitor, I run 45FPS steady.

First of all, let me tell you I WAS running everything fine. By "fine" I mean I was running 29-30FPS steady. And that's online multiplayer in our server in cities and heavy forested areas. Knowing how ArmA works is the key to getting it to run smoother. It's limitation is it's limited data transfer to and from the hard drive. Filling your drive up to 80% capacity or have several processes running (file sharing is a no-no) and your game will run like absolute crap. There are some good work around's for the data xfer problem, one just has to read the forums. Now, I run 40-50 FPS online with everything set to high using three 20" monitors at a 3840X720 resolution, 4GB RAM, Win 7, and a GTX 260 core 216 video card. That's online and with the particle effects mod, JTP fire and smoke, and the VOP Sound mod. I also have post processing turned to normal. So, please don't tell me how my games run ;)

I worked in electronics research and development (fighter avionics actually lol) for about 7 years. Software integration and debug was always that long span of time between getting the hardware built and going to production lol We had a version of the voice warning box for the F-15 where Betty kept saying Bing-En Burn Through. Drove us nuts until we found that semi-colon that had no place being where it was lol

Ya know, people keep screaming about performance. I can run ArmA2 on high settings (not the highest) and it runs fine. Like Lock On, IL-2, and ArmA 1 when they first came out, I actually like a games that cannot be run at full settings with the hardware that's on the market at the time of release. I remember the first time I was able to run each of those games at max settings and it was like an achievement. It was also more than 2 years after they were released. I originally ran ArmA2 on an AMD 4200 Dual core, 2GB RAM, and a 8600GT video card. This was at normal settings and it ran fine. If that rig could run it fine at normal settings, I have no idea what people are having such a dire problem with.

"Hey Matt! I fixed that LOD issue with the SU-25T in rainy weather!" "Great!! Let's test it tonight!" Testing follows... "That fix you made screwed up the LOD's on three other aircraft and there's graphical artifacts now in sunny weather" "Crap!" The next day..... "Hey Matt! Figured out the problem and that's all fixed now!: "Great! Let's test it tonight!" Testing Follows.... "Uhm, the netcode is completely borked now" The next day.... "Hey Matt! We fixed the netcode and everything should be good to go!" "Ok, we'll test it before I say Great! again" Testing Follows.... "Good, the netcode works! Great!" "Hey Matt? Is the editor broken for you too now? "AAAAAUUUUUGGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!" The next day.... "Hey Matt? We can't even get the game to launch now and uhm, we dunno what's causing it." "Let me phrase this carefully - do NOT make me shoot you! What was the last thing you did before it quit working?" "We put insect eye textures on the windshield of the Mi-24 Hind and....." ~CLICK!~ .....Isn't debugging fun? :D

It's not always reliant on the aircraft though. Good pilots working together and working strategically can overcome some pretty tough odds ;)

Hey, all good things are worth waiting on. I'd rather have a sim modeled around accurate data than guesses ;) Actually, if they could get their hands on the tech data and release models for the following aircraft: F-1 Mirage F-4 Phantom II F-14 Tomcat FT-7 F-7M SU-24 F-5 - then we would pretty much have access to the IRAF (Iran's air force) arsenal of fighters. Even though the IRAF has some MiG-29's and SU-24's, their aircraft of choice are the Phantom and the Tomcat. So, just including those two in the IRAF variants would add another element to possible political theaters :)

Wish I had fond memories of the Mirage tho... Lost a few friends on the USS Stark from a couple of Exocet missiles fired from and Iranian F-1. I worked in electronic warfare and, from then on out, I twitched every time I saw that Cyrano 4 radar pop up.

Dude! I'm at work right now. Don't show sexy stuff like that! I can't get away from my desk right due to a sudden shift in the pants!

Not discounting that in the least and, the Flacon fans are gonna hate me, but Lock On has long since been my favorite ever since I had a PC that could run it. Flanker was one of my earliest fav's. With the talent ED has though and the fact that they branched into US aircraft with Lock On, it would be a great addition to see some other "non-super power" nations aircraft represented. T-Bone, I suggested the Mirage F-1 simple because it may be easier to obtain declassified technical data on that aircraft. Remember, ED will only release aircraft they can get the tech data for. I would imagine the ALA have a pretty tight hold on the specs of the Mirage 2000 :D

I dunno who teases more. You, Glowing Amraam, or my wife lol!

I agree and disagree with you. I, personally, would like to see well modeled aircraft from more than just the US and Soviet sides. The ALA Mirage F-1 (or 2000) and the RAF Harrier for starters. Politics can be created in the mission editor for any scenario. If done correctly, even fictional politics can be immersive. It's not like there's a mass of dogfights going on in the real world :)

It all depends on the technical data they can get their hands on.

I stand corrected :) Sorry - former squid here :D

There is no tailhook on a real F-15. The F-15 is a US Air Force jet and has never been used in carrier operations. It's air frame is not designed for that. Youy are thinking of the F-14 Tomcat.

Lock On: Resurgence DCS: Lock On Flamings Cliffs: Lock On Reload

Veers, Download the attachment and put into your Missions folder of your Blackshark directory. This is a mission I created for myself when I was learning startup, taxi, take off, trimming, and basic weapons implementation. It's a cold start up with a couple of Urals enroute to shoot at. You can practice open flying as well. You can also move the points out wider to practice with the autopilot. As far as the view being locked forward, do you have TrackIR? If so, then we need to troubleshoot why it's not working. If not, what joystick do you have? I taught a buddy of mine a neat trick so he could use the mouse stick on his X52 to look around as needed. If nothing else, your numpad 1-9 keys (5 being center) can be used. Look in the Doc folder of your Blackshark directory. There will be a file called DCS-BS_Key_Commands_Ka-50_real_eng.pdf. That is all of your key commands. Simple Trainer.miz

Flew an overcast mission last night. Works fine. Cloud deck was at 1700m-2000m. I flew under the deck, through the deck, and then up to 3000m flying over the top of the deck. No FPS drop or stutters. I average a lower FPS because I run 3 monitors and the triplehead2go at a 5.33 aspect ratio. I am zoomed all the way out on my FOV without freezing (freezes in LockOn currently with the same settings) and run about 30FPS steady with a single GTX 260 core 216 with AA set to 8.

The CAS role of a helo is alot different than that of a fixed wing. Heli's can get in tight spots and directly support the ground troops in a way that fixed wings cannot. On the flip side - for fast response and blow the snot out of high threat targets, the fixed wing is a prime platform. If built correctly, the missions can incorporate rotor-wing platforms and fixed wing platforms seamlessly. MP missions will definitely show which mission designers are stragetically minded.

Hard to say how it looks without seeing it grouped into the cockpit. It could look too basic here, yet fit precisely into the enviroment with the rest of your mod.

This one was pretty insane as well: