Mid-Range system, questions etc.
 

Hello everyone.

I'm wondering if anyone here has a mid-range system like I do.
Does anyone have a working conf.ini file ready for these systems? I want to run it as smooth as Wings of Prey runs for me, and I will play windowed since that is my preference. I know it probably won't run smooth enough as WoP due to the performance issues etc. I can run Wings of Prey: Ultra High settings, no Anti-Aliasing, 16× anisotropy with a steady 40-50 FPS. System specs in sig.

Any input will be appreciated.

Thanks

You should be able to run it (according to reports) - but expect to have to turn the settings down considerably. WoP is an order of magnitude less complex...

I don't have a copy yet. So, we'll see...

Phenom 2 x4 965 @ 3.4Gb
GTX470 1280Mb
8Gb ddr2 mem
FPS = 1, there must be a problem somewhere but i'll be damned if I can find it.

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.

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

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?

TBH i dont think your system is midrange in terms of being a gaming machine. Its more like low-end. Pls dont take this as an insult. I hope you can run it good on your system.
I think there is some problem with the gameengine, since people with newest I7 CPU and GTX570/580 or HD6950/6970 got all the same poor perfomance especially over land. I just wait for my DL to finish (27 mins to go) and i can report what FPS i get since i think my systemspecs are very common.

I know. But the ranges constantly change. If you compare systems from 2 years ago and from now, you can almost say I run on a mid-range system. At least, that's what my local PC experts say.

Thanks for posting and checking your FPS range.

I think I'm building a custom PC this year. Limited on money. That's the only downside of being under-aged.

Please don`t mention Crysis2. Small maps, textures, no dx11 and whatnot. It`s even worse than Crysis.

And no, Radeon 4870 is not low end, no matter how you put it. Having a Quad core and recommended memory, we should be perfectly able to play the game @medium @~40fps. There are virtually no games that require a Gf460GTX card just to run properly.
Even on lowest settings, this game should always look 4x better than 1946 or it is broken.

And no, this is a PC exclusive game. We have a conf.ini, we have HUGE options to make a good compromise.

With my sys i am getting stable 40 fps in battles over channel even with more planes.

settings 1920*1080 detail level medium

Is there anyone with gtx460 with 2 GB VRAM? I think 1 VRAM is just not enough for HD res or engine has some kind of bug or memory addressing error.
i will wait the next patches until then i have to lower screen res to 1440*900 to get rid of the evil stuttering

Well I am running the game with a AMD Athlon 64 X2 dual core 5000+, a Saphire RADEON HD5670 with 512MB GDDR5 and 4GB RAM on a Win7 64bit professional system. The graphics look very nice, can not complain at all. I have had no stuttering be it over the water or low over towns. In my case the only thing fouled up is that my joystick is not being recognised. Otherwise I am happy with the eye candy.

Performance OK on low-end system with min settings?
 

Thinking of buying this new sim and been reading posts from people with high-end or mid-range systems who mostly seem disappointed.

I've got a fairly low-end system but it runs IL2 1946 superbly on high-ish settings. Does anyone know if I drop the settings on IL2 CoD down to minimum, would it still be better than IL2?

I'm more interested in playing the scenarios than in having the absolute best graphics (though obviously I'd love that if my system could cope) so if it's as good/better graphically as the last IL2 variant when on low/min settings I'll get it.

Any thoughts/experience of this?

System spec:

- Asrock 4CoreDual-SATA2
- Intel Core 2 Duo E4600
- 2GB Corsair DDR2 667MHz memory
- Asus GeForce 9800GTX+ graphics card (512Mb)
- on-board sound
- Arctic 700W psu
- 500 Gb SATA drive
- LG DVD-RW
- Windows Vista Business

I've really been getting good fps tonight after some config tweaking , i'm uploading a quick video on youtube as I type this. Recorded in fraps at over 40 fps so the speed is there when this game gets tweaked further.