Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover

IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer Maddox Games.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #71  
Old 04-06-2011, 01:27 PM
Eldur Eldur is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 101
Default

Without hacking a 32bit Windows (/3GB switch in boot.ini), a single Process can just allocate 2GB max. Usually it's even less, somewhere around 1,3-1,5GB. Never have seen a game with more RAM usage except a MMO with a nice memory leak growing up to 3,6GB (on a 64bit system). Could have been more, I just stopped raising it
64bit Systems are up to 6 years old, it's time to get some 64bit support nevertheless
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 04-06-2011, 01:27 PM
Hecke
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ARGH View Post
why is anyone calling for 64 bit version? the only reason for 64 bits is to address more than 4 gig of memory. if the game does not use past the 32 bit memory limitations then the 64 bit version won't do anything.
Yes, but why not take the advantage of loads of fast RAM instead of annoying the slow HDD (even SSD is slow compared to RAM).
Wasted possibilities.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 04-06-2011, 01:38 PM
ARGH ARGH is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 43
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eldur View Post
Without hacking a 32bit Windows (/3GB switch in boot.ini), a single Process can just allocate 2GB max. Usually it's even less, somewhere around 1,3-1,5GB. Never have seen a game with more RAM usage except a MMO with a nice memory leak growing up to 3,6GB (on a 64bit system). Could have been more, I just stopped raising it
64bit Systems are up to 6 years old, it's time to get some 64bit support nevertheless
if you are on a 32 bit OS then demanding a 64 bit application will do nothing for you. since your system cannot alocate more than 4 gb of ram (actually more like 3.5gb with a single gpu or 3 gb with SLI) and the fact that windows 7 or vista enjoys gobbling up at least 1 gig of ram with "nothing" running that usually leaves you a max of 2.5gb of available ram for a game. if you run win xp 32 bit then you have another 500 megs of ram so the total goes up to 3 gb.

if the game starts chewing past your available ram then it will be using the hard drive's swap file or crashing running out of memory. a 64 bit executable won't save you from this.

32 bits can address up to 4 gigs of ram. that is more than enough for this game and any game out there. what you need to do is upgrade to a 64 bit OS and have at least 6 gigs of ram on the system itself and you will not have any issues with ram usage in the game. 64 bit does not mean the game or executable runs faster or you get more fps.
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 04-06-2011, 01:57 PM
Buzzer Buzzer is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 46
Default

Good work!

But nothing on the buildings/houses and shadows that caused so big fps-drop...?
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 04-06-2011, 01:59 PM
Hecke
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzzer View Post
Good work!

But nothing on the buildings/houses and shadows that caused so big fps-drop...?

Read this: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=20055

"1. Performance increase. Over terrain, the two things that slow things down the most are trees and buildings. We are currently in final stages of testing optimized buildings that almost double the FPS over London on a test machine."
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 04-06-2011, 02:01 PM
bongodriver's Avatar
bongodriver bongodriver is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,546
Default

Quote:
Here's what we've done as of the end of the day today.

1. Buildings are as fast as we can make them. That's it. I doubt we can improve them more.
and this from the 4th april update
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 04-06-2011, 02:11 PM
Buzzer Buzzer is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 46
Default

I know the 4th April update.
Thats why I wondered why there was nothing on the 5th...but I see now they say :"What we’ve done today"...
ie the buildings were optimized yesterday already.

Thought for a moment this was what would be in the patch, but guess building-improvement is there already then...

Great work gents!
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 04-06-2011, 02:40 PM
facepoppies facepoppies is offline
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7
Default

I know I'm new here, but maybe it would actually help a little if people stopped angrily berating the devs. They're doing what they can, but it's going to take time no matter what. Hollering for things that you want isn't going to help anything get done faster.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 04-06-2011, 02:43 PM
bongodriver's Avatar
bongodriver bongodriver is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,546
Default

Quote:
I know I'm new here, but maybe it would actually help a little if people stopped angrily berating the devs. They're doing what they can, but it's going to take time no matter what. Hollering for things that you want isn't going to help anything get done faster.
I'm new here too, so are many of the complainers, you have every right to make this wise statement.
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 04-06-2011, 02:44 PM
Kankkis Kankkis is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Turku, Finland
Posts: 584
Default

Clock is 18.40 in Moscow, i think no betapatch today
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.