ArmA 3 Beta – Ramdisk vs SSD vs HDD (read description for info)

0
139



Updated with A3 v 1.52 here: https://youtu.be/cHEyZXkPRYA

Updated with A3 v 1.14 here: http://youtu.be/2eeRse5mtGA

Here is a comparison of ArmA 3 Beta 0.7.106872 running off various storage devices.

Top Left: 6GB Ramdisk running on 1866mhz 10-10-10-30 DDR3 ram
Bottom Left: Intel 520 SSD
Right: Hitachi 1TB (HDS721010DLE630)

The bottom left pane with the SSD was stuttering for some reason in the recording. In the actual game it was not that bad. The frame rate while recording was hovering around 30FPS so I believe the stutter here is from the framerate bouncing around 27-32FPS so there were dropped frames.

Settings: 3840×1024, 100% rendering via Nvidia Surround. Standard preset, no Post Processing/bloom/AA. 200 Shadows, Very High textures to try to get the most hard drive reads.

Recorded with DXtory clipped to 1920×1024.

There was obvious texture pop in some parts of the mission demo. The radio tower at 0:44 and the ground at 1:30 are the obvious points. Other than that they all felt about the same. There was little difference, if any between the SSD and ramdisk when it came to loading speed, the only noticeable difference was when flying around, or moving fast the ramdisk did seem ever so slightly smoother, but in the end it would be hard to justify spending the money on ram JUST for this purpose. I do not foresee myself running A3 off a ramdisk. A2 and A3 are now fairly optimized for a standard mechanical hard drive and run great on even a cheap SSD.

System Specs:
i5 3570k @4.2ghz
Gigabyte Z77x-UD3H
2x8GB G.Skill 1866mhz CL10-10-10-30 Ram
SLI GTX275
Intel 520 180GB
Hitachi 1TB (games)
WD Black 1TB (fraps/storage)

source

Download, Watch, Read more, Trailer, Gameplay
ArmA 3 Beta – Ramdisk vs SSD vs HDD (read description for info)