Assuming your processor can also deliver the settings you want to use I would guess the card might be ok at that resolution with much of the eye candy turned off. I don't think 'high detail models and textures' and '1024x768' really go together. Don't be offended but I doubt very much if you'll enjoy the high level of detail graphics CoD can provide if you use such low settings. 1024 x 768 is already, visually, a low level setting in IL-2.

I have my old PC with AMD3800+ 2.4GHz processor, 2Gb RAM and 7800GT 256Mb graphics card (similar generation to the 4650) and it runs IL-2 well at 'Excellent' on 1680x1050 and runs it well at 'Perfect' on 1280x1024. I don't expect it to deliver well on high detail settings in CoD.

But that's only my 2p 'think'. Best thing if you are wondering if its worth buying is wait for someone with a similar set up to report back on it.

per COD, any advantage between these two CPUs?
 

I have a CoD-specific quandary (again). The Intel 2500k processor versus the i-7-920? I know the older 920 supports hyper-threading, and that the 2500k does not. The 2500k can be over-clocked quite easily (with air cooling) to levels that would strain a 920-based system (making that system a power-hog in the process, plus more heat).

If CoD is not coded for hyper-threading, then is there any benefit to be gained from using the 1366 platform versus the 1155 platform for Cod? In other words, would CoD be better served to have a multi-core processor that can more easily deliver high CPU frequencies (4.5~4.9ghz?), but no hyper-threading? As far as system Architecture goes, I'm leaning towards one GPU presently, with an eye to a second one some time later. I have not seen much to show any advantage of 2x16 PCI-e lanes versus 2x8 pci-e lanes for video through put when it comes to two GPUs.

I'm sure this has been covered somewhere, but I'm focusing on two specific CPUs and their attendant architectures.
Flyby out

I would just wait for the first reviews and reports.

BTW: You can overclock an i7 920 to 4 GHz easily. Key factor is not the amount of power, but the speed and quality of the mainboard, RAM and of course the power-supply. I had my i7920 running at 4 GHz for quite a while with a quality 550 W-unit.

Aircooled, of course.

And while we're at it: Don't forget to cool the mainboard when overclocking!

FF! Thanks for replying. Much appreciated. Sound advice on waiting. It won't be long before virtual airmen are flooding this forum with their system specs and in-game results. I even have a 920 already; had it for a while. It's just that to get the 920 up to 3.6ghz it runs @317 watts (100% load), and 173 watts @ idle, while the 2500K is stated as 4.3ghz @ 187 watts (100% load), and 83 watts @ idle. This processor will do 4.8~5ghz on air. Heat is not so much as issue too (nor is water cooling said to be of much benefit, and overclocking is restricted to the CPU only. No FSB or memory to worry over. That's impressive. Here are a couple of links for the info I've put here; CPU comparatve:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/...ssors_review/1
Not bad, but the issue I'll wait for is to see if there's any benefit to hyper-threading when it comes to CoD (heavy flak, looking down over London, and a sky full of planes,for instance). Won't be long now. Less than TWO WEEKS!! :D
Flyby out

It looks like the I2500k is going to be like the duocore e6600 in 2006. Even cheaper. Can you imagine a $250 cpu running at 5ghz on air? If CoD is not geared toward more than 4 core's and one gpu one could built a smoking machine for less than $800 if you allready have a case and powersupply. If they later optimze it for SLI you can add a gpu. If it uses all 6 cores you can go AMD and still havea cheap solution.

When Il2 came out it took some expensive hardware to run it properly. There might be some good thinking behind Oleg's release strategy. Pull the masses in on affordable hardware. Once they're hooked they'll upgrade in order to be able to play the next installments. Give them a few new graphics features every installment and everyone stays interested.

Nice, thanks for the link!

For me the problem with the overclocked CPU simply was the rising board-temperature. Voltages became pretty unstable after a while, causing instability, no matter how high or low the actual CPU-temperature was. So I tuned down to a still good 3.6 GHz.

I'm considering an upgrade for SoW as well, but I'll definitely wait and test the simulation before judging which part to upgrade. Considering the thin information on features and usage of multi-threading and DX-features, there's simply no basis for a reasonable update, now.

Quick question - CoD on ATI4600?
 

I was looking at the system requirements, and my card, ATI Radeon 4600 is not on the list of supported cards. Does this mean that I won't be able to play CoD on it at all?

i think its just to give u an idea of the types of cards that will work, really as long as it's 512mb, and supports dx9.0c it'll work, how many frames per second u get is a totally different question all together, a 4600 is pretty slow,..

Thanks for the feedback. Just thought that if I ran CoD at any resolution higher than 1280 I'll only get a chunk of lag with it. Just wish they'd release a demo for CoD.

It has been said before, and many times.

"I suggest you wait until the BOB COD is released"

The BOB COD forums will be buzzing with information about systems, all kinds of configuration issues. You won't believe at the support flowing once it is released.

Everyone will be looking for Nirvana with COD.

It's OK to post here and make some system upgrades for sure, but just remember you may still need help with refinements once it is installed on your system.

Don't panic over what you do or don't have, and be especially careful if you are not very sure about hardware you would like to buy.

About to upgrade. If I go 64 bit Windows 7 OS, will both ClOD and IL-2 series both work? My IL2 (and ROF and Black Ops, etc etc) now works with my Vista 32 bit.

yes

this is my pc
Win7 64bit
Intel Core i5 760 @ 2.80 ghz
RAM 4096
Geforce GTX 460

What do you think ? I'm not interested in max detail.

My guess is you'll be fine. From all the horror predictions I don't think many of us will run everything maxed out for a few PC generations yet but you're well above the minimum spec, more importantly your CPU is a shade above the recommended, GPU is well up the "Supported GPUs" list and RAM is bang on the recommended.

Of course they don't say what the 'recommended' will deliver in settings and FPS but it must be reasonably good.

Should know in a week :)

Thank you klem,i feel much better right now :) i'll keep the preorder ON and wait for the relase:)

Damn! And i have a crappy ATI 4350! Have to upgrade or put up with it lol.

Haha. I've got a HD5570 and I can run Wings of Prey flawlessly on higher settings, 1280 x 800 resolution. It's a shame I can't get a new system since I got mine just half a year ago. I'm also pretty money limited because I'm underaged. Oh well.

Yeah i got my new computer not so long ago, 1 year ago now. I wasnt really going to play any games on here but i found my Battle of Britain: Wings of Victory II so i installed it on and then bought FSX which i have no problems what so ever. I have Birds of Prey on the PS3 and love it, shame they cant put Cliffs of Dover onto the consoles! Ill but Cliffs of Dover and see what it turns out like, If its pretty poor quality then i shall upgrade the GPU!

This is my system:
Intel I7 920 @ stock speed
XFX Geforce GTX285
12 GB DDR3 RAM
2 x Intel x25m SSD (Raid 0)

I wonder if my Graphics Card is due for an upgrade? (To GFX480 ?)

Any input would be much appreciated :)

Looking for some help. Can't do a complete 'rebuild' of my entire rig yet but when I built this one 3-4 years ago it was with the HOPE that I could upgrade at least once before I HAD to build again.

ASUS P5K-E/WIFI-AP LGA 775 Intel P35 ATX Intel Motherboard
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 Kentsfield 2.4GHz LGA 775 95W Quad-Core Processor (OC'd to 3.36 and have ran it stable with HUGE Fan/HS to a quite a bit faster)
CORSAIR XMS2 2GB(2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel
EVGA GeForce 8800GT Superclocked 512MB 256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16
OS = WinXP 32

So, I was thinking at first I would just upgrade the video card since the 2GB RAM limits on XP makes upgrading to 4GB RAM kinda silly until I can get Win7 64.

What are your thoughts? Like I said, I am really stuck with the MoBo for now so, is it worth upgrading or just wait a year and rebuild a new one from the ground up?

Thanks in advance!
R

@janik_dk : your gtx 285 is definitely outdated for CoD, you should go for a modern gtx580. The gtx480 was a error they pushed the heat and power consumption way too much.
If it's too expensive, going for a short term "cheap" upgrade (ex : a second hand gtx460) could also be a good idea while the game is being optimized.

@Riddlin yes you can upgrade but will it be enough to play CoD some day ? that is the question, you should wait, also i've read that the game is having some strange bugs over xp this needs to be sorted out, anyway you can still buy a 2gig stick of ram (ddr and xp will support it, in fact).

My quick 2p

Riddlin, Your PC can access 3.4(?)Gb RAM and 32 bit applications usually can allocatre a full 2Gb for its use so going to 4Gb wouldn't be a waste and would ensure a full 2Gb for say IL-2 or CoD.

A GPU upgrade could also be helpful. Really depends on whether the GPU or the Processor is the current limiting factor (I don't know that one).

janik, agree with jibo but if you can't afford the 580 the 570 is a good second bet although it has less memory (1.3Gb).

Jibo & Klem:
Thanks for your answers guys! It'll be a 570 or 580 :)

Well, I have a copy of Win7 Pro waiting on me when I decide to upgrade so that is a plus.

RAM I can get this: Kingston HyperX 4GB (4 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 1066 (PC2 8500). Its less than $80.

The thing I am worried about is the vid card...with what I will be setting it on, any suggestions as to what would be the best?

I have the CPU OC'd rock solid stable at 3.31Gig. I got it up to 3.84Gig right after I bought it but it was running really hot and all I have is an air cooling system(9 case fans and a huge copper HS/Fan from Zalman(sp) & the GPU has crap ton of added HS and a Zalman HS/Fan on it as well).

If you meant RAM...I have 4 slots for that.

Get this as well with a geforce 9500 gt :(

You've got to be kidding? 128kbps UP. That pretty much rules out anybody with ADSL

I guess they mean kilo bit per second. so this should be fine for adsl...

PC CONFIGURATION

OPERATING SYSTEM: Windows® 7 Ultimate*
PROCESSOR: AMD Phenom II X4 3.1GHz*
RAM: 4GB*
DirectX® 10*
SOUND CARD: X-fi Extreme
NVidia®: 9800GT 512Mb*

PERIPHERALS: Mouse, keyboard (Saitek X-52/Pro pedals)

MULTIPLAY: Broadband connection 25Mb


Yep I should be able to play this!

I wouldn't bet on it. Not with that graphics card.

Krt_Bong

I wouldn't worry about the VC at this time. Give the devs and community a chance to start posting configurations and settings.

I have an nvidia 8800 512 single card. I remember when I bought it how it was outdated and such, and everyone was pushing SLI.

Addressing all those VC wasn't not as facilitated as people were saying. In fact, by having one card I was at better FPS than all the SLI users with few exceptions.

You can see my specs below aren't too different than your own. I have vista 64 and Win 7 64. I run the IL2 - 4.101 with the Vista and get great performance and graphics.

Krt_Bong

I wouldn't worry about the VC at this time. Give the devs and community a chance to start posting configurations and settings.

I have an nvidia 8800 GTS 512MB single card. I remember when I bought it how it was outdated and such, and everyone was pushing SLI.

Addressing all multiple VC wasn't as facilitated well as people were saying. In fact, by having one card I was at better FPS than all the SLI users with few exceptions.

You can see my specs below aren't too different than your own. I have vista 64. I run the IL2 - 4.101 with the Vista and get great performance and graphics.

http://www.nvidia.com/page/geforce_8800.html

That's true, it is better to wait until we know whether the game will continue to hog graphics memory. From what we've seen, though, 512MB and even 1GB of graphics memory is just not enough.

Well I didn't say I won't be buying a new Graphics card, just not yet. I too am taking a wait and see approach, till I have the game installed it's all purely speculative.

I think the game is far ahead of today's hardware capacity. Even before the outcome was clear that the latest hardware barely satisfy the needs for normal flight.

rgr.

hi
i have the following system:
i2500k~4ghz, gtx560ti 1gb, 2x2gb 1033 ddr3 rams resolution: 23" 1920x1080
I think this is enough most of the games that was released in the last few weeks/months.
I bought CoD from Steam and I've trying how to set the video options to make it flyable.
As I see the game is flyable (doesn't matter where you are flying, above sea or London, but it need a bit time to load buildings, etc, and above sea it runs a bit fluently)
So I think we need an optimisation patch (core usage, etc) and it will solve most of the problems.
Great work guys, just continue and this will be the best sim ever :)
(sorry for my english I'm from Hungary, -I hope you understand)

Your English is better than my Hungarian ! Lol so ur welcome :grin:

My system doesn't not arrive till monday
i7 2600 3.4ghz WC
8GB ddr3 1333mhz ram
Samsung 24" 1920x1080 monitor
ATI 6870

I am excited to c if mine plays CoD well

An given what my system is I won't lose sleep if it does not play well as I think it's been established the game needs patching :cool:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pBiRUBW8vM

36 He111's and 12 Spitfires..

FRAPS locked the fps at 30 but without FRAPS on its around 40-45 at 1920X1200 Video settings on HIGH, Mirrors OFF, then set roads OFF, grass OFF, forests to VERY LOW, and most importantly. set buildings to lowest detail and number settings.. everything else remains HIGH

Runs great..

One thing I've looked into when considering a vid card is that it have a 256 bit bus, it makes no sense to buy a card with 2 Gb VRam and have a 128 bit bus and there are plenty at reasonably low prices but I cant see wasting money on them. I would consider a 1 Gb card and 256 if it will run the game a reasonable Med High settings, but I will wait to see what ppl say after the end of April when the optimisation has been made. I don't really want to spend $200 on a vid card but when new stuff comes out the other cards tend to come down a little in price and rebates are more appealing if they bring a cards price down 20-30 bucks. I just want to know what the best specs for some of these middle weight cards should be before spending my money.

Just remember, it's not THE optimisation, just the FIRST optimisation.

There are some excellent deals on the last generation of cards about, but the next gen aren't due until the end of the year, so I think it'll be a while before prices of the current gen will fall. Like you say, see what results people get with cards like the 470 and 5870 after the patch, as there should be good deals on those cards.

My system presently is old faitful Quad 6600, Geforce GTX 460, 4gb Ram, Windows 7 and SSD harddrive which in my opinion gives the final boost that enables me to play the latest games quite well.

CoD is the only one I've tried where I notice that a faster system would be better, but I hope in the future patches will optimize the game and make it faster.

I have a E6550 OC'd to 3.1GHz, 4GB DDR2 ram and a HD5850

I have shadows, grass, roads, land detail, effects, model detail, damage decals all set to high, everything else on low on 1920x1200

here's what it looks like, highly compressed and downscaled to 1280x720... its only laggy cause of fraps :S

[flash=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6Irv9pCnCI]width=500 height=128[/flash]

So the NV GTX 295 is not supported?....NVidia®: 8800/9800/250/260/275/285/460/465/470/480

SLI support is in works, but nowadays you must turn off the second core.

I just installed it last night and I have surprisingly good results over London. I have a bit of shutter but nothing major at all. Everything is set to highest settings and I am getting great fps 90+ as long as the ground is not generating all its details. I absolutely love the attention to detail that's been put into this. I was stunned at just the beauty of the scenery and the lighting.

Nvidia 9650M GT
 

Just purchased the game, checked the minimum specs and then confirmed with "Can You Run It?" http://www.systemrequirementslab.com/CYRI/intro.aspx

http://cadfaele.fileave.com/Min%20Specs%20CoD.jpg


I realize that my video card is not supported but it does meet the minimum specs. When I start the game I get the introduction but no pilot or aircraft images in "Options" and when I click "Fly" the games crashes to desktop, with game continuing in the background with sound but no video. I receive the warning " Display driver has stopped responding and has recovered".
The video drivers are up to date 275.33 and the game is the latest version 1.02.14821. I've tried various settings without success, any advice would be much appreciated.

Cheers

The answer I hope...
 

Thanks Doc, as usual I found your excellent post AFTER I'd posted my plea for help.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=20769

Cheers

It works!
 

Thanks Doc and all those who helped...

Cheers