![]() |
|
Performance threads All discussions about CoD performnce |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hello everyone.
I'm wondering if anyone here has a mid-range system like I do. Does anyone have a working conf.ini file ready for these systems? I want to run it as smooth as Wings of Prey runs for me, and I will play windowed since that is my preference. I know it probably won't run smooth enough as WoP due to the performance issues etc. I can run Wings of Prey: Ultra High settings, no Anti-Aliasing, 16× anisotropy with a steady 40-50 FPS. System specs in sig. Any input will be appreciated. Thanks |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
You should be able to run it (according to reports) - but expect to have to turn the settings down considerably. WoP is an order of magnitude less complex...
I don't have a copy yet. So, we'll see... |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Phenom 2 x4 965 @ 3.4Gb
GTX470 1280Mb 8Gb ddr2 mem FPS = 1, there must be a problem somewhere but i'll be damned if I can find it. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Specs as my sig,its probably considered low range thise days.
Over water,in a 109 cockpit,I get over 25 fps. There are many settings you can turn down to improve performance,and threads on the forum already about them. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
According to Smit's post, I really hope they are going to fix this performance issue. I just can't stand how games can go perfect. on graphics, and then still run slower then i.e. Crysis 2. Games like Arma 1 and Arma 2 My brother is a happy owner of an awesome PC, he can run Crysis 2 literally everything maxed, but he can't play Arma 2 on max. That's like really weird since Crysis 2 is the game that stresses PCs most. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
__________________
“Violent, irrational, intolerant, allied to racism and tribalism and bigotry, invested in ignorance and hostile to free inquiry, contemptuous of women and coercive toward children: organized religion ought to have a great deal on its conscience.” ― Christopher Hitchens |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Most graphic intensive games that are used as benchmarks (like Crysis for example) are not well-suited to simulator benchmarking.
The reason is that the fundamental differences in the gameplay are reflected in totally different processing demands: they run much smaller maps, they don't need multi-layered AI that has to take advantage of 3 dimensions to be of any challenge, they don't need to model as many different parameters for what the player controls, etc. That being said, i too would be interested to know how to maximize performance on mid-range rigs. I use an i7 920 at stock speeds (2.7Ghz) on an Asus P6T deluxe motherboard, 3GB of DDR3 RAM in a triple channel kit (i skipped vista and installed XP when i built it so no use going for a lot of RAM, i now run win7 64 however) and an Ati 4890 1GB. I'm not really keen on overclocking the CPU for a variety of reasons and i really can't afford a DX11 GPU upgrade. I might bump up the RAM a bit though and since i have a second triple channel capable bank, it would make sense to go for 6 GB. That will have to wait until the first round of optimization patches and some community feedback, but it's a cheap and worthwhile upgrade overall. In the grand scheme of things i'm not really worried since i don't expect to run this on high settings, more like medium to high and tweaking it to get 30-40 FPS across the board to maintain playability. The only thing that's causing me concern is the 4890. Since the game runs in DX10, does anyone know how a 4890 1GB fares when compared to a mid-range DX11 card running DX10? I seem to remember the first DX11 GPUs (eg, 57xx,56xx) actually being slower than the late generation DX10 cards like the 4890, but with so many people running GTX 460/470/equivalent 5xx and similar Ati/AMD models i need some frame of reference to those GPUs to roughly know what to expect. Any ideas? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
I think there is some problem with the gameengine, since people with newest I7 CPU and GTX570/580 or HD6950/6970 got all the same poor perfomance especially over land. I just wait for my DL to finish (27 mins to go) and i can report what FPS i get since i think my systemspecs are very common. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Thanks for posting and checking your FPS range. I think I'm building a custom PC this year. Limited on money. That's the only downside of being under-aged. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
And no, Radeon 4870 is not low end, no matter how you put it. Having a Quad core and recommended memory, we should be perfectly able to play the game @medium @~40fps. There are virtually no games that require a Gf460GTX card just to run properly. Even on lowest settings, this game should always look 4x better than 1946 or it is broken. And no, this is a PC exclusive game. We have a conf.ini, we have HUGE options to make a good compromise. |
![]() |
|
|