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
  #21  
Old 07-01-2011, 10:55 PM
zoopyzook zoopyzook is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 47
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutch_851 View Post
Anyone tried 4BKevin 62?

Sorry, it's that beer again.

:shudder: Kevin is actually my RL name
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-01-2011, 11:02 PM
ATAG_Dutch ATAG_Dutch is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,793
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zoopyzook View Post
:shudder: Kevin is actually my RL name
Sorry mate, pure coincidence. Kevin's a bloke I know in my local who is an unbelivable pain in the derriere, just sprang to mind when reading the thread.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 07-01-2011, 11:04 PM
Ze-Jamz Ze-Jamz is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: On your six!!
Posts: 2,302
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Orpheus View Post
Apparently so. So far I'm the only person that's actually contributed to the thread instead of whining because you all prefer a different benchmark.

Thought of trying that? You know, contributing? No, of course not.
Ok numbnuts il be clear here...I gave my input saying the win7 benchmark tool is flawed so DON'T use it due to it causing a lot of BS from people that already have issues...you gave no input other than to come in here "puking" as you say all over my post...where was you input at that point?

If you bother to look I've added input you on the otherhand are in here bashing me...

Please stop wasting your time
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 07-01-2011, 11:07 PM
zoopyzook zoopyzook is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 47
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ze-Jamz View Post
Ok numbnuts il be clear here...I gave my input saying the win7 benchmark tool is flawed so DON'T use it due to it causing a lot of BS from people that already have issues...you gave no input other than to come in here "puking" as you say all over my post...where was you input at that point?

If you bother to look I've added input you on the otherhand are in here bashing me...

Please stop wasting your time

I have to agree, win7 experience gives me a 7.6 on a 2 year old machine (apart from my GPU) so it can't be that accurate.

will follow with my 3DMark11 score when it finishes downloading
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-01-2011, 11:11 PM
Orpheus Orpheus is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 235
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ze-Jamz View Post
Ok numbnuts il be clear here...I gave my input saying the win7 benchmark tool is flawed so DON'T use it due to it causing a lot of BS from people that already have issues...you gave no input other than to come in here "puking" as you say all over my post...where was you input at that point?

If you bother to look I've added input you on the otherhand are in here bashing me...

Please stop wasting your time
Acutally I seem to remember you telling me to 'be quiet' as if I were some 8 year old with his hand in the cookie jar when all I asked was that people contribute to the benchmark idea, even if they disagree as to whether it's 'worth it' or not - because frankly neither of us know which benchmark would be more use to the developers. Since you felt it necessary to talk to me like a child, I have no problem returning the favour.

Since a forum moderator has asked for this I thought it was worth adding my results instead of complaining about his choice of benchmark - which is all you and everyone else in this thread has done. I don't consider that a 'contribution'. I'm done arguing this point with you, so just let it go and let the thread go back to being useful for those people who actually want to help instead of complain.


Quote:
Originally Posted by zoopyzook View Post
I have to agree, win7 experience gives me a 7.6 on a 2 year old machine (apart from my GPU) so it can't be that accurate.

will follow with my 3DMark11 score when it finishes downloading
Looking at your specs, you're running a pretty hefty rig, regardless of whether it's two years old or not. Seems pretty accurate to me.

Last edited by Orpheus; 07-01-2011 at 11:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 07-01-2011, 11:19 PM
Thee_oddball Thee_oddball is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 812
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zoopyzook View Post
but for an accurate test we all need to be singing off the same hymn sheet.

I can get awesome scores with 3DMark 05
if you want a real comparison then we will ALL have tobe running CLOD on FRESH installs of win7 with NOTHING else but the game installed and using the same tool.

S!
__________________
Gigabyte Z68
Intel 2500K (@4.3 ghz)212 CM Cooler
8GB Ram
EVGA 660SC (super clocked) 2GB Vram
CORSAIR CMPSU-750TX 750W
64 GB SSD SATA II HD
WIN7 UL 64BIT
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 07-01-2011, 11:25 PM
Thee_oddball Thee_oddball is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 812
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zoopyzook View Post
I have to agree, win7 experience gives me a 7.6 on a 2 year old machine (apart from my GPU) so it can't be that accurate.

will follow with my 3DMark11 score when it finishes downloading
you have a much better rig than i do and i get
6.9 cpu
7.4 mem
7.5 vid

Im happy with the score and performance but i wonder how it is rating my system.

S!
__________________
Gigabyte Z68
Intel 2500K (@4.3 ghz)212 CM Cooler
8GB Ram
EVGA 660SC (super clocked) 2GB Vram
CORSAIR CMPSU-750TX 750W
64 GB SSD SATA II HD
WIN7 UL 64BIT
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 07-01-2011, 11:26 PM
zoopyzook zoopyzook is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 47
Default

3DMark11 score:

P6070 3DMarks

but apparently its telling me that my Drivers are out of date.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 07-02-2011, 01:00 AM
AARPRazorbacks AARPRazorbacks is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: SEC, USA. WPS
Posts: 222
Default

Dwm2.bmp




system:

MOBO- Gigabyte GA-EP45_UD3P.
CPU-Intel core Duo E8600 @ 3.33GHz.
Ram 4GB.
PSU-(Duel power supply.
500 and 550 watt on the GPU.
550 watt on MOBO and SSD.
500 watt on HDD and CD/DVD player)
GPU-Video card GTX 470 1280 MB GDDR5.
Internal SSD- Crucial M4 CT064M4SSD2 2.5" 64GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive
Internal HD-Seagate Barracuda SATA2 1TB/TO 32MB 7200RPM.
External HD-Seagate USB2.00 500 GB 7200RPM.
OS-(Duel partition on Internal HDD.
Windows XP Pro 32bit.
Windows 7 PRO 64 bit.)


CFS3 and Expansions,FSX on XP 32 bit HDD-Seagate Barracuda SATA2 1TB/TO 32MB 7200RPM.
CLoD and RoF in W-7 Pro 64 bit HDD-Seagate Barracuda SATA2 1TB/TO 32MB 7200RPM.
CLoD and RoF in W-7 Pro 64 bit SSD- Crucial M4 CT064M4SSD2 2.5" 64GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive


MSWFF Pro 2.
2 saitek x52 throttles.
Saitek Pro Flight PZ35 Rudder Pedals
Monitor- HP-19, HP-24 or a VIZIO 42in screen.
Turtle Beach Gaming Headset and Mic.
TIR5.
Fraps.
Systems Windows 7 Experience Index rate of 6.7 base with SSD-- 5.9 base with HDD


With this score I'm able to fly CLod very well. I was able to fly CLod at base 5.9 HDD. Not as good as 6.7 base SDD but still very playable.

I use MS Windows 7 64 bit as a OS on my PC. CLod is MS Windows based.

We all are using MS Windows XP, Vista 64 bit or Windows 7 64 bit to play this sim.

Does MS know what there doing? I would think so!

If by posting my results of Windows 7 Experience Index helps the CLoD team make This sim more playable on more PC's.Then thats a good thing.

Windows Experience Index is already on Vista and 7 and being used by PC games and Hardware developers to help people know wither or not thy can use there product on there PC. If there hardware or software is MS windows base.

There was a poster on another flight sim forum ask what FPS he would get with his system in CLoD. I told him if he had Windows 7 Experience Index to run that. then post his Base score and I could tell him what to expect form CLoD on this system. That EZ.

Last edited by AARPRazorbacks; 07-02-2011 at 01:31 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 07-02-2011, 01:27 AM
AndyJWest AndyJWest is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,049
Default

Quote:
If by posting my results of Windows 7 Experience Index helps the CLoD team make This sim more playable on more PC.Then thats a good thing.
It doesn't, so it won't, so it isn't.

Quote:
Does MS know what there doing? I would think so!
They know what they are doing. So do we. Producing simplistic 'benchmarks' that tell the user little, but help MS make a profit. If they can persuade people that they need better hardware, they can be 90% sure that this will result in another sale of their OS - most people don't upgrade isolated components, but by a new PC - with Windows installed.
__________________
MoBo: Asus Sabertooth X58. CPU: Intel i7 950 Quad Core 3.06Ghz overclocked to 3.80Ghz. RAM: 12 GB Corsair DDR3 (1600).
GPU: XFX 6970 2GB. PSU: 1000W Corsair. SSD: 128 GB. HDD:1 TB SATA 2.
OS: Win 7 Home Premium 64bit. Case: Antec Three Hundred. Monitor: 24" Samsung.
Head tracking: TrackIR 5. Sore neck: See previous.
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 02:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.