New rig - all is silk smooth...

[Blackdog_kt]

There's no denying the sims needs optimizing, but i run it just fine on a two year old PC:

Asus P6T deluxe motherboard
i7 920 @ 2.7Ghz
Ati 4890 1GB
normal hard drives (no SSD)
3GB or RAM (yes, only three)
win7 x64 Pro


My only problems in regards to usability is that some times loadouts go missing or the menus go funky but work fine the next time i fire it up. As for performance, the problem is not lack of it but that it's sometimes inconsistent.

All in all, i get nothing game-breaking after the latest beta patch, running 30-60 FPS with occasional dips to 25 and only split-second pauses the first time a certain texture loads (no more of the initial continuous stuttering) depending on amount of aircraft, clouds and the terrain i'm flying over.

So how do it do it? Well, i just don't expect to run everything on high with anything less than top of the line hardware, that's how
I run it at 1680x1050 with most settings on medium, model details and land shading on high, vsync on, shadows and roads on, SSAO off, AA off (since people say it doesn't work much anyway).

Sure, there's still room for improvement, lot's of it. At the same time though, a lot of complaints come from people who expect to run it maxed out on 1920x1080 or higher with hardware older than mine, that's not realistic and will probably never happen.
At the same time, too many people are obsessed with running it at the maximum possible settings, completely disregarding the fact that CoD on medium is slightly better than IL2 on max, they just see an option and want to max it out no matter what.
I've seen people with dual cores getting higher FPS than me, but most of it is probably due to my low RAM and them usually having nVidia GPUs of the same generation as my Ati 4890 or newer, more powerful GPUs of either brand.

[Rattlehead]

Originally Posted by Jatta Raso

happy for you but that's not a high end PC, that's more of a computer from outer space. further optimization still required for most of us users...

Not really.

It's a very, very nice system but that's what constitutes a high end system today.
Now, something like quad SLi is pretty much from outer space...I agree though that most of us have to tweak things to get the most from the game.

[mazex]

Originally Posted by Langnasen

That's funny, I've got effectively the exact same spec as you and my game doesn't run silk-smooth at all. Runs pretty good, until the screen locks up, but by no means silk-smooth. That's on a new install of the game onto a fresh install of the OS.

Mmm, but I'm running on a Samsung 2233RZ monitor (I love the 120Hz too much to swap it out!). So the resolution I use is 1680*1050. I guess you're not on your 30'' ?

Originally Posted by mazex

Mmm, but I'm running on a Samsung 2233RZ monitor (I love the 120Hz too much to swap it out!). So the resolution I use is 1680*1050. I guess you're not on your 30'' ?

I run it on my 30" but at 2560x1600 I get the jerkiness down low over land (to be expected generally speaking, though it doesn't happen in RoF) AND at 1920x1200, which I do NOT expect.

It's not a show-stopper, it's most noticable if I look away from straight ahead, and even looking 90-degrees sideways at 50m altitude it's not too bad. But RoF has zero and IS "silk-smooth".
The real show-stopper is the lock-ups. And the inability to run FSAA and AF is leaving the image looking very poor.

[Remo]

Originally Posted by Langnasen

....
And the inability to run FSAA and AF is leaving the image looking very poor.

Get your eyes checked m8, at 2560x1600 FSAA is a nice to have , but don't do much for image quality.. only if you down size does i make a huge diff.

And if you can see the jaggies (jagged edges) on your 30" at 2560x1600 , then you should increase the distance to your screen..

Originally Posted by Remo

Get your eyes checked m8, at 2560x1600 FSAA is a nice to have , but don't do much for image quality.. only if you down size does i make a huge diff.

And if you can see the jaggies (jagged edges) on your 30" at 2560x1600 , then you should increase the distance to your screen..

Simple comparison between RoF and CoD at 2560x1600, both with x8 FSAA but RoF with also x16 AF, not one single jaggie to be seen in RoF, whereas in CoD there are shed-loads.

[baronWastelan]

Originally Posted by mazex

Well, after all the patches CoD ran rather fine on my old E8400 rig, but today I finally got my new rig setup (look at sig) and CoD runs completely silk smoth on high settings... The lowest I can get is ~30 in cockpit at 30 feet over central London, but just a few hundred feet up I get ~70 fps over the city. On Black Death with high settings I get an average of 70 fps.

So - on a modern high end rig this game has no performance issues any more. Nice!

SWEEEEEEZTTT!!! Enjoy it in good health! :beer:

[Oldschool61]

Originally Posted by mazex

Well, after all the patches CoD ran rather fine on my old E8400 rig, but today I finally got my new rig setup (look at sig) and CoD runs completely silk smoth on high settings... The lowest I can get is ~30 in cockpit at 30 feet over central London, but just a few hundred feet up I get ~70 fps over the city. On Black Death with high settings I get an average of 70 fps.

So - on a modern high end rig this game has no performance issues any more. Nice!

I hope it runs smooth..it cost you a car to get it like that!

Nice Rig mate, like you said very similar to my own, CLOD certainly needs some serious grunt.

[Jaws2002]

Congrats.
I'm waiting on some parts for my new build as well. I missed the fever of looking for new hardware.
I kept my q6600@2.4/GTX285/4gbDDR2 to see how it will run. It runs but i have to sacrifice too much beauty to run on it.
The old box is 3.5 years old anyway, it served me good, but is a good time to let it go.
My system will be quite similar with yours. I already have the EVGA GTX590, I'm waiting on the i7 2600k, Asus ASUS P8Z68-V Pro, crucial M4 256GB SSD and 2x4GB of Corsair DDR3.

I should have all the parts sometimes next week and looking forward to put it all together.