Pentium 4 3.0Mhz , 2 Gb ram 800 Mhz ,Video card whit 500 Mb ram , windows xp 2sp
 

This game is developed many years ago , for me is too selective , need only monster pc to run fine , for me and many people is out of market . Need many optimized . Sorry for my english , i'm Italian.




Motherboard Asus Rampage Formula
Icore 2 quad Q6600 2.6Mhz overclocked 3.2Mhz
4Gb ram 800mhz
video card : gtx 260 896Mhz Vram
800 watt power supply
W7 32bit

I think your grammar needs optimized. And pentium 4s were phased out what ... 7 years ago? New CPUs and a new motherboard are literally .... 200$ for something that would be more powerful than a Pentium 4 lol.

I've seen a lot of valid performance complaints about IL2:COD. This isn't one of them.

You can't expect any new flight sim to run well on a 7 year old CPU.

hunter1, your post title and system described in your post don't match. Why?

Maybe he rushed out and upgraded between 7.04 and 8.14 :rolleyes:

Pentium 4 was actually phased out in August 2008.

Quote from Wiki:

"The Pentium 4 brand refers to Intel's line of single-core desktop and laptop central processing units (CPUs) introduced on November 20, 2000[1] and shipped through August 8, 2008."

Yours too

Becouse this sim is developed many years ago , only nvidia , asus , and other brands NEED to sold new computer , motherboard , video card ...... software engineer make better software whit LESS resource , no better software whit enormous resource . There are many games have better effects , but run fine in my old computer P4 3.0Mhz example WoP , IL 2 1946 , H.a.w.x. , far cry , arma , crisys. I want buy a game not a new computer for THIS game , another reasons is , few people have very fast computer ( I7 core , I5 core ) , many people have good computer ( P4 and more powerful ) Few people , few copy sold , many people , many copy sold , is a market .

I do not belive you got ArmA or Crysis to run "fine" on a Pentium4.

I have a Pentium4, latest edition. One of the HT ones. @ 3.20GHz, and I cannot get it to run ArmA or Crysis "well" let alone "fine"

The Pentium4 is very old, and is one of the worst Processors you can have. It is not 'good', it's a £20 job today.

Alot of people do have things like the Phenom2 X4, and similar.

My old pc spec are:
P4 3.2Mhz 800 fsb 1 Mb memory cache
asus p4p800e deluxe
2 Gb ram 800 Mhz
Ati radeon sapphire HD3850 AGP whit 500 Mb Vram

A 2.4 GHz Pentium 4 was released on April 2, 2002, and the bus speed increased from 400 MHz to 533 MHz for the 2.26 GHz, 2.4 GHz, and 2.53 GHz models in May, 2.66 GHz and 2.8 GHz models in August, and 3.06 GHz model in November. With Northwood, the Pentium 4 came of age.

Some iteration may have shipped until August 2008, but the 3Ghz Pentium 4 was introduced in `02, making it an almost 9 year old piece of technology.

Actually, problem with Clod is not with the hardware. There isn't anything in there that some 2 or 3 year old PC couldn't handle. "Eyecandy" in Clod is outdated. The problem is coding. There is post on Ubi Cod forum by Gibbage, you might want to read that.

Good examples with coding and optimization is Crysis, and Crysis 2 even more.

Crysis is a noted machine killer...I also fail to believe that his old system runs it fine.

Basically, commercially available CPU's like the dual core CPU's are the bottom of the barrell today. I'm not exactly surprised the old P4 can't handle Clod.

1. Gibbage is anything but credible. He is acting against current dev team and has been disreputed.

2. Do not bring up Crysis/Crysis2 when dealing with this game. IL2 CoD is nothing like Crysis. If you have problems understanding that then you should stop posting here.

What is your source for that nonsense? It was released a couple of weeks ago, and developed with today's PCs in mind.

That's not correct. You are new to this forum, so I understand that you may not be fully informed on the details of this sim. IL2 was written by the same people. CoD is more detailed in every way. None of these other titles provide the historical accuracy and detail, flight and damage model that CoD provides. If you are interested in the best combat flight sim ever produced, stick around, there's a lot for you to learn here. If not, don't waste your time here, it's not for you.

You clearly haven't got a clue what computations the game is making to model all the AI planes etc.

So in Crisis you can move around a map (without pausing to load as you move) that covers about 100 thousand cubic miles? And the AI are in historically accurate planes flying around that space? You might as well use Avitar as your basis for graphical comparison.

well a rig with:
P4 3.0Ghz HT
2GB DDR2
8600GT 512mb

could ran everything smooth except for GTA4, Bad Company 2, ArmA2, Crysis2, Global Agenda, Shattered Horizon...well it even ran ArmA2 at low visibility and low resolution

among the titles which ran pretty well are:

Mass Effect 1 and 2
Crysis (1)
ArmA
Dragon Age
Far Cry 2
Fallout 3
Fallout New Vegas
Oblivion
Mount and Blade Warband
IL-2 1946
Flaming Cliffs 2.0

so, WITH OPTIMIZATION, this simulator that uses only 1 core, and not more than 2gb of ram, and that is only 32bit could be ran by that configuration, and I'm not a nay sayer just pointing out facts

On my P-4 , 3,2Ghz Ati x1950pro no start up of COD possible , only a yellow crosshair and then ...nothing

How about another fact then?
IL2 : Cliffs of Dover is not programmed for consoles .

Fact #2 : Your PC is a PoS.

there's been two times over the years where i had to buy a new rig just coz a new sim came out

my 233mhz pentium wouldnt run gpl even though it was above minimum requirements so i bought a pentium 4 3.8 top of the line pc (at the time)
and i have to say that old p4 did me proud right up until the end of last year
and my son still uses it now running FSX,Rfactor,gtr2,warfront,1946.with a gt240!!!
which shows just how good the p4 3.8 was.

up until last year i ran 3 seasons in the V8 supercars on iracing with that P4 with a gt 9800
(very minimal stutters on minimum graphics and 90fps!!!!!)

the p4 3.8ht was the fastest p4 ever made and held up against a lot of the cpu's that followed it,but now its like what 5 or 6 generations old..the p4 3.8 was a hell of a lot quicker than your p4 3.0 you cant expect miracles mate.
the king is dead!!!
long live the king!!!

You have to be patient and a bit more welcoming with newcomers as the vast majority of gamers out there have no clue whatsoever what kind of processing it takes "under the hood" to make a sim like this.

What sets a simmer apart is more realistic modeling over sparkly effects, hit boxes/hit points and predictable AI. I'm sure the posts about best configurations for a game controller are coming as well.

Ironically, he is right (for the wrong reasons) that the sim needs a lot of optimizations, and will likely scare away those tentative console type gamers peeking around the corner of our part of the world which in a way is too bad because they are also not the type to wait around after release for a few months for things to get sorted out to be playable out-of-the-box.

It is the truth that flight simulation are somewhat different than FPS games. But technology behind them is the same. Differences are not that big at all. Both are made for the PC, and must use similar technologies. It is not like steam powered versus jet engine.

One of the names in that technology is for example Microsoft DirectX. Clod runs on that, and yes Crysis2 too.

So, can someone tell me why the same technology works in Crysis, for example, and not in Clod?

Or can anyone really believe that computing two planes in the flight above Dover really eats more processor power ("under the hood") than Boeing's factory 747 simulator, with all planes systems, and subsystems (google is your friend)

Differences are just as in new BMW and a kit car (with the engine that you must "do-it-yourself")

Avala , Thank you , you have understand what i want said : for me this game have the engine too old , too many time to release it.

Whoa! chillax, that struck a nerve ain't it, you guys need to lower the fanboi dial a notch or two

if 1C Maddox were a rock band you need to be the guys with drink in hand thinking, "that song it's pretty damn good" not the girls infront throwing your panties at them

I had that same PC and I can vouch for those games running, except ArmA2, I had to lower the settings to be able to run it and that's exactly what 1C is asking for COD

Sorry , Triggaaar , I'm Italian and not know very well the english , but i'm old , before i play il2 forgotten battles and all sequence of this game , now il2 1946 , VISIT many sites of combat flight sims , reads only , many time , becouse my english is very poor and not permit to reply many time , i " know " this game is in mind of Oleg from many time ago , the time of pentium 4 , but not the last pentium 4 , a little before .
[/QUOTE]
That's not correct. You are new to this forum, so I understand that you may not be fully informed on the details of this sim. IL2 was written by the same people. CoD is more detailed in every way. None of these other titles provide the historical accuracy and detail, flight and damage model that CoD provides. If you are interested in the best combat flight sim ever produced, stick around, there's a lot for you to learn here. If not, don't waste your time here, it's not for you.[/QUOTE] Triggaaar , my register is new on this forum , you too , and i think this game has need too many time to developed , only . Example , i hope you understand , is a Volkswagen beatle engine in a Ferrari car. Too informations for this engine software and now move whit an elephant . And , again , sorry for my poor english , but i love the combat flight sim ...... [/QUOTE]

You clearly haven't got a clue what computations the game is making to model all the AI planes etc.

So in Crisis you can move around a map (without pausing to load as you move) that covers about 100 thousand cubic miles? And the AI are in historically accurate planes flying around that space? You might as well use Avitar as your basis for graphical comparison.[/QUOTE]

And for Triggaaar and Charvel ...........When i read on this forum , this game run FINE on i2 core quad Q 6600 , i buy it , before .......NO. Check your graphic of copy sold ......before and after the optimized.

Sims are more demanding and VERY different from games like Crysis because games like Crysis have very primitive damage modeling, for instance, as compared to the calculations required to register a hit to hundreds of specific components in a bomber among many other things you don't see but emulate reality. That stuff doesn't happen for free.

You are right in the sense that unfortunately CoD should still be able to perform a lot of those visual effects you like and better utilize the resources available.

The simple fact is 1C simply doesn't have a fraction of the budget for this flight sim that a game like Crysis has and it shows by how long it has taken to get to this point and how disturbingly unoptimized it currently is) so even when the technical aspects get fixed, I doubt we'll see much imagination and creativity in the implementation (interface, mission cohesiveness, etc.).

The good news is there is a very creative community out there that will offer these things better than 1C can ever hope to so it depends on whether you bought CoD as a flashy but relatively short-lived game or as a simulator with a great deal of potential and longevity.

I think this is becouse CoD isn't release on DVD , becouse is a very small user .

That is all fine but you don't have to be idiot do you remember? We are not talking about unrealistic spitfire FM so don't start comments like this, it raises pulse :)

same old P4 3gig here with 2GB old slow 333MHz ram and old AGP slot but newer and one of the latest Cards for AGP ; HIS ATI 4670 IceQ (perfect low noise)
DirectX 9

with all graphics settings on low or out except modell (high), effects (middle) and damage (middle) I reach over sea which is better than in IL2/FB about 17-25fps in cockpit; but not more than 10 planes in game.

the graphics is optimized for high resolutions but it would be perfect when all textures has a second or third resolution f.e. 1280x800 or for good old 1024x768...than this game would run like IL2 and look better too.

ok a P4 is outdated but why should´nt it be possible to run this game in settings like IL2 where those PC´s run very good day for day Online on HL with 30fps on high settings (thats enough)

as others postet earlier it´s bad programmed or they really don´t care and produce low compressed eye candy textures and useless groundvehicles instead of a good flightmodellbased Simulation with original Enginesounds http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/images/icons/icon9.gif

think the times of good simulations like SSI,Microprose or Janes are gone for ever.

I installed the old Battle of Britain from Empire again and noticed the same rolling soundbug in CoD when standing on ground engine shut off.....BoB was not bad and had a full stratetic part of the BoB !...hundreds of Bombers in Formation was very nice to look at

of course with a 10 years old computer you should stick with 10 years old games

Hallo Hunter1,

Did I read correctly, you bought a new PC? Congratulations!

Hallo kubanskiloewe, it has been how many, 6-7 years?

The new patch that was released yesterday as beta (should be official on Monday) solves a lot of the performance problems on older machines!
- It has some new options in the graphic settings which lower the graphics of the ground and buildings and make it playable on older graphics cards.
- It uses better the power of multiple CPUs so, a Quad-CPU is very good to have and it pays off with the game now.

In summary, you should be doing much better with the new patch as of Monday :-)


Some word of caution though:
This is really the next generation of IL2, we played IL2 for ten years and maybe you remember how difficult it was back then flying at 18-20frames per second on our 640x480 CRT monitors.
So we are in year 0 of IL2CoD and it may take years until hardware is available to make this game run at high fps and high graphic settings...

Basic things for Hardware will be:
1.) Win7 64bit: Yes, it runs well and it runs better than WinXP. And for IL2CoD it is necessary because it gives DX10, this game runs well in DirectX 10 (WinXP has only DX9, the game runs but not as well).

2.) Having said this about DX10, YOUR GRAPHICS CARD MUST BE DX10 AS WELL (or DX11)!
beware some older NV cards of only DX10, I think the game needs DX10.1 (do not crusify me if I am wrong...).

3.) Your CPU will have to be at least Quad-core (finaly a game which handles a lot of CPUs)


The list can become endless but the above three things may help you take some decisions in the near future.

Happy Flying !

~S~

no, the new beta patch does´nt make much difference in performance; on the contrary it produces now a lot more of buildings which let the fps drop down....restart the Game does´nt help and in conf. there isn´t a line which responds to amount of buildings.

so i really dont buy a better PC for that uncomplete and buggy game....it´run good enough for me for a little ride; steam is another thing i did´nt like and so i hang on in Hyperlobby with IL2+Mods whith much better and original engine sounds, Radar and more

i´m sure there will be some freaks who compress those "needless" textures ....