New rig - all is silk smooth...
 

Well, after all the patches CoD ran rather fine on my old E8400 rig, but today I finally got my new rig setup (look at sig) and CoD runs completely silk smoth on high settings... The lowest I can get is ~30 in cockpit at 30 feet over central London, but just a few hundred feet up I get ~70 fps over the city. On Black Death with high settings I get an average of 70 fps.

So - on a modern high end rig this game has no performance issues any more. Nice!

Nice System! Congrats!

Nice system mate... kinda sux though that you need all that to run it okay?

I upgraded my Rig too lately, if i compare it to the recommended spec on the DVD case though :???::shock:

That's funny, I've got effectively the exact same spec as you and my game doesn't run silk-smooth at all. Runs pretty good, until the screen locks up, but by no means silk-smooth. That's on a new install of the game onto a fresh install of the OS.

Really?

That sux..thats a more than decent rig you got there :\

happy for you but that's not a high end PC, that's more of a computer from outer space. further optimization still required for most of us users...

__________________
Q6600 2.4GHz (going OC 3.0GHz as soon as get better cooler)
Gainward GTX570 Phantom
2x2GB DDR2 800Mhz GSkill
1TB SATA 3 64MB
Asus P5K-E Wi-Fi
SyncMaster 24'' P2450 Monitor
Win 7 x64
Thrustmaster T.Flight Stick X

I've got a pretty good system too and it runs the game like butter when I'm flying solo. But five minutes into a mission and i get lock and a failed launcher message. That is 100% porked code and not my rig.

I heard that programmers nowadays has new expression for bad coding.

It's "CoD-ha-ha"

So, if anything not working as it should be they just call it CoD, and try to blame it on customer's bad and old computer.

Sneaky sort, those programmers . . .

There's no denying the sims needs optimizing, but i run it just fine on a two year old PC:

Asus P6T deluxe motherboard
i7 920 @ 2.7Ghz
Ati 4890 1GB
normal hard drives (no SSD)
3GB or RAM (yes, only three)
win7 x64 Pro


My only problems in regards to usability is that some times loadouts go missing or the menus go funky but work fine the next time i fire it up. As for performance, the problem is not lack of it but that it's sometimes inconsistent.

All in all, i get nothing game-breaking after the latest beta patch, running 30-60 FPS with occasional dips to 25 and only split-second pauses the first time a certain texture loads (no more of the initial continuous stuttering) depending on amount of aircraft, clouds and the terrain i'm flying over.

So how do it do it? Well, i just don't expect to run everything on high with anything less than top of the line hardware, that's how ;)
I run it at 1680x1050 with most settings on medium, model details and land shading on high, vsync on, shadows and roads on, SSAO off, AA off (since people say it doesn't work much anyway).

Sure, there's still room for improvement, lot's of it. At the same time though, a lot of complaints come from people who expect to run it maxed out on 1920x1080 or higher with hardware older than mine, that's not realistic and will probably never happen.
At the same time, too many people are obsessed with running it at the maximum possible settings, completely disregarding the fact that CoD on medium is slightly better than IL2 on max, they just see an option and want to max it out no matter what.
I've seen people with dual cores getting higher FPS than me, but most of it is probably due to my low RAM and them usually having nVidia GPUs of the same generation as my Ati 4890 or newer, more powerful GPUs of either brand.

SWEEEEEEZTTT!!! Enjoy it in good health! :beer:

Mmm, but I'm running on a Samsung 2233RZ monitor (I love the 120Hz too much to swap it out!). So the resolution I use is 1680*1050. I guess you're not on your 30'' ? ;)

Similar specs to you BD except I have an 8800gt, it runs fine for me, with settings medium to high, vsync on, unfortunatley shadows off, I am running at 1680x1050 as that is my screens natural res, so this probably helps a bit.

I have no problems running missions over land or sea, although there is the occasional load pause when bombers first come into view, I can run any of the QMB missions resonably nicely.

A lot can also depend on what beta you are running, or if you are running the beta patch.

Thanks :) I spent twice as much on my Athlon Thunderbird 1.3 Ghz system with a Geforce 3 in early 2002 to get IL2 running smooth ;)

I run it on my 30" but at 2560x1600 I get the jerkiness down low over land (to be expected generally speaking, though it doesn't happen in RoF) AND at 1920x1200, which I do NOT expect.

It's not a show-stopper, it's most noticable if I look away from straight ahead, and even looking 90-degrees sideways at 50m altitude it's not too bad. But RoF has zero and IS "silk-smooth".
The real show-stopper is the lock-ups. And the inability to run FSAA and AF is leaving the image looking very poor.

Get your eyes checked m8, at 2560x1600 FSAA is a nice to have , but don't do much for image quality.. only if you down size does i make a huge diff.

And if you can see the jaggies (jagged edges) on your 30" at 2560x1600 , then you should increase the distance to your screen..

Simple comparison between RoF and CoD at 2560x1600, both with x8 FSAA but RoF with also x16 AF, not one single jaggie to be seen in RoF, whereas in CoD there are shed-loads.

That's nice Mazex. Thanks for reporting back to us. I'm holding off for Ivy Bridge since I'm not flying anyway and if CoD survives this and that and expands this and that, it really is a good idea to upgrade. CHeers!

i play the campaign and it runs pretty good ....still low over the terrain i have some hick ups and frame rate issues .

S!

Congrats for your new rig. Good fly!

I´m running most Medium with some High´s, Vsync on, Grass off, 8xAA, 1920x1080@60Hz, clean 14413 install, 8xAA/8xAF in Nvidia CP.
Overall it flyies fine, specially over water. Over land I got micro stutters, not too bad, but you feel that is not flowing properlly. If I turn shadows off, it goes very, very smooth. Guess one of the problems are those flickering shadows under trees and trees also.
Besides that, the sim needs labor to fine tune it.

SP!

[QUOTE=Mad G;282731]S!
problems are those flickering shadows under trees and trees also.
Besides that, the sim needs labor to fine tune it.

yes indeed it does !!! :mad:

Not really.

It's a very, very nice system but that's what constitutes a high end system today.
Now, something like quad SLi is pretty much from outer space...I agree though that most of us have to tweak things to get the most from the game.

I hope it runs smooth..it cost you a car to get it like that!

Nice Rig mate, like you said very similar to my own, CLOD certainly needs some serious grunt.

Congrats.:)
I'm waiting on some parts for my new build as well. I missed the fever of looking for new hardware.:grin:
I kept my q6600@2.4/GTX285/4gbDDR2 to see how it will run. It runs but i have to sacrifice too much beauty to run on it.
The old box is 3.5 years old anyway, it served me good, but is a good time to let it go.
My system will be quite similar with yours. I already have the EVGA GTX590, I'm waiting on the i7 2600k, Asus ASUS P8Z68-V Pro, crucial M4 256GB SSD and 2x4GB of Corsair DDR3.

I should have all the parts sometimes next week and looking forward to put it all together.:grin:

How do you like your G940? Any issues getting it setup in COD? I'm still waiting for the US version of COD from Amazon. I've heard a lot of horrer stories about HOTAS setups and the sim not recognizing HOTAS hardware and/or unrealistic or uncontollable stick and rudder. It sounds like your sim is running as designed but it's good to get some feedback about the G940 since it provides the whole HOTAS set with FFB at a reasonable price.

Sweeet! That system will sure run CoD :)

My G940 works well now that they fixed FF effects in the latest patches. The problem is that when loading a mission it first have forces for a second, then goes as "limp" and after like 20-30 seconds the FF kicks in and all is fine. It feels like if you provoke it a bit with high alpha turning it kicks in faster ;)

Regarding the configuration of axes it has worked rather fine for me, the logarithmic scaling is a bit weird to configure and the first version lost settings at reboot, but now all it at least as good as IL2 for me at least. The rudder is a bit "spiky" but I think that is due to the G940 :)

I´m having this problem too with FF. Sometimes takes more than 30 seconds to engage the forces. Also after firing, sometimes I loose it. However when I start the next mission, it´s fine, the forces are there.

You won't utilize that 590 to its fullest until SLI works properly. 580 would have been a better choice.

Thats an odd thing to say considering SLI will eventually be enabled ;)

So running a game at MAX resolution and MAX settings and getting 70fps in the most fps intensive area of the map is "Ok"?????

This isn't an FPS game that will be out of style in 6 months.. this engine needs to be able to be competitive in 5 years at least.. The capabilities of this are barely scratched at at the moment.. but on newer systems its runn great, not just ok. My buddy runs it on a 3 year old system with a good G Card and its better than Ok on his.. He runs settings that are appropriate for his hardware. Some people seem to think that you should be able to run MAX settings at the MIN hardware required... Its not going to happen.. but there is a LOT of scalability in this