![]() |
|
IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer Maddox Games. |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Min 46 Max 53 (note vsync enabled) Avg 49.989 (Click to enlarge) ![]() |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thanks for the head's up. AMD seem to be churning out drivers like hot cookies these days.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
The CrossfireX profiles are released independently but found on your driver page. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
For all intents and purposes, Cliffs of Dover is a released Beta, with a very, very small share of the PC market. I doubt they are even showing up on ATI's radar right now. When the new graphics engine is up and running I'm sure Luthier will send them a notice saying, "hey, the engine is no longer a horrible mess, how about you take another look?"
Until then we're just going to have to keep trying other game profiles and see which one gives us the best results. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Well I just wanted to add that the 11.7 CAP 1's added Xfire support for RoF so there is definitely hope of getting a proper profile for CLoD.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Judging by RoF's case (about two years before proper SLI/Xfire support, or was it more?), i guess it will be a long time coming before AMD provides a profile.
Don't get me wrong, the fact that the graphics engine in CoD is under overhaul all the time is also delaying things, i just don't think that even when CoD is in a stable state we will have that much of attention by the GPU companies. It's the main reason i always go for single card setups, both in the past with nVidia and a couple of years ago with Ati when i bought my current PC: i'd rather have one GPU that works to its full capacity all the time, instead of having to wait for someone to "unlock" performance that i've already paid for. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Multi GPU can be a very cheap and effective way of getting better than next gen graphics performance at a fraction of the cost. Admittedly it is easier to ensure a hassle free experience if you go with a single card setup. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Point taken but I should clarify that when this test was run the CPU and GPU were both at stock clocks. I don't think a gtx480 is necessarily a top shelf card any more although still quick?
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I'm still running 11.6 drivers (forgot to update last month) on this:
i7 920 @ stock 2.7 Ghz Ati 4890 1GB win7 x64 and a measly 3GB of RAM It's a two year old, middle of the road PC and i get similar FPS to Jimbop with slightly lower minimums (FPS ranging between 30 and 60 except over London where i might get 25FPS), while running a higher resolution than he does (1680x1050) and in some cases higher detail settings than he does (i have forest on very low, land shading and model details on high, everything else on medium , grass/roads/shadows/vsync on, ssao off). I think the problem is not lack of performance over the entire board but lack of consistency in performance between different PCs. Sometimes it's the different ways we setup our PCs that causes this, sometimes it's the fact that the code is "sensitive" to certain combinations of hardware and drivers. I do expect the sim to work well for more people with the new graphics engine, but let's not assume the only way to run it adequately is with a monster, overclocked, 2-month old PC. It runs fine on mine and many others share similar experiences. |
![]() |
|
|