il2 1946 4.08m vs radeon hd3850

[JG27CaptStubing]

Originally Posted by IceFire

If the mission involves a carrier and a defensive fleet around it firing at maximum firing capability (its possible in the mission builder to set how often ships will fire) then thats enough physics calculations to bring any CPU to their knees. At this point your graphics card is waiting around for the CPU to complete calculations...so the FPS drops.

Run the track called 'blackdeath.ntrk' and record the FPS start the finish. Write down the lows, average, and high. Let us know.

You have a slightly older CPU paired with a very fast graphics card. You're likely CPU constrained.

He is CPU bound but there are ways to get it to run better than what he's getting. I still don't know what res hes running in.

If he's running in 1920X1200 then that could be a problem. Also running with water on 3 for his card is too much even for a top of the line machine.

[sanyigz]

blackdeath.ntrk, minimum fps 12 average 48 maximum (i dont know, bcuz i turned off the benchmark after it quit to menu so it benchmarked 630fps).

Im running it at 1280*1024, and now with exellent ground detail instead of perfect. No AA, but don't know about af. In setup i set on texture anisotropic arb extension, and i set texture filtering to anisotropic, but i don't know how much af.

For ati= water 2 was for those ati cards with sm2.0 when pacific fighter came out. Now for ati cards with sm4.1 it's not problem
It's sounds a little funny to me that water 3 is too much for my machine, when i playing with games without problem, what are far more shader intensive than il2(that's why il2 runs much better with nvidia cards, what are slower in shaders but better in texturing, and of course in opengl). In stalker(+ float32 shader mod), oblivion a lots of shaders everywhere, and i playing with them not just on maximum graphics, but with 16x af, and 4x aa.

[KYA]

Have you tried this beta dll?
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpos...1&postcount=37

[JG27CaptStubing]

Originally Posted by sanyigz

blackdeath.ntrk, minimum fps 12 average 48 maximum (i dont know, bcuz i turned off the benchmark after it quit to menu so it benchmarked 630fps).

Im running it at 1280*1024, and now with exellent ground detail instead of perfect. No AA, but don't know about af. In setup i set on texture anisotropic arb extension, and i set texture filtering to anisotropic, but i don't know how much af.

For ati= water 2 was for those ati cards with sm2.0 when pacific fighter came out. Now for ati cards with sm4.1 it's not problem
It's sounds a little funny to me that water 3 is too much for my machine, when i playing with games without problem, what are far more shader intensive than il2(that's why il2 runs much better with nvidia cards, what are slower in shaders but better in texturing, and of course in opengl). In stalker(+ float32 shader mod), oblivion a lots of shaders everywhere, and i playing with them not just on maximum graphics, but with 16x af, and 4x aa.

I can assure you even though your running a more advanced card you are hurting your performance by a ton running in that mode. I have a SLI 8800GT setup which has more performance in theory than a 280 GTX and that mode is too slow for me. I run water=2.

The reason why 3 is too much for your rig has nothing to do with your cards. It has to do with the fact your balancing CPU power against GPU power and your CPU is weaker by todays standards. The CPU still has to send a bunch of setup information to your GPU why load it up when you don't need to.

Okay at 12X10 you should have ZERO problems running that game in perfect mode water=2 and 3d gunners. I would use that setup utility and check off an ATI card like the 9800 series.

You also might be causing problems with the ATI control panel by forcing AF and AA and the game settings are conflicting.

In order to really help you its important that you list everthing in your rig including driver versions and settings in both the game and the control pannel. Right now we are taking stabs in the dark.

Also 12 minimum in Black Death is about right for that CPU. It's been said a bunch of times in this thread but your really limited by that CPU. What is odd though is your running in a lower res IMO and it shouldn't be a problem with bandwidth.

Its most likely your card is fine and is capable of running much higher res and higher settings but the CPU is lagging way to far behind to feed it.

I have a 3.2 AMD system with an older X800XL and I get better FPS than you at 16X12. I did however turn off 3d Gunners and I don't run any AA or AF

[jurinko]

I had HD3850 and it run IL-2 like crap. My x850XT was much better. Switched to 8800GTS now.

[1.JaVA_Jojo]

Another thing: if people switch to another graphic card manufacturer then they should make changes in the graphics tab setup of the game.

If somenone had a nVidia based card and changed it to a AMD/Ati you cannot simply run the game without adjustments in that setup. After changes in setup you notice that in the config.ini.

I had the 3870, wich is basically the same as the 3850 and never had any lower than 35 fps. All maxed out in 1600x1200.

People may think that Ati 3850 is a bad card but it certainly is NOT!

[Thunderbolt56]

All the rhetoric about being CPU-bound in that rig is false. The 4400+ is plenty adequate to run at 12x10 in perfect given the other hardware is up to the task. IMO, your issue is the 3850 GPU. Even the HD 3870 was marginal for some of the higher settings under perfect landscape and only got worse when you included some antialiasing. The 3850 had few shaders, slower memory clocks and fewer pipes.

If this sim is the one you play most, sell that GPU and get an 8800GT or 8800GTS (G92). Clean your drivers COMPLETELY before switching manufacturers, crank up the settings and enjoy this sim for another year.

[sanyigz]

there are no specified shaders since the unified shaders came out, and since the gpu-s using multi functional units. the 3850 have 320 stream processing units, as the 3870, bcuz it's the same gpu(rv670) exept the clocks.

I don't play just il2, and when the real dx10 and 10.1 games coming, i won't downgrade to a dx9.5 gpu like a g92.

When im at home, i'll try to turn off 3dgunners, and setup radeon 9800 settings.

[JG27CaptStubing]

Originally Posted by sanyigz

there are no specified shaders since the unified shaders came out, and since the gpu-s using multi functional units. the 3850 have 320 stream processing units, as the 3870, bcuz it's the same gpu(rv670) exept the clocks.

I don't play just il2, and when the real dx10 and 10.1 games coming, i won't downgrade to a dx9.5 gpu like a g92.

When im at home, i'll try to turn off 3dgunners, and setup radeon 9800 settings.

A G92 is based upon the G80 GPU with a die shrink and some enhancements like PCIE 2.0 and DX 10.1. It's certainly not a downgrade. They have a lot of bang for the buck.

In terms of a new GPU the most bang for your buck right now is the 260

I opted to buy another 8800GT and go SLI. I had some problems with SLI but I've been able to work them out. 8800GTs in SLI are in some cases faster than a 280 GTX. The key is SLI isn't as clean of a solution though it works. Running COD4 and a few other titles like a champ. The next move for me will be the move to a high end Quad Core but so far I'm not seeing games scale much past a 2 core CPU. I know FSX is about the only game where there is a noticable difference.

In terms of DX10 I aint buying into right now. This generation of cards isn't enough run it well and the visuals aren't that much better than DX9. So far I haven't seen the promised efficiency nor the mind blowing graphics DX10. Plus you can keep Vista... Only now is it starting to mature.

[sanyigz]

Originally Posted by JG27CaptStubing

A G92 is based upon the G80 GPU with a die shrink and some enhancements like PCIE 2.0 and DX 10.1. It's certainly not a downgrade. They have a lot of bang for the buck.

There is no dx10.1 nvidia card, g80 also have pcie2.0 support.

But after a hd3850 any nvidia card would be downgrade, bcuz it capable for dx10.1, and nvidia cards hardly capable for REAL dx10 games (cuz there was some games with advertised dx10... but dx10 not about just shader 4, and they used just that)

Originally Posted by JG27CaptStubing

In terms of DX10 I aint buying into right now. This generation of cards isn't enough run it well and the visuals aren't that much better than DX9. So far I haven't seen the promised efficiency nor the mind blowing graphics DX10. Plus you can keep Vista... Only now is it starting to mature.

As i said there are no real dx10 right now, but there will be. DX10 mainly isn't about better graphics, but about more efficent working. There was a little demo called "assasing creed" with it's "free" antialiasing with the use of dx10.1, of course only worked on ati cards.

current nvidia cards isn't enough for run dx10 games(poor performance in geometry shader fe.), that's why i wrote dx9.5 for nvidia cards, but ati cards won't have problem with that.

That's why i won't downgrade to nvidia, even if these old, nvidia optimized games like il2 running better on nvidia cards.