have found a few more fps by altering some graphics settings, here are my latest: -

Mod Details--high
Buildings---Medium
Land---Medium
Forest---Low
Visual Eff---High
Texture---High
Damage---Medium
Building Amount---Low
Shading---Low

Grass=off
Shadows=off
Roads=on

Sorry "omgclod" if you can't get your system working, but some of us with low specs pc have by trying different settings. We have managed to achieve reasonable performance by keeping at it and experimenting. My system is standard (not o/c) and I'm not very savy with altering bios etc (in fact it scares the @%#* out of me even thinking about it). Dont give up, I found that the "beta patch" helped, once the game is more optimised we will wonder what all the fuss was about.
Here's my system specs: -

Asus P5b mb
E6600 core 2 duo 2.4gig
6gig ram 1066 DDR2
9600gt 1 gig vram
1x HDD 1Tb
1x HDD 320g
550w p/s

This basic rig is 5 years old but I have upgraded the ram from 2gig --6gig and added the 1Tb HDD. Both HDD's are partitioned with all my il2 series on drives separate from "C". I have one partition as a special "Steam" drive with only COD on that.

What, why would we lie, maybe people will help you to get it running, although with your attitude I doubt it, personally I have enough children at home needing help with their games, grow up!

talking about low specs machines...
 

I would like your comment to a quick test I made here
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=22665

I experimented various setting how u'll see, I wonder why (from medium settings to high, tested also forest=0) I have near to zero fps improvement.
Is the bottleneck elsewhere?
In this test cpu usage: Cpu1 mostly 70% Cpu 2-3-4- 40-45% more or less
Ram usage 75% more or less
VRam 95-98%
very strange 4me
Cheers

Here's a screen capture from my system. See fraps fps.

Well, i dont know about you and the "90% users" with problems, but that the pc-magazines are jerks is a fact!

I've done too some testing with my system. I found the CPU a bottleneck in my system while never utilizing a core at 100%. Read my posts (4th post and later on page 5 and 6) http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthr...t=22155&page=5

In the meantime I've upgraded my system (will later post the results in that thread) with a AMD 1100T processor in place of my old AMD X4 640. The result is that with this processor at least one core is utilized at 100%. In my opinion it is that some processors don't give full utilization in the graph because saturation of certain instruction sets won't translate to full utilization in a graph. However the processor is still fully utilized. Since my upgrade I see also a better utilization of my graphics card.

@RickRuski: Nice to see you have found a good compromise between performance and eye candy on your system. And probably with time it will only get better as the code gets optimized. I also wouldn't recommend overclocking your system if you aren't comfortable with it or have the cash to replace damaged components. However, I have to say that I have never damaged one component in more than ten years overclocking. The only thing is that I probably have worn out some components sooner than I would have without overclocking (due to electromigration). But most of the time components are written of due to technological advances before that happens.

I have to admit that there are some settings that I have turned "off" to be able to get reasonable game play. With a low specs system you can't expect to have all settings "on". In the realisim settings the only thing I have "on" at the moment is "vulnerability", also I have "clouds off" (these are a big hit on my system) also I fly "cockpit on" but in "shift-F1" mode (this I find gives me about 5fps extra), if I fly "no cockpit" I can have about a 8---10fps increase. I am still experimenting with "realisim" settings to see what I can have on without to big a fps hit, will post my results.

Hope to have an upgrade to my system in the next 2---3 months but will hold back until further patches have come through, don't know wether to upgrade cpu or graphics first. If I decide on cpu it will mean about a $1000-00NZD upgrade as it will be new M/B,cpu and Ram (probably an i5 or i7 system).

True, but also with newer video cards your PSU might be taking strain. Not necessarily, but it's a possibility, so that might require an upgrade if you switch to a high end video card.

Personally, I'm waiting for AMD's Bulldozer before making a decision. I did earmark the 2500k as the processor for my next upgrade, but since Bulldozer's release isn't far off (according to websites) I think I'll just wait a bit longer and see.

Hi Rattlehead,
Yes that is a possibility, I have a 550w ps at the moment and cards that I would go for can be handled by that, if not I will have to bite the bullet. I'm like you, waiting to see what develops with the patches. At least I can get this running with reasonable frame rates at the moment. Will continue to try different settings to gain what improvement I can.

you guys have to remember something...when the new intel/amd come out this year they wont be cheap!..they will most likley be over $350 not to mention the cost of the board..
i was wrong to tell people earlier to "wait and see"...any of the phenom or I series CPU's will do the job right now and in a year plus when the latest and greatest CPU's come down in price THEN start thinking about an upgrade...unless money is no concern to you.

S!