Intel i7 OC to 3,33Gz fps test: Il2 full mods vs RoF

[TUCKIE_JG52]

For those who are wondering about new hardware... I've been "videotesting" my new Pc... Rise of Flight triggered for me the need of new hardware, but obviouslly I will keep flying in Il-2, so it's a comparative performance test; full mods in IL-2 vs default Rise of Flight. Both at 1920x1080, Ambient occlusion On, AA and Aniso at 8x as forced in Nvidia control panel (I don't use NHancer).

Mod pack used was Ultrapack 1.7, not intending to spam nothing here. The reason is that it's hardest to run smooth with all effects on. UI and other packs, and of course, default 1946 should run even better than this. Anyway, I still have to fine tune conf.ini...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9KTdNSuNKc

None Il-2 or RoF gave me any single problem running under Windows 7.

For those flying other simulators, I also videotested in my machine FS2004 (finally full graphics capable), FSX (lots of problems here!), X-Plane 9 (amazing autogen crowded scenarios!), Condor (rock solid at 60fps), Black Shark (good performance), Lock On Gold (some shadows bugs). The other 3 videos with those tests are on my Youtube channel.

In all cases, consider there are some loss in fps due to fraps capturing video.

[nearmiss]

Everything looks good.

Have you done a test with alot of planes in a furrball?

All the mathmatic calculations from alot of aircraft in the air flying and fighting would be a better test.

Put as many aircraft into the air fighting as possible, then autopilot and move around while running the FPS tests.

I haven't run them for awhile on my system, but I cannot run perfect water in a furrball. I have ABit Pro 35 Mobo, 4gig low latency ram, E6600 processor,750watt PS, 8800 GTX 512 (single VC), artic cooling fan, in 900 Acer box with 5 fans.

I am currently planning a new system, and your mention of the i7 920 tweaked my interest. I was looking at using a i7 860.

Thanks for the video, the graphics are pretty terrific and the flying isn't bad either.

[TUCKIE_JG52]

Precisely that scramble was in a QMB+ with fulll smoke mods (usually FPS killer at effects = 2), 4.09 with 72 km horizon, water 4 on the river, trees = 2, complex mod clouds, lots of planes on the ground, 16 attackers, and 20 defenders... you see.

For other references, there uses to be used as benchmarck the default track "The Black Death" with the views as default.

There, my fps are sustained at 60, the max the monitor can show, with some minor falls to 45-50 when Il-2's attacks the vehicles convoy on the track, and only one serious slow down to 26 fps when the first 190 is downed, because as backkgrount there is the aerodrome full of smoke while being attacked. All this, with mods on on UI 1.1... Ultrapack 1.7 has different performance, looking a little bit better I think, but with a little bit less fps.

[Flyby]

Hey Tuckie how about a test where there is a lot of flak from enemy ships or maybe a bunch pf troops jumong from 8 or 9 JU-52s? I've fund them to be real show stoppers on my old system (P4-2.8 and Nv6800 Ultra). I just bought an i7-920 so I'm really interested in your results.
Flyby out

[TUCKIE_JG52]

Originally Posted by Flyby

Hey Tuckie how about a test where there is a lot of flak from enemy ships or maybe a bunch pf troops jumong from 8 or 9 JU-52s? I've fund them to be real show stoppers on my old system (P4-2.8 and Nv6800 Ultra). I just bought an i7-920 so I'm really interested in your results.
Flyby out

I'll look for it, but instead of parachutes I'll better use 16 Fw-200 bombing with sub-munition cluster bombs, it's a far more fps killler.

What I've tested yet it's the nuclear bomb, slowing down to 18 fps after the white flash (which is really high fps for that big explosion overrunning a city) at effects = 2.

A medium city burning entire, every building on fire with smoke, slows to 20 fps. There are extreme situations that any normal Pc can run fine

[Flyby]

Hi Tuckie,
I'm sure a lot of people will be interested in your test results since IL2 can only benefit from higher core speeds and not multiple cores (sort of). I mention the flak and the parachutes because, like your examples of the (lots of) sub-munition cluster bombs, and smoking cities, these effects are an immersion factor in some cases. For instance, I found that I had to turn down the flak from naval vessels to far less than what I've seen shown in documentary films just to have decent frame rates. It was almost to the point where flak gave one a pass as he nosed over in a dive on a ship, or made a torpedo run. Not very immersive imo. Naval flak from a combat naval fleet was heavier than could be represented. This low-performance feature took away from the suspension of disbelief. Again, imo. So, with multiple cores handling some of the crap running in the background perhaps one core at 3.3ghz (as you use) might be able to resore a bit of what's lacking in those scenarios. hmmm...
Flyby out

[Thunderbolt56]

I've been running IL2 and RoF on my new rig for the last 4 months and the i7 is definitely a racehorse.

Here are my specs:

Asus P6T Deluxe V2
i7 920 @ 3.8ghz (Thermalright TRUE Copper HSF)
6GB Corsair Dominator @ 1523mhz
XFX GTX285 Black Edition
X-Fi Titanium Champion Fatal1ty
VRaptor 300GB (boot sector)
Seagate 500GB (data/games)
Vista Home Premium x64

I run the following settings in IL2 by default:

1920x1200
8xAA, 16xAF
Perfect landscape, water = 4
Forest = 2
Effects = 2
3D gunners = on


At these settings, with Vsync on, I maintain 60fps mmore than 90% of the time. Like Tuckie, there are a few specific time in The Blackdeath track where is slows into the low 30's and in the Kamikaze track it slows to about the same for approximately 5 seconds (repeatable).

In online scenarios, I've never seen it go below 40fps and still remains pegged at 59-60 fps almost all the time with the above settings and everything else turned on too.

In RoF I run it with Vsync off and frames usually stay in the mid 70's at equally high settings (1920x1200, full screen, 4xAA, 4xAF).
I have everything maxed out in the settings tab with the following exceptions:

1. I have lanscape set to "med" instead of high as there really isn't much difference and the marginal increase in detail isn't worth the performance hit IMO.

2. I have all post effects turned off for now. I can turn them on (and have obviously) but again, some are annoying while trying to fly online and they come at a performance cost that isn't worth it to me.

I wasn't building this machine for BoB, I built simply because I wanted too and had the ability to do at the time. I still intend to upgrade the GPU sometime in the next 2 months (waiting on NV's reply to the 5xxx series from ATI) and will have a great upgrade path in the 1366 socket with the 6 core i9 next Spring.

I'm extremely happy with my new machine.

[Flyby]

thanks for the feedback TB56. I'm glad you mention the Kamikaze trk as that one seems a bit tougher than the BD (at least it always was on my old system). Good info on the settings with RoF too. I see some things still have to be turned down due to a hit in performance. Are these more a CPU hit or a GPU hit in RoF? Perhaps the new 6-core i-9 will correct that, or the 5xxx GPU or Nvidia 3Xxx series cards. I wonder who will be the first to go with a 1ghz bus?
Flyby out

[TUCKIE_JG52]

Just tested the Kamikace track too, it stands at 50-60 fps with some momentarily drops to 30 fps. It's really spectacular to see a carrier firing with all their gunners with all their weapons at 50 fps...

I've also just deactivated the energy saving options that slowed down the performance of the CPU a bit. Now it runs more smooth than in the video I've posted before...

[Flyby]

Originally Posted by TUCKIE_JG52

Just tested the Kamikace track too, it stands at 50-60 fps with some momentarily drops to 30 fps. It's really spectacular to see a carrier firing with all their gunners with all their weapons at 50 fps...

I've also just deactivated the energy saving options that slowed down the performance of the CPU a bit. Now it runs more smooth than in the video I've posted before...

Outstanding!!!! It looks as if you've conquered the mighty Kamikaze. Also, just the idea that ships' flak can be set to a more realistic volume (is that a leap of faith?) has to be a tremendous immersion factor now. It always seemed quite a bit less intense having to turn down the flak setting, then tipping over in a dive on a ship and receiving only token fire from a fleet.
Good job, Tuckie!
Flyby out