Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[sniperton]

My point is that WAW is somehow defective regarding performance. My rig is worse than yours, so I'm more perceptive to such problems. I made my (repeatable) tests on WAW 8 with your 4.12 air.ini. Result is simple: what is playable in 4.13 or HSFX, is unplayable in WAW/CUP. Effects/weather kill my framerate, flying close to the ground kills my framerate, flying close to ground units kills my framerate.

To the point: what if not only number of loaded airplanes affects game speed, but also number of loaded textures of maps and ground units? What if you reduce the number of maps/ground units? What if you reduce texture quality for ground units/terrains? These are blind guesses, for sure, but until you find out how many (or: which) planes you have to rem out to get back your FPS, these are a valid option.

[Chupacabras84]

what if not only number of loaded airplanes affects game speed, but also number of loaded textures of maps and ground units? What if you reduce the number of maps/ground units? What if you reduce texture quality for ground units/terrains? These are blind guesses, for sure

Well, dropping visuals never had any effects on WaW, that was also the very first thing I reported that my performance drop is weird like this.
Since many people does not have any issues with WaW I wonder what exactly is the bottleneck.
Seeing how I have 4GB.RAM (bought 2 just for WaW hoping it would help) 2GB.VRAM, I think it might be my Athlon 64x2 4000+ that cant handle all this but its still weird that WaW hit my CPU so hard.

[sniperton]

Well, dropping visuals never had any effects on WaW, that was also the very first thing I reported that my performance drop is weird like this.

Yep, unlike in 4.13 or HSFX, reducing video quality does not considerably increase performance in WAW. WAW was probably made for maxed out settings on a high-end PC and has never been tested on, and optimized for, compromised settings on a low-end or medium PC.

Since many people does not have any issues with WaW I wonder what exactly is the bottleneck.

Well, this thread has 3593 reads at the moment of writing this...
Possibly WAW, with its sheer number of retextured planes, maps and objects, went beyond the limits of the game engine, so that only a high-end PC can cope with this oversized bunch of data. Anyway, I wonder how WAW would perform with only the stock 4.12 planes, maps and objects loaded. Such a 'barebone' WAW would tell which is the culprit: sheer numbers or the lack of optimization.

[Chupacabras84]

Philosophy of CUP is to gather the best mods there are and thats it, if guys who make CUP dont have performance issues its hard to expect them to adjust CUP for those few who do, especially if it means dropping half the package somewhere down the road, that would go against idea of what CUP is suppose to be.
The fact there are people who have good fps in WaW without any additional manipulations leave me with hope that if I get a better PC I will finally be able to play it.

I wonder how WAW would perform with only the stock 4.12 planes, maps and objects loaded. Such a 'barebone' WAW would tell which is the culprit: sheer numbers or the lack of optimization.

Well, in WaW part 8 just limiting number of planes was enough to bring performance back to the level of a stock game, now its not enough, only stock air.ini brings fps back to normal level.

I want to give it another go later and see what I can do but for now cant promise a thing.

[sniperton]

I think I can tell you that the bottleneck is your CPU, Athlon 64x2 4000+, having a single core benchmark of 759 only. Mine is slightly better (894), but I have less video memory (1 GB) and less RAM (2 GB). I think it's simply that our rigs don't meet the minimum system requirements for WAW (which, in turn, have not been specified and announced so far).

It seems that CUP/WAW requires at least 4 gigs of RAM, 2 gigs of video memory, and a decent CPU with a single core performance of X to run smoothly. X is clearly higher than 1000, but exactly how much is still to be investigated. Anyone below these specs should forget about CUP/WAW.

[Chupacabras84]

Funny thing is, for years I wanted to get a new PC, I even had the money for a build to run DCS smooth but being in the middle of house renovation I decided to wait till the work is done since I didnt want my brand new PC to be full of sand, big mistake.
Money went out of the window because you constantly need something and from the look of it I am stuck with my current PC for unspecified time.

Still, kinda wonder why the hell WaW kills my CPU like this.
I would expect it to eat up memory or send my GPU into spasms but instead it decided to take a piss on my CPU 

[edc1]

Hi Guys,
Have just been reading these posts and from what I can understand it seems that if you
need better frame rates you will need a more powerful unit to handle CUP.
I am getting 60fps (80+ aircraft all airborne on their way to engage in a fighting mission)
my monitor limits me to 60fps.
My system is self built:-
     Intel I7 4790 processor @4.0GHz
     Memory = 8Gb
     Graphics card GTX760 -2GB memory
     Motherboard  Gigabyte Z97X-gaming 7
     Windows 7 home
    IL2 1946 CUP modded  and up to date
The only problem I have is - when testing a mission I speed up the program by X4 or X8 times
then the frame rate drops to between 6 or 4, but returns to normal as soon as the seed is normal. (don't know why that happens).
Windows has a performance information and tools program I am getting a 7.9 score on all items except the hard drive which is given as 5.9
This program might give some clues as to why you cannot get better frame rates ie processor speed etc
Ps I am about to upload some missions for CUP but I think the might not be playable for those who have frame rate problems,
and put some user's off so I may wait a while
Just my thoughts hope they may help
Cheers edc1 (stan)

[sniperton]

Hi Stan, your CPU's single core performance is benchmarked @ 2532, and still you have problems when speeding up the game. Now compare that 2532 to Chupa's 759 or to my 894, which are 4 to 5 years old average-speed CPUs, completely fitted to run Il-2 in all its major versions (stock, DBW, HSFX) except WAW. Now the problem is that if modding goes in this direction, many old Il-2 fans who cannot afford or don't want to have a state-of-the-art gaming rig will have no other choice than to revert to older versions of the game or completely abandon it.

[edc1]

Hi sniperton,
Yes , it will be a problem (CUP) for those who cannot upgrade there system to improve FPS,( not everybody
can afford an upgrade).
 Perhaps we should all try and help  support those versions (stock, DBW and HSFX) that allow older systems to carry on
using and improving IL2 to ensure we keep all fans of the game into the future .
Cheers edc1 (stan)

[pilotpimpf]

Well Im no computer expert, all I know is how to turn it on .....

I have not measured my frame rates but I begin to wonder if its down to the make of the CPU or the make of graphics card, I have always read that NVidia is the card for the sim.
Could that be part of the reasons ?

Heres what my computer is ; AMD AthlonIIx4645 3.10GHz
Installed memory 8.00 GB
Windows 7
ATI Radeon 3000 graphics card.

Like you said all my money goes on a house renovation at the moment but I would of thought that the above spec should of been OK.

[ol' Navy]

This topic really interests me.  I have heard for years you folks mentioning your PC's and their relationship to how well the game runs.  My boys have always kept my PC in pretty good shape I think.  Over the years, they always give me their hand me downs after they upgrade.  At present, my PC is as follows - CPU is AMD FX-6300, video card is MSI Radeon 7850, HD is Samsung 256gb SSD, PSU is Corsair 650w, case is Corsair 600T, memory is 8gb Corsair.  Asus motherboard.  Windows 8.1 (gonna upgrade to  Win 10 when it's out since I never turn down anything that is free).  Good size monitor but a sorry joystick.  What do you think of my system and should it do well with CUP?  Just interested in what you guys are saying.  And, with fewer frame rates it takes me longer to get shot down or just run into something.  Thanks.

[sniperton]

Yes , it will be a problem (CUP) for those who cannot upgrade there system to improve FPS,( not everybody
can afford an upgrade).

Well, I have one PC, which serves me well, and I don't want to invest in a second one only for the sake of WAW. A new rig, similar to yours, would cost me more than my one month's income (and I'm relatively well paid according to Eastern European standards). I could afford it, but the extra cost would be simply too much for a hobby.