Mid-Range system, questions etc.

[JG52Uther]

Specs as my sig,its probably considered low range thise days.
Over water,in a 109 cockpit,I get over 25 fps.
There are many settings you can turn down to improve performance,and threads on the forum already about them.

[MugiSNK]

Originally Posted by JG52Uther

Specs as my sig,its probably considered low range thise days.
Over water,in a 109 cockpit,I get over 25 fps.
There are many settings you can turn down to improve performance,and threads on the forum already about them.

Thanks. And I know about those threads, but I only see gaming PC's at those.
According to Smit's post, I really hope they are going to fix this performance issue. I just can't stand how games can go perfect. on graphics, and then still run slower then i.e. Crysis 2. Games like Arma 1 and Arma 2

My brother is a happy owner of an awesome PC, he can run Crysis 2 literally everything maxed, but he can't play Arma 2 on max. That's like really weird since Crysis 2 is the game that stresses PCs most.

[Oldschool61]

Originally Posted by MugiSNK

Thanks. And I know about those threads, but I only see gaming PC's at those.
According to Smit's post, I really hope they are going to fix this performance issue. I just can't stand how games can go perfect. on graphics, and then still run slower then i.e. Crysis 2. Games like Arma 1 and Arma 2

My brother is a happy owner of an awesome PC, he can run Crysis 2 literally everything maxed, but he can't play Arma 2 on max. That's like really weird since Crysis 2 is the game that stresses PCs most.

Some of that may be poor game coding and more physics code running

[Blackdog_kt]

Most graphic intensive games that are used as benchmarks (like Crysis for example) are not well-suited to simulator benchmarking.

The reason is that the fundamental differences in the gameplay are reflected in totally different processing demands: they run much smaller maps, they don't need multi-layered AI that has to take advantage of 3 dimensions to be of any challenge, they don't need to model as many different parameters for what the player controls, etc.

That being said, i too would be interested to know how to maximize performance on mid-range rigs. I use an i7 920 at stock speeds (2.7Ghz) on an Asus P6T deluxe motherboard, 3GB of DDR3 RAM in a triple channel kit (i skipped vista and installed XP when i built it so no use going for a lot of RAM, i now run win7 64 however) and an Ati 4890 1GB.

I'm not really keen on overclocking the CPU for a variety of reasons and i really can't afford a DX11 GPU upgrade. I might bump up the RAM a bit though and since i have a second triple channel capable bank, it would make sense to go for 6 GB. That will have to wait until the first round of optimization patches and some community feedback, but it's a cheap and worthwhile upgrade overall.

In the grand scheme of things i'm not really worried since i don't expect to run this on high settings, more like medium to high and tweaking it to get 30-40 FPS across the board to maintain playability.

The only thing that's causing me concern is the 4890. Since the game runs in DX10, does anyone know how a 4890 1GB fares when compared to a mid-range DX11 card running DX10? I seem to remember the first DX11 GPUs (eg, 57xx,56xx) actually being slower than the late generation DX10 cards like the 4890, but with so many people running GTX 460/470/equivalent 5xx and similar Ati/AMD models i need some frame of reference to those GPUs to roughly know what to expect.
Any ideas?