Friday 2010-10-29 Dev. update and Discussion

Originally Posted by JG53Harti

Maybe you are right, but have you read what we need now for hardware already ?

It seems that a high range setup from 2010/2011 can already handle that game at full settings. I expected to need a monster computer, but that's not the case.
Didn't many people here say that it needed a lot more time until hardware could handle IL-2 at full settings?

So I think there is lots of free space for Oleg to fill up with better graphics, more objects and features.

[T}{OR]

Originally Posted by Hecke

It seems that a high range setup from 2010/2011 can already handle that game at full settings. I expected to need an monstercomputer, but that's not the case.
Didn't many people here say that it needed a lot more time until hardware could handle IL-2 at full settings?

So I think there is lots of free space for Oleg to fill up with better graphics, more objects and features.

If you look at the presentation here:

Originally Posted by Hecke

I bet you haven't seen this.

Video of the presentation:

http://rutube.ru/tracks/3742502.html...46b8b757bf2761

You will see that at the end of it where they show Su-26 flying low over land and water the game runs extremely smooth without any stuttering. Since Oleg mentioned the game will ship with x64 exe I presume that the game then must be able to use more than 2GB of RAM (limit for every program on x32 systems) which to me frankly, isn't a surprise when you look at all the features and the landscape itself.

Well done Oleg and co.

The systems they are currently using are probably Running Vista/Windows 7. Right off the bat, those two OS's use a heck of a lot of RAM. When you have a game like SOW that requires a lot of RAM, especially for larger maps you have the OS and the Game fighting over who gets the most RAM. Hence the stuttering. Another GB or two would have probably let it run smooth as glass.

The reason they didn't have that option was the people setting up the show made them use their PC's and for some reason they didn't put nearly enough RAM in them to showcase newer game like SOW. Your average FPS or MMORPG probably isn't going to need that much RAM, but a game like SOW will, and they should have known that and made some provisions.

[addman]

IL-2 is basically a DirectX 8 game (with some DX9 features that came later on) and it was written for hardware avaliable at the time thus the reason why people with super rigs even today see stuttering in certain parts of the game. SOW on the other hand is written with multi-core cpu, modern GPU and massive RAM allocation capabilities -thanks to the x64 exe- so don't be surprised if your computer might run SoW BETTER than IL-2.

BTW, a 32-bit OS is restricted to 3GB of RAM no matter how much you stuff in it, not 2GB that someone mentioned.

[Ploughman]

Originally Posted by addman

BTW, a 32-bit OS is restricted to 3GB of RAM no matter how much you stuff in it, not 2GB that someone mentioned.

I've stuck 4GB of RAM in mine and I'd thought the system could use up to 3.7GB of it, is this incorrect and the OS can only utilise 3 of the 4 gigs available? Seems every little's going to help.

[addman]

I have 4GB in my computer and before I was running XP 32-bit and it could allocate 3.25GB of it so no, there's nothing wrong with your system.

Maybe I should also stick with my q9550@4x3 GHz because then I can keep my 8 gb RAM.
Would be interesting to know from what amount of RAM the fps don't get better anymore when upgrading to more.

[swiss]

Originally Posted by Hecke

Maybe I should also stick with my q9550@4x3 GHz because then I can keep my 8 gb RAM.
Would be interesting to know from what amount of RAM the fps don't get better anymore when upgrading to more.

i7 can't deal with DDR2?

[F19_lacrits]

Originally Posted by addman

IL-2 is basically a DirectX 8 game (with some DX9 features that came later on) and it was written for hardware avaliable at the time thus the reason why people with super rigs even today see stuttering in certain parts of the game. SOW on the other hand is written with multi-core cpu, modern GPU and massive RAM allocation capabilities -thanks to the x64 exe- so don't be surprised if your computer might run SoW BETTER than IL-2.

BTW, a 32-bit OS is restricted to 3GB of RAM no matter how much you stuff in it, not 2GB that someone mentioned.

Il2 supports DX8, but most of the development went into OGL support.. That's why nvidia cards run better with IL2 than AMD/ATI cards.
The RAM restriction of 32-bit Windows is 4GB. Then peripheral devices like graphic card, controllers etc. hog some RAM. That's why you won't get full 4GB available when Windows is launched. On average you get a little over 3 to 3.5GB available in Windows.

[addman]

Originally Posted by F19_lacrits

Il2 supports DX8, but most of the development went into OGL support.. That's why nvidia cards run better with IL2 than AMD/ATI cards.
The RAM restriction of 32-bit Windows is 4GB. Then peripheral devices like graphic card, controllers etc. hog some RAM. That's why you won't get full 4GB available when Windows is launched. On average you get a little over 3 to 3.5GB available in Windows.

I stand corrected, totally forgot about the OpenGL part