I am the only one who doesn't...

[Chivas]

I agree that Combat flight sims have always required high end systems to get the best out of them. I did avoid buying two video cards and went with one very high end card with the possiblility of adding another if SLI performance made it worth while. So far it appears that hasn't been the case, although a few people I respect say SLI has given some extra performance.

I also recommend having a seperate SSD drive with only a copy of Windows7 64bit , COD, and its peripherials running on it. Your motherboard will give you the option to boot to two or more Windows copy's. I've never seen a decent combat flight sim yet that ran well with minimul spec machines.

[mazex]

Originally Posted by LoBiSoMeM

Todays average system is a good quadcore, a good VGA with 1GB of VRAM and 8GB DDR3 RAM, running Windows 7 x64.

You don't need the best CPU, the best brand of RAM or ultimate VGA to run CloD ok, but don't expect so much without the basic config above...

+1

The problem is that people are so used to the "dumbed" down world where the system performance of the PS3 and Xbox 360 sets the graphic standard for most PC games. Even a three year old gaming rig can run those games at 100+ fps... This game sure needs optimization - but it needs a gaming PC from 2010 and forward to run OK. What needs a major optimization is really the recommended specs on the box

[Timberwolf]

Originally Posted by LoBiSoMeM

Todays average system is a good quadcore, a good VGA with 1GB of VRAM and 8GB DDR3 RAM, running Windows 7 x64.

You don't need the best CPU, the best brand of RAM or ultimate VGA to run CloD ok, but don't expect so much without the basic config above...

as you will see from my spec
I run my settings on very high without shutter or lag Only whine i have is control issues i still can't seem to get my plane flying level or without over steer

[jamesdietz]

Even with 14-25 FPS I luv it!

[Ataros]

The only bug I have is landscape stripes.

To me the most funny thing is that luthier mentioned that many people who sent him performance complaints and crash dumps have antiepilepsy ON in conf.ini.

Should I even care that someone is complaining on the forums about performance or glitches after this or try to help them? LOL I think some people just deserve to have performance and graphic glitches

If your friends are not of this type ask them to go through a simple equipment pre-flight check list as pilots do. http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpos...4&postcount=13

[klem]

Originally Posted by xcleartheskyx

You want the specs of 7 of my friends PC's? (no, not an exaggeration)

They all seem to have the same issues, low FPS, graphics issues in the cockpits (instruments are purple and green etc). Their specs dont really matter when the majority of them have the issues. Its a game problem. I heard that you can fix it by changing the game so it uses direct x 9 instead of 10 but im not sure how to do that

I meant your system specs. I don't think anyone can comment without those. You could of course compare your friends system specs with your own. I don't mean to be rude but if they are all relatively low you could all have similar problems. Same goes for how they are each setup. I assume you've started with the lowest possible settigs and worked up from there?

The thing is, many people are playing CoD quite happily but as one other post here says, you need a fairly high spec machine before you get anything like the results you get in IL-2 '46. There are even some strange anomalies for virtually identical spec machines that may depend on all their Settings (in-game Video, in-game Audio, in-Windows Graphics Card control panel settings, background processes, Windows version, etc) even similar system spec PCs may be producing different results due to how they are set up in total, especially if they have 'borderline' CoD specs. Actually the one constant is the game itself for a set of identical settings.

EDIT: also knowing your settings will help.