I'll just LOVE it NOW
 

Holy moses what difference was changing my 5970 to 7970, allmost same cards in performance in 3Dmark 2011 but i have zero stutter now, all max and it's really enjoyable sim.

1gig to 3gig i think make biggest improvement, and no crossfire anymore.

Wonderful SIM.

Kankkis

As many have been saying.. Alot of the CoD issues can be cured by simply upgrading the hardware!

That is to say, cutting edge software typically needs cutting edge hardware!

Put anotherway, a 10+ year old sim like IL-2 does not need cutting edge hardware

ill need to sale my immaculated arse for that GPU :(

True...but even a healthy mid range system, can run this game with no serious problems.:cool:

A three gig card makes all the difference. In a year or two, I would imagine a 3 gig card would be more "standard issue" than today, and we will be enjoying this sim for a long time.

its just too expensive now

I just got the game today after waiting for a discount offer. I play on a 9800GT! Im surprised how well it runs on medium-low settings.

I thought the 7970 - 90 had very noisey fans once pushed to the max??

I happy with my Nvidias.

He111.

My last few cards have been Nvidia because they generally have run the original Il-2 and COD a little better than AMD gpus.

My current Asus Direct11 580 is so quiet I don't hear it, and with the Kuhler H20 Antec CPU cooler I don't hear my system at all. Of course it helps that I'm old and can't hear that well anymore. My wife thinks I'm deaf, but I don't bother mentioning I'm just ignoring her.

We've always had to have very highend systems to run Combat flight sims at max settings, and usually there were options for lower end systems to make the sim playable. Unfortunately COD was release unfinished and unoptimized. The next patch should make the sim playable on average systems with the appropriate options set.

iT SHOUYLDNT TAKE A 3GIG CARD TO RUN THIS THOUGH.

Glad to hear of the improvements Kankkis! Now, which kidney should I sell....

S!

Which drivers do you use Kankkis? The 12.2 Pre-Certified?

Yes, game is absolutely smooth now and that SMAA thing make it very pretty, now i just love to fly this because none stutter, fps all the time at steady 60fps with vsync, all maxed. When all maxed little slowdown over london and rooftops. No slowdown in London without shadowd, they are huge hit in london.

Secondly i overclocked my 7970 allmost max, it really easy and no risk, very good guide link below.

http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon...erclock-guide/

It normaly wouldn't, if the devs were allowed to finish the sim before it was released you would have had a finished optimized sim at some point. Unfortunately that didn't happen, now we've paid to be beta testers, instead of waiting another six months to a year for the finished release. Which most of probably would have signed up to beta test anyway given the alternative of waiting and doing nothing.

Actually this is exactly what Oleg promised - it will take hardware which is not available at the time of release.
Sys.req. on the box were a lie though.;)

no shhh...
Badly optimised software needs cutting edge hardware to work decently. That is when the effects are not near (in CLODs case). Properly optimised software willl work well, even on "mid range rigs". I have an ace-like question for you: "Do you think ROF is not a cutting edge software (whatever that means)? Because it works damn good even on low-mid rigs....

didnt need at release too...it was (in most part) pretty well optimised just from the start....kudos to Oleg`s team

Anyway, if you guys are waiting to play this game maxed in a 3 years old card let me say that it will not happen even if you hired John Carmack to scribe the game in machine language (that is in ones and zeros if you don't know it)

To much people comes from play IL-2 1946 in a laptop and cry rivers because can run CLOD well when is know that maxed setting is for futures hardware profiles.

Well ... congrats for your card, you makes me so envious :) , I'm waiting for this card as well but its just freaking expensive for me now :-| , looking for price drops ...

Dude, look at my rig and tell me; should I play this sim without massive slowdowns? I have em....and I optimised my rig and OS "to the bones"....enough said.
BTW; Im playin all other very HW demanding games on max on 1920x1200.....

My post was not aimed you and some others in this thread and I know that you are not looking for a answer but looking at your rig I can certainty say that :

Try play CLOD maxed out at 1920x1200 without FPS drops (that is constants 60fps) in a GTX470 is pretty much impossible, and if you try add FSAA then that turns surrealist.

What are your settings?

MAC

I think 470 memory isn't enought. Good and fast card all the other way.

Never said i have maxed out but textures and plane detail are on high. Plus external (DX files) AA is ON. What is obvious, I can play decently even on max (I tried) but as soon as some effect is near it gets very slow. Sometimes when more planes are near. So its teh software not the card. AND btw, my GTX 470 is Twin frozr version 2 with very good custom coolers which is overclocked to 800Mhz on the core which is pretty damn close to the much faster cards. 1.25 GB should be enough even for 1920x1200.

All maxed exept, no SSAO and textures high not orginal.

With my old overclocked 5970 i got 3dmark 2011 8800points, with overclocked 7970 i got 8900points, so no difference there but in Clod that is different game now, not stutteringfest anymore.

Constant 60fps with vsync, ok not maybe on rooftops on London. Happy Clod player here now, i just love it now, really nice to fly at evening and look at those exhaustpipes from cockpit.

GTX 470 is close to may card and Im on 1920x1200, even with the new patch I dont expect play on high at 1920x1200, I guess that some thing should be dropped to medium like buildings, trees or textures.

There no enough space for all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZGTA...Fa6UYXqlBtpir7

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2y3ol...Fa6UYXqlBtpir7

realtimerecording, sry no CEM there now, back in the game for long time :)

Actually my first game to test with new GPU :)

And believe me it looked really much better on my monitor than that poorquality video :) When i record then my FPS is constant 30FPS.

Kankkis

Stock 470. Mine is TF2, overclocked to 800Mhz on the core, which is faster than stock 580.

Ofcourse. I already have most things on med.


Im not rich to afford 7970.....my salary is above average here and is 1380 buckss....thers loan for apartment, kids etc....

Tvirdi nice motherboard :)

I have 2 kids too but now we doesen't eat at all for next month ;)

Ah it is. Love Gigs MOs.

Mhm, dunno, life standrad is here 10 times worse than in your country.

Well, I think I will start saving for new GPU....maybe I will be able to buy one of the new kepler nvidias which will arrive in april (on the market) I think....

I got this card now http://www.mindfactory.de/product_in...--Retail-.html

but iam still not able to run the game all maxed out! no SSAO

over london still not more than 20 fps

overall still jumping fps over land down low! Even under 20 fps!

so a 7970 is no guarantee with this shitty engine! All at 1920*1200!!

Rise of flight however maxed out is smooth and a blast.

driver version 12.3

I got 8 gb corsair ram and 1055T AMD 6 Core cpu! It seems CLOD does not like AMD at all!

Weird, what are your other specs and have you deleted ubisoft intro?

yes intro is deleated.

got an AM2 Asus Mainboard, Amd 1055T6Core Cpu, Gigabyte 7970 card, 8 GB Corsair ram! HD 1000GB and 400 GB!

Driver is 12.3 pre WHQL from guru3d.

whoa how do you delete the intro? That adds FPS?

With some Ati cards yes, it leaves GPU to 2D speeds.

I got it!!!!!


Despite the fact i deleted the intro the GPU is staying at 501 MHZ!

Must be a powerplay issue! Maybe i can resolve it with a profile!


Ok fixed it but not better performance! Afterburner was showing wrong numbers!

This engine was not developed for resolutions higher than 1920x1080. Let's hope a patch can help or we have to wait till 2013-2015 videocards for extreme (higher than fullHD) res. Nothing comes for free. Resolution neither.

Clouds, weather and landscape improvements in BoM will put new hardware to its knees again on extreme resolutions. The devs optimise for mainstream resolution only because further optimisation for extreme resolutions is too costly in terms of resources used and image quality hit.

Solution is to use mainstream resolution or buy a new top video card every 6 - 12 months if you are rich. Sims are more demanding than any shooters due to high visibility distances and modelling detail.

Ataros will test with that resolution! Maybe its better

I think you have a problem with processor speed.
You should try to overclock it to 3.5 GHz at least, but only with aftermarket
cooler if you have one, because thubans are hot.
Also, you should check how many phases your mobo have on VRM ( voltage regulation ).

Tvrdi.. I know the fact that a better video card and correctly configured PC goes against everything you and the rest of the nay-sayers would have people belive.. That being that CoD does not work for anyone.. But the fact remains that there are plenty of posts in this forum of people who are having no problems with the FPS or CTD.. And in light of your response of 'shhh' to counter that fact only highlights it

Now your getting it!! So it appears that you actually do agree with me! Better late than never! S!

Now you getting it!! So you do understand why 1C is taking the time to optimize the code! This is a big step forward for you Tvrdi! You have come a long way in just two posts! Keep up the good work!

So your baseline is RoF?

That explains a lot about your current and past statements!!

Allow me to explain why your comparsion is in error

1) Apparently you are un-aware of the fact that RoF is a DX9 program.. And that the DX9 API has been around for some time now, which means there are a lot of experienced DX9 programers to choose from and thus easier to program the game. Where as CoD is a DX10 program that uses the DX11 API.. The DX11 API is new, and very different from previous DX APIs, thus the DX11 API is not as well understood as DX9, mater of fact Microsoft is still working out some of the bugs in it, which all means there are less experienced DX11 programers to choose from and thus harder to programer the game.

2) Apparently you are un-aware and or don't remember what RoF was like when it first came out.. RoF like CoD was not a bugless sim when it was released back in 2009.. It took Neoqb years to get RoF into the state it is today.. And during that time Neoqb gout bought out by 777 studios! So, imho it is disingenuous of you to compare CoD which has been out for less than a year to a game that has been out for nearly 3 years. And try to remember that RoF has a near constant cash flow due to charging for add ones!! Where as CoD does not! Currently the only CoD can generate more development money is to produce a sequel/addon or find someone willing to invest in the product. Which explains why CoD is allready working on a sequal

So now that you are up to speed on RoF I hope you can understand why RoF works so well on lower end systems.. i.e. RoF has had more time and more money to optimize the code and RoF is still a DX9 game thus unless they upgrade to the DX11 API you will never see the DX11 features in RoF that we are soon to see in CoD.. Now 1C could have done the same as Neoqb.. It would have been easier to do.. But as we are now seeing.. 1C has had a much bigger vision for this game engine than Neoqb had for RoF

+1 Exactally!

Yes i agee, sometime in the near future im hoping the hardware will be developed that will allow us to use FSAA in a flightsim.

In the mean time you may want to check out the following 3rd party utils

JSGME FXAA and SMAA utils

I have, about as much use as a chocolate fireguard.

Furhter proof.. same game.. differnt PC.. different results

Buchon's MSAA worked well for me, look absolutely great sim now, i'll really enjoy flying it now, even more than RoF, and i'm big RoF fan, bought it right after release in russia(1 week), there was very much problems too. When was UK release(about half year after russia) it was better shape, but bugs there and there.

While i agree with you AoA, i also think that if your pc meets the specs then you shouldnt have to buy new hardware to play the game well.
I will lol if all those who bought new hardware didnt need to with the correction made to the patch...but i dont have that much faith in the Devs :razz: so no lols for me.

That is part of it, COD is not optimized for multi core CPU’s very well and it is still a very CPU dependent game. My card is only working at 30% but one of my CPU cores is working at 85% to 90% (the others are going at 20% to 30%). Over clocking gave me solid gains and I plan to push my CPU as close to 4Ghz as I can, but unless the developers are able to make COD take more advantage of other cores I think the Intel guys are going to have a better time with their higher memory read/write times and higher CPU speeds.

I have everything set to high with the exception of Trees (low for online play) and buildings which are on unlimited, However I have grass off (causes serious stutters) and Shadows off. This gives me solid mid 40’s FPS over towns and low 80’s most everywhere else. Shadows was what pulled my frames down, with shadows on and the same game setting I would get mid 20’s over towns and it would drop to high teens with other aircraft and flack. I am hoping with the optimization they are able to rectify some of these issues.

JD
AKA_MattE

Which is not suprising really.. Most games are released with bugs.. It's just the nature of games.. What sets one game maker apart from another is how they support the game to address these bugs.. With that said, we are lucky that CoD is made by 1C and not the company that made Silent Hunter 5.. Both games were released with bugs, but, the makers of SH5 simply took the money and ran with it.. Where as 1C is still here working on it.. Yet reading some of the posts in this forum you would think 1C should be hung for doing so.. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad

There are two main parts to any PC..

1) The hardware (MB, MEM, Video Card, etc)
2) The software (OS, Drivers, etc).

With that said, you can have the newest hardware money can buy, but porly configured or conflicting software can make it run like a 286..

At the same time you can have old hardware, but, if your savvy enough, you can tweak the software to make that old hardware shine!

In short, hardware alone is not the answer! It is a combination!

100% true.

True ACE, but what i need is the bit in the menus that says FSAA 0 x2 x4 x8 to work as intended. i have a NVIDIA 580, i have the hardware, i need the games software to work.

Thats true too, it's shame if it not working after a year, why the hell devs doesn't even hidden that option in the launch :shock:

But funniest thing in my gaming history was that epilepsy mess(of course not devs fault), but now when i got smooth gameplay, i see very positive future for Cliffs of Dover. I never forget my first flight, what a stuttermess that was, really terrible, maybe buggiest game in launch ever.

My superhero. Im not in ROF boat. I gave em hard time when deserved. I know its DX9 but it looks very nice dont you think? Yes it had problems with stutters (on some rigs) but they solved that in less than a year (do-you-copy?) ROF still has some very advanced features which CLOD doesnt, like dynamic cloud shadows, realistic sun glare, realistic rain drops, much better DOT system (cant cheat with lower res), posibility to extinguish engine fire in dive and so many things which i cant rem right now.

Ataros, LOL, 1920x1200 isnt an insane resolution in 21st century...anyways I didnt gain much going from this to 1680x1050....I tried that too, I was a beta tester so I know all the tricks...

Why is so hard for you to admit what devs admit...its a bad, bad code...period

Because for some people, like me, it is already working to an extend. Not so well, but it improves something the edges. Anyway I have it disabled as I play at big resolution and FAA disabled minimezes the problem to find and trake dots.

Ah shucks.. Well super is a bit much IMHO.. But I am glad to hear you agree with me just the same! S!

Playstation 3 was $799 at launch:-|

tried that and now have 30-40 fps over towns down low! Thank you very much Its quite acceptable now! But boy i dont even notice a difference with shadows off? This engine is really messed up XD

Check with fraps or similar, or ingame fps meter.

???? i did check with ingame fps meter. But more important is the stuttering is gone!

Now now tvrdi, it took ROF 2 years to fix the CTD online. I'm sure you remember the coined word "I've been roffed" where you'd randomly lose 5-6 guys every single time a AI character spawned due to a rof.exe crash. I'm sure you also realize it took ROF 2.5 years before the 1st plane had an FM review as well? The sun in ROF looks much less realistic than it does in Cliffs to me btw. Cliffs also had moving clouds, dynamic cloud shadows, and clouds that even changed shape at release. ROF didn't have moving clouds till after Cliffs did and they still don't change shape. They are static objects that move across the sky, while in cliffs the clouds slowly change shape, form, appear, and dissipate.

See here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZN7TOKuTP2k

And don't go into bad code. Of course there's people that like different things and your mileage on certain things may vary, but there's isn't a flight sim out there that has the game engine close to anything like IL2 (new or old). You couldn't place couple 100 big objects in a row in a mission in a row in ROF and fly it, (actually the mission probably wouldn't even load - it would error out) let alone fly it smoothly. Now this isn't to say that there are some obvious performance problems with cliffs as it stands right now. But as a fiddler in the FMB, I can go to town and click away and build w/e I want and the game doesn't care. I think squirrel (when screwing around testing this) placed 20,000 3d trenches along England, (basically until his finger got tired) then flew next to them in amazement.

The point is, once the performance is all sorted, what you are left with is a game engine similar to the old IL2 - which is unsurpassed by any other sim ever made. It's sad to some (not me) that these guys don't really work on the SP campaigns or any of that jazz, but it's because if you want one they'll give you all the tools to make it however complex and immersive you like. That's why you can code anything into a mission that's part of MS's NET framework, amongst a million other possibilities. As a fiddler or a person that gets into the "guts" of these games, there's literally no comparison. Not at all.

It's similar to walking into a house that's gorgeous with all this fancy furniture, then finding out while you can walk around, you can't touch anything. Where as IL2COD is like walking into an unorganized messy house, then realizing that you can do w/e you want in there. The 1st scenario is all bright and flashy at 1st, but then you realize just how limited you are in the scope of things. While the 2nd, your imagination is the limit.

Ask anyone is ROF, and I mean anyone, to try and make a map like this to race online. Then, if you take the time to place just 1/10 of the amount of objects and see what happens when you load the mission, you'll see just where I'm coming from. This is a map someone hosts from their home pc btw. This isn't SP.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdOqd...eature=related

And btw, every single thing you see in the map besides the water is an object in the FMB. (not the grey ground texture though) Anything from the mountains, the ramps, to well, everything is there to play with and do w/e you like. Take a gander at the ME in ROF and you'll probably go. ..."oh"

With that said, ROF is good at what is does. It's a nice dog fight simulator, but without the ability to even have a trench as an object in it's mission editor (kinda a big thing in WWI wouldn't you think?) or the ability to place more than a couple hundred objects in a MP mission without the mission going kaput, that's all it will ever be. In IL2, the sky is the limit, once the base engine is all sorted.

So please do watch and read. This type of stuff is exactly why I stand in line with my pom poms eagerly awaiting for what's next.

The sim was released unfinished which made the listed minimum spec irrelevant. The next patch should boost performance enough to allow a minimum spec system run the sim with minimum settings. New combat flight sims have usually always required high end systems to run with all the bells and whistles turned on.

As the series progresses and the developer adds resource hungry features, we will need to upgrade our systems accordingly if you want keep your frame rate high. I upgraded my highend systems a number of time during the original series. I wanted high frames with no sign of a stutter at any time. This sim will provide options for people with average systems to play the sim well just as the original series did.

That race is a great example Bliss.


From Chivas: "The sim was released unfinished which made the listed minimum spec irrelevant."


@Chivas , wouldnt you say that thats the case with most pc sims/games and more so ones that have a PvP mode.

@Chivas "The sim was released unfinished which made the listed minimum spec irrelevant."


WTF Chivas, i dont remember it saying that on the box or on the steam site.

"these are the min specs....but they dont count as we are going to release it unfinished so anything you read on the box is irrelevant....in a years time were making a patch that will improve performance, then and only then will the min spec make sense"

I must admit I had only few CTDs, mainly before migrating to 64 bit OS (rem., they introduced more RAM usage in one update). Stutters were my biggest problem then. To be fair, I must say I love both sims and enjoy both. But currently I have serious performance issues with CLOD which naturally (sometimes) spoils my fun. So Im talking only about facts. Your right when you say ROF is limited in NO of units which you can use on the map but I think there wasnt (initially) any intention to make ROF nothing more than a very good dogfight sim with some objects as targets for bombers.
Then again I must say that CLOD was (when it was officialy released) in more or less unplayable state and that even today (year after the release) some ppl (with pretty good rigs) have serious performance issues mainly due to poorly optimised code. This will show in full light once we will get optimisation patch so we will see how many steps forward you can do with better coding (optimising).
Hopefully in the next patch. Im not a CLOD hater or ROF die hard fan.
My thoughts are simmilar to those of Chivas (look at his last post).
A short review of both sims:
1) FM and DM - CLOD has very good FM, really, on example, you can almost feel the "heaviness of the plane". DM is nice too. We heard they will further improve both which is great. ROF has a very good FM too, DM is somehow odd on some planes but nothing which will spoil our fun. They are really slow with fixing FM innacuracies and I was really vocal about it....
2) graphics - both sims have nice graphics. CLOD has fantastic cockpits but (IMHO!) landscape is somehow wrong...although they corrected colors in one of the latest patches....plane models and ground objects are in both sims very nice but I currently cant use high details on land objects in CLOD...and a big issue for me is a fact that CLOD (still) doesnt have collision model for trees which is not acceptable for "hardcore sims"...
3) AA and AF - AA doesnt work properly in CLOD...theres a workaround with DX files ofcourse....AA works nice in ROF....AF in both sims is questionable....
4) sounds - new CLOD sounds (made by 777 sound designer) and ROF sounds are fantastic...ofcourse the man wasnt so experienced on ROF start...as he is now, so engine sounds of first ROF planes are not so good..but stock sounds in CLOD were practicaly as those from original IL2....one proof (along with AA and tree collision) that CLOD was indeed released in an alpha state....
5) optimisation and MP - both sims had very big otimisation problems but ROF team somehow fixed their troublers...ofcourse thers still a problem with limited no of units which can be used...my hope that we will see a big improvement in optimisation in CLOD
6) single player - much better in ROF (currently)
7) PR and updates for the community - here ROF team finaly did their homework while 1C struggles with a guy whos not good in english (and had very restricted competences)....but without him we would be in a complete darkness....really odd since we had great updates and communication, back then, in old IL2 days...
so...thats it for now...

Try to OC your 1090, that is a must!

I just can't belive that you get such poor results with that monster card.

I run the sim on 560 TI 1GB w/o any problems you mentioned,
with almost everything on max except building details on medium
and forest on low.
I have 2500k on 4.5 GHZ, but I'm shure that thuban on ~ 4 GHz
will perform very close.
Your 30% GPU usage points at problem, CPU can't fill GPU with data.

Also about shadows, I dont have problems with them at all,
but I saw some guys with ATI cards have it, maybe some driver settings,
or new driver will help.

What is the resolution on which you play CLOD?. So we know what we are talking about.

Unfortunatly my 1055T does not like overclocking at all! I have 550W Corsair so this should be enough! But everything over 2950 MHZ is a nono! damn

Why reach for the sky, just turn the game down a bit and enjoy:)...not pretty, but not that bad at all

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f3...303_160127.jpg

You know ;) I put it down on 1680 because of spotting contacts,
and I didn't have problems with 1920 either, litlle slower FPS.

My graphic card is litlle faster than yours at default , and on 950 MHz a bit more,
but I think that is not a problem.

Crank up a voltage on your CPU , 1,35 V is safe ( it wont last 20 years , 10 maybe :grin: ) and put it close to 4 GHz.

You may not trust me but you will see that you need a new top video card when new clouds and weather are introduced even with improved engine. Then you will say that it is bad code again.

The truth is you can never have cheap, immediate and quality (including high resolution and sim detail level) solution. You always have to pay more, to wait more or to compromise on quality (resolution) or play more simple arcade games like BF3. It is up to you to decide if you want to take responsibility for your PC performance. It is easier to blame others of cause but it would not increase FPS for you unlike one of above compromises.

Let's wait for the new weather and see. I bet you will not be able to run it in 1920x1200. The devs are struggling to make the game work on mainstream resolutions which are fullHD now I believe but not higher.

My CPU is CO version and i doubt i can do described above, with scythe catana 3...

@Ataros - new weather? When? This year? Now? ???? By thne I would probably upgrade my rig..then we will se what will be the excuse...

Agreed 100%

It is not your 1055T for shure, probably mobo (.

The box actually says very little, most of the features you've called promises in your negative rants aren't even mentioned.

It would probably not have been an intelligent idea for the developer to say the sim was unfinished on the box. It might have made you happy, but it would have almost guaranteed the demise of the development. Atleast now there is chance the sim you will be finished.

Steady now Chivas no need to get your knickers in a twist.
i dont rant, and ive never talked about "promises" i think your getting me mixed up with someone else, your getting all personal and snotty....not like you Chivas.

Oh the IRONY, I had a good chuckle at that lmao!

No not the mobo! Its a M4A89TD pro i think!

Wow! Posting Image Macros/Memes. . . did I just stumble into the Counterstrike forums?

What's a counterstrike forum?

ACE, seriously now...your name here...i mean...really?...ACE of ACES...really?

and all that in big letters...

ace of clowns

S!

Well there was a game on Commodore 64 called Ace Of Aces. You flew a Mosquito and shot down Bf109's etc. So maybe AoA is one of the old hands who played on C64 ;)

http://www.google.com/search?tbm=isc...64+ace+of+aces

Com´n guys, get a grip, a guy just posted a thread about his new card an it gets derailed again, keep it civil and we can find some answers.

-The patch improves in graphics engine will not only improves GPU but also CPU performance, because part of graphics engine code is done in the CPU also.

-The reason because IL-2 dont likes AMD is because the simulation of physics implicates big single threads, so single thread performance is important and Intel have the lead here.

Also is important the speed of thread execution, that is why CLOD is sensitive to CPU overclock.

I remember, i have that game in orginal Cassette :)

Ohh no...this means he is not a kid.....

He isn't and thats why he doesen't know Counterstike forums either ;)

Very good post !

You got me! ;)

Actully I have posted here before, first flight sim I played was back in 1985 when I was in the Army.. A buddy of mine got a Commodore 64.. It was alot of fun as I remember.. I didn't see another flight sim until I got out of the army and was going to school.. It was LHX or something? But right about that same time Dynamix came out with Red Barron.. I was hooked! Than Aces of the Pacific (AOTP) came out which I made alot of mods for that can still be found today

Chris Acepage

Than there was Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe (SWOTL) that I also made mods for and than Chuck Yeagers Air Combat (CYAC) and on and on an on.. So yes a good 20+ years of flight simming! I dare say I have T-Shirts older than most of the guys posting in this fourm! ;)

So I take it.. Counterstrike is a kidd-os game? Which I guess explains why spec jokey knows of it?

Gold star at tanget topic atempt to take focus off you saying you never rant about the promises.. but no sale! :razz:

Poor Tvrdi.. I guess my post tearing your RoF comparsion to CoD a new one upset you such that you feel the need to lash out? So sad.. Let it go

Yes, the CPU is not really keeping up, but the game is not really utilizing the CPU it to its full potential; however overall I think most Sandy Bridge Intel CPU’s will beat the AMD CPU’s due to their faster memory read/write speeds. I am hoping with an optimized game and more mature video drivers I can turn on all the present eye candy. Don’t get me wrong, the game is very smooth at 45 FPS over a town and when flying over everything else it is at 80+ with no issues and it does not turn into a stutter fest while heavily engaged over a town with lots of flack and aircraft. Bottom line the game still looks great with the settings I have. It is the Shadows, but specifically shadows while flying over towns where I get a big FPS hit so for the moment they are turned off.

As for the grass, I don’t know what is going on there, it is not an FPS issue it is just a persistent stutter, but since I don’t cut the grass very often I don’t really care about it.

I can only get the CPU to 3.4 on stock volts and this is my first time overclocking so I am taking my time and learning as much as possible before I start to mess with the voltages.

JD
AKA_MattE

Actually you never replayed to my last (big) post because its right on the spot....only things, on which you are sticking your crusading nosie, are only a small teases for clowns...hopefuly, once when (and if) they (1C) fix the performance of their graphic engine the need for your existance on these boards will vanish...but then again, who cares for one little tortuous soul, right?

Take your time, but you can do it very easy.
You have unlocked multi on 1090T, put your CPU voltage on 1,4 V
and change multiplier and I'm pretty shure you will find it stable at 3.8-3.9 GHz.

You can't damage CPU with that voltage, just watch temperature with
HWmonitor ( this one is the most precise for AMD I think).
If it is under 60* C loaded with Prime95 for example,it is OK,
in il2 it will be arround 50* C.

If you find it stable then you can try to lover CPU voltage step by step,
with testing in between,to find sweet spot, minimal CPU voltage for desired CPU frequency.
From my experience 1.37- 1.38 V is usually enough for 3.8 -3.9 GHz,
but that depends on particular CPU speciment.

Check your PM !

If believing that makes you feel better..

So be it..

No skin off my back because guys like Bliss, I and others saw your comparisons for what it was.. apples vs. oranges.

By the way.. Is that why you felt the need to lash out and start calling me names? Because more than one person saw through your smoke screen

I have just built a system with a 1090t and m5a97, and have it overclocked to 3.9ghz and 1.375v. Hope that helps!

That's it ... I'm heading off to the local PC shop after work and I'm going to getz me a new card. I'm sick of Crossfire and stutters.