Nividia or ATI, Intel or AMD

[335th_GRAthos]

Something more since you are preparing your order, take a look at my other post here
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthr...t=23302&page=2

And, since you mentioned 2 x GTX570 which is exactly the setup I have, my advice today:

I personally would buy two 580GTX 3GbVRAM if I would go to the shop today so, unless if you want to play very high resolution (3072x and higher) you should to buy a single GTX580 3Gb VRAM GPU.
Should cost the same or be cheaper than 2 x 570GTX
Wait for the game to support 3Renders (3 monitors), by then the prices of GTX580 will have dropped and you can buy your second GTX580 when you will really need it.

I say this because the 1380Mb VRAM of the GTX570 is always at the limit at the resolution I play (3072x1024) so I will always recommend more than 1380Mb VRAM (you can see screenshots of the 570GTX VRAM usage in my pictures on the "SLI Working" thread).

Still, the 580GTX is a medium term solution so you will need to buy a new card in a year or two.

My 2cts...

~S~

[Flanker35M]

S!

People should stop spreading false information about CoD. It runs at DirectX ONLY. Period. It was in beginning OpenGL, but switched to DirectX later on. So a DirectX capable card should run the title just fine AFTER the devs have fixed their code, after that AMD/nVidia can make applicable drivers/CAP etc.

[Ataros]

Originally Posted by 335th_GRAthos

Still, the 580GTX is a medium term solution so you will need to buy a new card in a year or two.

Exactly. I think Battle of Moscow will not introduce much challenges but Battle of Stalingrad which may come next year will probably have at least some elements of new water, clouds and/or weather. 580 will be able to run it on medium settings but for those who can not settle for less than everything maxed out a nextgen card will suit better.

Since the 2 blue lines bug is fixed ATI 2GB vram 69xx series is a strong player again. As a medium term solution I would recommend going for 6950 flashed to 6970 and adding the 2nd one when/if needed depending on nextgen cards price/performance ratio and timing of Il-2 addons issue.

2x570 is a waste of money imho as it does not have enough memory to last long term and is too expensive as a med-term solution.

ps. BTW my 4890 runs original Il-2 in OpenGL fine without any artefacts.

[WSP_Zoop]

I did build a new system July 8, 2011 using the advice gained here.
i7 2600K
Corsair H80 cooler
Gigabyte Z68X-UD5-B3
EVGA GTX 580 3GB
G Skill F3 Sniper DDR-3 1866 2 x 4GB
Crucial M4 SSD 128GB SATA 3
Corsair AX 850
Windows 7 Pro 64 bit
I'm running graphics at very high settings. Never had a stutter so far. Haven't bothered with a FPS reading as yet. I'm quite happy with this setup. Specs are stock for now, but I will be overclocking the CPU and the GTX 580 in the next month or so.

Thank you to everyone for the input.

[Rattlehead]

Nice! I love the smell of new hardware.

[tintifaxl]

I recommend i7 2600k and a 3 Gig GTX580.

This is what runs CloD best at the moment. But maybe you should wait for the patch with the new graphics engine and decide then.

Edith: I just realized I beat a dead horse.

[r0bc]

Someone please show me where a 3GB 580 out preforms a 1.5GB card because I've yet to see it.
Clock for clock

[Blackdog_kt]

I think it's not about clocks (in fact, i vaguely remember seeing some specs where the 3GB variants use a slower type of vRAM than the 1.5GB ones) but the total amount of memory.

That's specific to CoD though, due to the large texture sizes and the way they are shuffled in and out of vRAM.

Let's just say that with the graphics engine update in the upcoming patch i wouldn't be keen to buy a new GPU until i see the new patch in action, because it could all be subject to change very soon.
If for example memory management becomes better and the game swaps textures in and out of vRAM in a more efficient manner, it could be possible for everyone to up their texture settings one notch without having to buy a new GPU. In such an example my Ati 4890 1GB would probably be able to run high textures and 1.5GB cards might be able to run original size textures, with no additional money spent.

Another example, getting a 64 bit executable would allow us to use more RAM which would in turn allow the sim to load more textures in there, so instead of having to access the hard drive every time the GPU wanted a set of textures, it would access the RAM which is much faster. Buying an extra bank of DDR3 sticks to double RAM from 3-4 GB to 6-8GB (depending on triple/dual channel configurations) is much cheaper than a new GPU.

I think it's one of those times that it's best for us all to wait

[tintifaxl]

Originally Posted by r0bc

Someone please show me where a 3GB 580 out preforms a 1.5GB card because I've yet to see it.
Clock for clock

That's easy: London is the place where the 3 Gigs come in handy

It isn't faster fps wise, but it's keeping all the textures in its ram, which completely eliminates the stutters. At least, that's what I saw, when I tested it.