Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover

IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer Maddox Games.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 04-02-2012, 04:08 PM
ATAG_MajorBorris's Avatar
ATAG_MajorBorris ATAG_MajorBorris is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Minnesota, USA
Posts: 342
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaws2002 View Post
I forgot. I would get the 2GB 680 over the 3GB 580 any day of the week. I would get the EVGA version and sign up for step up program and if the next best thing is released within 90 days, I'd just switch to that by paying the difference.
Only thing Jaws is I dont think you can "step up" from a 680 to a 680.
__________________
ASUS Sabertooth MB--Intel 2600k@4.7--EVGA GTX580 3GB--Corasir 1200 watt psu--Corsair 16gb 1866--Corsair H70 cooler--Corsair 650d case--OCZ Vertex 3--Track IR5--CH Eclipse Yoke--CH Trottle Quadrant--CH MFP--CH Rudders-MSFF2
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-02-2012, 04:12 PM
Insuber Insuber is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Paris - France
Posts: 1,406
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaws2002 View Post
Do you play this game? If you do, you'll see it uses more than 1GB. That if you have it.
My game is using close to 1.5GB of video ram, because the game can't see the other 1.5GB on the second GPU in my dual GPU card.

People that have 2GB cards can confirm that their game is using close to two GB of video memory.
I think with 2GB you should be fine, but now, with all this 3GB cards on the market, I wouldn't spend a penny on a card with less then two GB per GPU.

The more you have, for this game, the better.
I confirm, the game uses nearly all of the 3 GB of VRAM, it tops up at >90% occupancy of the VRAM.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-02-2012, 04:50 PM
Jaws2002 Jaws2002 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 851
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MajorBoris View Post
Only thing Jaws is I dont think you can "step up" from a 680 to a 680.
Ah. You are right. I forgot.
Nvidia are such bastards. They won't release the flagship card until August, because the lower power version (680) beats the best Radeon.

Hopefully sometimes after that one comes out, my old GTX590 dies.
__________________
----------------------------------------
Asus Sabertooth Z77
i7 3770k@4.3GHz+ Noctua NH D14 cooler
EVGA GTX 780 Superclocked+ACX cooler.
8GB G.Skill ripjaws DDR3-1600
Crucial M4 128GB SSD+Crucial M4 256GB SSD
Seagate 750GB HDD
CH Fighterstick+CH Pro pedals+Saitek X45
Win7 64bit
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-02-2012, 05:28 PM
addman's Avatar
addman addman is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Vasa, Finland
Posts: 1,593
Default

I run the game with a mere EVGA GTX 550ti 1GB DDR5 and I get 34 FPS on average in black death with v-sync turned on at medium to high settings albeit at only 1366x768 resolution though.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 04-02-2012, 05:30 PM
priller26 priller26 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 266
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaws2002 View Post
Any 580 with less then 3GB of ram is waste of money now. EVGA also makes some good cards, and have awesome waranty.
Would be my choice, have one myself. Lifetime warranty as long as you register the product. Works great, never had a hiccup.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 04-02-2012, 05:44 PM
ATAG_MajorBorris's Avatar
ATAG_MajorBorris ATAG_MajorBorris is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Minnesota, USA
Posts: 342
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaws2002 View Post
Ah. You are right. I forgot.
Nvidia are such bastards. They won't release the flagship card until August, because the lower power version (680) beats the best Radeon.

Hopefully sometimes after that one comes out, my old GTX590 dies.
It seems the 680 was the 670 untill it beat new ati, dam them lol,

Dont wish undue harm to your 590, its still good, => 680? and you can sell it later : )

Regarding "step up"

If one were to get a 580 3gb then you could step up to a 680 4gb in the 90days if the timing was good.

*read all EVGA faqs about waranty and step up to be sure!...3 day cross ship rocks!
__________________
ASUS Sabertooth MB--Intel 2600k@4.7--EVGA GTX580 3GB--Corasir 1200 watt psu--Corsair 16gb 1866--Corsair H70 cooler--Corsair 650d case--OCZ Vertex 3--Track IR5--CH Eclipse Yoke--CH Trottle Quadrant--CH MFP--CH Rudders-MSFF2

Last edited by ATAG_MajorBorris; 04-02-2012 at 06:03 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-02-2012, 05:46 PM
ATAG_MajorBorris's Avatar
ATAG_MajorBorris ATAG_MajorBorris is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Minnesota, USA
Posts: 342
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by addman View Post
I run the game with a mere EVGA GTX 550ti 1GB DDR5 and I get 34 FPS on average in black death with v-sync turned on at medium to high settings albeit at only 1366x768 resolution though.
Just curious, why would you benchmark with vsync on?
__________________
ASUS Sabertooth MB--Intel 2600k@4.7--EVGA GTX580 3GB--Corasir 1200 watt psu--Corsair 16gb 1866--Corsair H70 cooler--Corsair 650d case--OCZ Vertex 3--Track IR5--CH Eclipse Yoke--CH Trottle Quadrant--CH MFP--CH Rudders-MSFF2
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 04-02-2012, 05:50 PM
addman's Avatar
addman addman is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Vasa, Finland
Posts: 1,593
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MajorBoris View Post
Just curious, why would you benchmark with vsync on?
Because if I don't have v-sync on then the average FPS value won't reflect the real performance of the game since I only run the game on a 60Hz monitor, any higher value then 60 FPS will cause tearing and for me 60 FPS max is more then enough for my eyes.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-02-2012, 05:58 PM
ATAG_MajorBorris's Avatar
ATAG_MajorBorris ATAG_MajorBorris is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Minnesota, USA
Posts: 342
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by addman View Post
Because if I don't have v-sync on then the average FPS value won't reflect the real performance of the game since I only run the game on a 60Hz monitor, any higher value then 60 FPS will cause tearing and for me 60 FPS max is more then enough for my eyes.
I always though for benchmarks, v-sync gives a skewed result. Or that you cant tell the other tweaks(changes) are as good or bad.
__________________
ASUS Sabertooth MB--Intel 2600k@4.7--EVGA GTX580 3GB--Corasir 1200 watt psu--Corsair 16gb 1866--Corsair H70 cooler--Corsair 650d case--OCZ Vertex 3--Track IR5--CH Eclipse Yoke--CH Trottle Quadrant--CH MFP--CH Rudders-MSFF2

Last edited by ATAG_MajorBorris; 04-02-2012 at 06:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 04-02-2012, 06:03 PM
addman's Avatar
addman addman is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Vasa, Finland
Posts: 1,593
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MajorBoris View Post
I always though for benchmarks v-sync gives a skewed result.
Well, yes it does but the same can be said about running without because if you run a benchmark without v-sync then the average FPS probably will be higher but it might be because the bench suddenly jumps up to high FPS values in short parts of the bench and then raises the average FPS number but it doesn't really reflect the performance of the majority of the length of the bench.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.