Community help,configurations and settings

[Insuber]

Originally Posted by SturmKreator

I'm Gonna make my own based review from this game, I buy this game with 80% of discount, becouse I read a lot of critics about this new simulator.

First, My machine is:

Amd 250x2 @3.6 ghz
2gb ram ddr2
Hd4850 521mb
19" Screen (max resolution: 1280x1024)

This is my first time playing COD. When I enter in COD by first time, I try to adjust every setting to make run the game in the best possible way.

When I choose the battle and enter to the flight for the first time, this have a lot of stuttering, I only choose a map over the sea with 4 planes!!, Well after 2 minutes of constant stuttering, I can fly properly with a little lag.

After 5 minutes fighting, then the game fridge, I close the game and start all the process again. I choose the same scenary, and past 5 minutes again, and the game fridge again!!!

I feel if I was playing a beta with 50% of progress, this sim need a long way of work, and then I read from luthier where this game gonna receive less priority...

Well at least I lost 10 dolars, I feel really bad, becouse I love the ww2 sims and the entire Il-2 saga.

Excuse my English.

Flight sims stress to a max all the components of a PC. This was true for MS FS series, Rise of Flight, DCS Black Shark and now DCS Warthog. And for any other non-arcade flight sim that I can remember. Added to that, CoD has also some optimization problems.
But in your case I would not complain CoD, your system features a CPU with no L3 cache, 234 million transistors (phenom II x4 950, launched before yours, had 758 million transistors), and a narrow memory bandwidth. It was a low end CPU in 2009, priced below 90 $.
You have also only 2GB DDR2 RAM: apart from their insufficiency for CloD per se, it's likely that you have XP which means DX9. A lot of users have issues with XP and DX9.
The video card is not bad, but it is 3.5 years old, and moreover its 512 MB would put you in troubles even with Rise of Flight, which is now well optimized.

I know what I'm speaking about because initially I tried CloD on a dual core, 2GB, 8800gt 512 MB system. No deal, it was either freezing and stuttering or needed to be played at very low settings.

Mate, all in all you need an upgrade if you like CloD, or even if you want to play RoF at high settings.

Cheers

[Insuber]

Originally Posted by 159th_Jester

Not quite true.

I run CloD on the following PC:

AMD x2 240 @2.8GHz
2GB DDR2 Corsair RAM
nVidia GTX260 896MB
On board sound with AC97 codecs
Win XP Pro 32-bit

I do have problems with some kind of memory leak in the sim (will crash if I don't restart inbetween missions), but the sim runs well on medium/ low settings (models on high) even with engagements of 20 or more aircraft over land (but NOT over London!! ).

As you'll notice the other poster you were replying to has a stronger CPU than mine (not sure how his GFX card compares to mine.... I'm not well versed in ATI cards). Needless to say, if he's running Win 7 or Vista with only 2GB RAM he's on a none-starter anyway (I didn't notice him mention an op system in his post).

The problem he's having I would guess is more to do with unrealistic expectations: He needs to spend some time tweaking his in game GFX settings to find the best balance of graphics and performance. If I can do it on my PC I can't see why he can't do it on his (unless he's running Vista or Win 7)

Your 260 is >50% quicker than his 4850, and has 75% more GDDR3 VRAM. Do the math, mate ...

[SturmKreator]

Originally Posted by Insuber

Flight sims stress to a max all the components of a PC. This was true for MS FS series, Rise of Flight, DCS Black Shark and now DCS Warthog. And for any other non-arcade flight sim that I can remember. Added to that, CoD has also some optimization problems.
But in your case I would not complain CoD, your system features a CPU with no L3 cache, 234 million transistors (phenom II x4 950, launched before yours, had 758 million transistors), and a narrow memory bandwidth. It was a low end CPU in 2009, priced below 90 $.
You have also only 2GB DDR2 RAM: apart from their insufficiency for CloD per se, it's likely that you have XP which means DX9. A lot of users have issues with XP and DX9.
The video card is not bad, but it is 3.5 years old, and moreover its 512 MB would put you in troubles even with Rise of Flight, which is now well optimized.

I know what I'm speaking about because initially I tried CloD on a dual core, 2GB, 8800gt 512 MB system. No deal, it was either freezing and stuttering or needed to be played at very low settings.

Mate, all in all you need an upgrade if you like CloD, or even if you want to play RoF at high settings.

Cheers

I could run BlackSharck, ROF, at full graphics, over 50 FPS

[159th_Jester]

Originally Posted by Insuber

Your 260 is >50% quicker than his 4850, and has 75% more GDDR3 VRAM. Do the math, mate ...

As I said, I don't know how nVidia and ATI cards compare. Thanks for clarifying that. Hope my post didn't muddy the waters.

[Insuber]

Originally Posted by SturmKreator

I could run BlackSharck, ROF, at full graphics, over 50 FPS

Sorry mate, review your RoF settings. What you say is technically impossible: with 512MB of video RAM, RoF *doesn't allow* you to max out the video settings, like textures quality, object density and FSAA >2. Of course if you reduce resolution to 800x600 everything changes ... . And having had a system similar to yours I know that it's strictly impossible to run RoF at 50 fps with the max allowed settings. I had big issues with Black Shark also: low graphics to have acceptable performance.

Cheers,
Insuber

[BigC208]

Originally Posted by SturmKreator

I could run BlackSharck, ROF, at full graphics, over 50 FPS

Congratulations! You still can't play CloD with that rig. Should you be able to? Yes you should, it says so on the box. They screwed the pooch with the minimum requirements. With my old system (6600 duocore @3.4 ghz, 8800gts640mb 4 gig ram) I could also play pretty much any other sim out there. The only way I could get CloD to play was turn the graphics down. It looked like 1991's Chuck Yeager Air Combat. Because I loved what I saw on better computers I spend the money to be able to play the sim at high settings.

So, you are right to be dissapointed. On the other hand you knew going in what the facts were from reading the forum. My advice for you. Wipe CloD from your hard drive and keep playing the sims your system can handle. Try again after the new patch and see if they performed a miracle and it runs on your rig. If they failed you have two options. Get over it or spend $1000 and run it properly. I know it sounds a bit harsh but that's reallity. All this optimizing for antique systems IMHO is standing in the way of progress. Flight sims have always been pushing the graphics boundaries. Designing this sim without the bennefits of the latest graphics card developements hobbles it's future potential. This point of view would have been elitist and arrogant just a few years ago. Today, on the other hand, you can buy a Windows 7, 64bit system with a dx11 gpu and 8 gigs of ram for around a thousand bucks. Upgrade or be left behind.

[SturmKreator]

Originally Posted by Insuber

Sorry mate, review your RoF settings. What you say is technically impossible: with 512MB of video RAM, RoF *doesn't allow* you to max out the video settings, like textures quality, object density and FSAA >2. Of course if you reduce resolution to 800x600 everything changes ... . And having had a system similar to yours I know that it's strictly impossible to run RoF at 50 fps with the max allowed settings. I had big issues with Black Shark also: low graphics to have acceptable performance.

Cheers,
Insuber

my max resolution is 1280x1024

[SturmKreator]

Originally Posted by BigC208

Congratulations! You still can't play CloD with that rig. Should you be able to? Yes you should, it says so on the box. They screwed the pooch with the minimum requirements. With my old system (6600 duocore @3.4 ghz, 8800gts640mb 4 gig ram) I could also play pretty much any other sim out there. The only way I could get CloD to play was turn the graphics down. It looked like 1991's Chuck Yeager Air Combat. Because I loved what I saw on better computers I spend the money to be able to play the sim at high settings.

So, you are right to be dissapointed. On the other hand you knew going in what the facts were from reading the forum. My advice for you. Wipe CloD from your hard drive and keep playing the sims your system can handle. Try again after the new patch and see if they performed a miracle and it runs on your rig. If they failed you have two options. Get over it or spend $1000 and run it properly.

I'll have to do that

[Robert]

Originally Posted by SturmKreator

I could run BlackSharck, ROF, at full graphics, over 50 FPS

Your System:

Amd 250x2 @3.6 ghz
2gb ram ddr2
Hd4850 521mb
19" Screen (max resolution: 1280x1024)


I have:

a duo core 6700

4gb RAM (32 bit OS allows 3gb)

The same video card as you

Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium soundcard

and a 19 inch monitor running 1024 x 768 resolution for RoF.


I can't run it all maxed and expect to get in a fur ball. Just the max ground textures alone will cause my card to use 128% of my memory. We won't mention how AA, maximum light sources and multi sampling make the game run like.

I recorded a track while playing. I then replayed the track at almost full settings and it was choppy.

You ain't running RoF at full settings. No way..... especially at the resolutions you're claiming.

[Verhängnis]

Yes of course he lies... Rise of Flights Max settings would require twice the power his computer has, and some. Because even if he had say a Quad Core and a 1024Mb graphics card with 4 gig of Ram, that would reach the reccommended settings only.

DCS on the other hand, is actually very efficient in that it needs little processing power. So is Rise of Flight, but he wouldn't get it on max settings with over 50 FPS, no way.