Flyby
-
Posts
1034 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Flyby
-
-
thanks Zorrin!
-
good discussion so far
You guys bring some interesting perspectives. LOS is a curious angle to play. Also I have personally regretted "word salad" of many people talking on the same channel. I've read where it was normal to hear many voices over comms in WW2 aerial combat. But that was then. As far as comms in a multi-player combat sim, it will be a matter of team discipline, regardless of which software is used.
What is IVC? Is that Ventrillo? Anyway, you guys rock on this.:thumbup:
Flyby out
-
yup, SUBS17
rgrt 17, but it would be nice to know for certain. I guess there's plenty of time to sort that out
-
One day DCS will have two-seater models that can be crewed online. I wonder how comms like Teamspeak might work out. I guess there will be lots of channels, eh?:joystick:
-
i hear...
Kind of makes you wounder:smilewink:A recent major class action lawsuit that was brought against both Nvidia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nvidia and ATI for conspiring to fix, raise, maintain and stabilize prices of graphics processing chips and cards may soon be coming to a resolution.
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Nvidia-ATI-lawsuit-antitrust,6421.html
that both ATi and Nvidia has settled those price-fixing lawsuits, and will give up some cash: http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/09/30/nvidia-settles-two-gpu-price
now on with the show! New Nvidia GPUs due out in 2nd qtr/09 40nm
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=9688&Itemid=1
We'll see.;)
Flyby out
-
no worries
not a problem, H-E. I agree that they should. It seems they've left the cooperation bit to using either OpenGL or Direct x graphic implementations. Maybe that's why some, sadly, some games perform better on Nvidia cards, and some perform better on ATi cards? Can't they just all get along?:megalol:
Anyway, I hope the Hydra implementation will be at least somewhat backwards compatible at least for a couple of generations of mobos. Hate to have to buy all new stuff again (but that's what we do anyway!).
Flyby out
BTW Stealth, got a link to this new Bulldozer tech?
-
it's not about the game developers
The game developers are not entirely responsible for how games scale when using either Crossfire or SLi. That's more on ATi and Nvidia, and neither one of the has solved the problem of how to two GPUs to work together seamlessly with any consistency (from game to game). There is a new technology called Hydra that seems to do just that: make two video cards scale nearly 100% over one card. This effectively means doubling the performance of one GPU when going to two GPUs. I may not be expressing this correctly, so here's a link to one article I read: http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2328495,00.asp
Wouldn't it be great if this were available? Imagine; no more motherboard selection conflicts for either going with Crossfire or SLi when wanting to use two GPUs. Imagine employing this technology to join two GPUs on one PCB versus the problems seen now with this configuration. It could happen!:D
Flyby out
-
rgrt, Acedy
Flyby out
-
ok, but
Please explain what it is about the 280 that "seems" to make it a better performer than the 4870-1gb. ROPs? Twice the bus width?
Flyby out
-
hey Acedy!
thanks for posting the links. I see from the Harwarezone link that I can compare the new 4870-1gb's specs to the GTX 280 and 260. It seems as if the new ATi card is being held back by a lower memory bandwidth, bus width and ROP compared to the GTX280. I guess that's all in the architecture design? Imagine what that card would be if it equaled the 280 in those respects AND held the faster gddr5 memory. But then it would cost more too. Beside, for some reason ATi decided not to go head-to-head directly with Nvidia in those regards. Maybe that's why they're both being sued for price-fixing?:D
At any rate, price makes it hard to overlook this card. It's a good choice for a single card solution, second only to the GTX280, imo. Maybe it will force the price of the 280 down just a few more dollars.
I have a question for anyone. Which of these two cards will be best for Black Shark?:joystick:
-
re the 1gb 4870
that new ATi card is impressive, especially for the price and performance. Maybe TheMoose can explain the technical differences between that card, and the GTX280?:) I'm not sure I understand those differences, erxcept to speculate the dissimilar architectures used and ATi uses faster memory, but it's also a power hog compared to the 280. I think the 280 must have higher pixel and texture fill rates (in gb/ps)to still be faster than the 4870-1gb which may mean that memory speed and size can only go so far in rendering complex graphics. We'll have to read more articles, I guess. I'll see if www.gpureview.com has any specs listed for the new card. At least at that site one can compare two GPUs side by side for performance.
Flyby out
-
now, just to confuse the picture
ATi has released a 1gb version of it's 4870 card. I'm sure comparisons will be made shortly;) http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3415
Thanks for the links, Moose!:thumbup:
Flyby out
-
1
-
-
looking good
Nice to know that not all 1gb GPUs are created equally. That 1gb 4870 is brand new. I'd like to see how it compares to the 1gb GTX280. It has to be down to design features now, not just memory, although the ATi card is more power-hungry. It also has faster gddr5 memory (by Hynix, I think).
Flyby out
-
Hi Guys,
Hope I'm not starting trouble, but if you don't ask...
Is there a chance that DCS will release the code to modernize LOMAC/FC? Suppose the code could be reworked to make use of at least dual cores? Might that not make running at higher water settings easier on a system I'm thinking of a post where running the highest water settings on an overclocked quad - 3ghz- processor still is not enough at the high water settings to prevent lowFPS over cities and small towns. Please page down and read this post by DTWD on this page: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=32140&page=2
It gives you an idea of what I'm talking about. If the code could be modernized to benefit from modern CPUs and GPUs, might that not be a noble venture? I'd pay for such an updated code. Maybe DCS and the code-workers could come to some agreement similar to the one DCS has with Sim-Mod for terrains, bases, etc for a mutually beneficial business adventure. Other companies have released sim codes befoer, iirc.
Flyby out
-
the floor recognizes the junior member.
DTWD,
your post makes me wonder if the GTX 280 might run into the same problems with LOMAC/FC as your oc'd 8800gt. But it's surprising...almost...that your quad core is still a bottleneck even at 3ghz. LOMAC was not coded to take advantage of multiple cores ( like Falcon4 was). So even if one core is being used by those pesky processes in the background, a dedicated 3ghz processor just won't do justice at the higher water settings (which only seems to effect rendering towns!)
But let me come to the point. DCS has no immediate plans to update the LOMAC rendering engine. I wonder if your problems could be solved if DCS were to allow someone to responsibly modernize the code? To that affect, I've gone here and posted a message: http://sim-mod.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=6228#6228
Please feel free to chime in. I will also explore this idea elsewhere in this forum. If you don't ask...
Flyby out
-
what about drivers and the BS engine?
Hey Groove,
I like the GTX 280 also. What monitor are you going to run that behemoth with? Also, do you know if DCS has tested the BS graphic engine on the newer ATI and Nvidia cards? Maybe DCS would state which drivers work best?
Flyby
-
but wait! there's more!!
Interested in a 1gb 4870 gpu?check out this article at Anandtech: http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3415
The price seems right for the increase in performance as cmpared to the -512mb model.;)
Flyby out
-
oh the horror! the horror!
Well I know I will have to do my homework before I select a cpu, especially for the core mission of running combat flight sims like Black Shark and Sow_BoB. Being as they will be cpu-intensive, I'll be needing a lot of ghz. Just selecting the correct stepping will need to be smartly done.
-
we're getting somewhere!
GT-E thanks for the link to your test. If anything, one can pretty well go with the premise that cpu ghz makes a larger impact on combat flight sims than the modern crop of video cards might. At least for now. CPUs are still the current bottleneck, unless you're overclocking them. But I wonder what the next big tech jump in cpus will be? So far as I've read there has not been much improvement by going to 4ghz, and going to over 5ghz seems to require some super-cooled liquified gas. Even that hasn't been tested in a combat flight sim. How to get that minimum frame rate up to (say) 65fps? :D btw, monitor size and resolution may impact gpu performance too. What is your monitor, and how do you like
running LOMAC on it?
Hey TheMoose, I'm thinking the GTX 280 for me too. The 4870-512 is a great card, especially with that speedy gddr5 memory. Still the 280 seems to have a bit more overhead room. What monitor are you running, and how do you rate it's performance in a combat flight sim?
-sulan- I owned a 9500pro and it's still going strong with the friend I sold it to. It's in his son's computer. My friend now owns my BFG 6800 Ultra.
I think the reason I want the 280 is that it's the fastest single card solution available and the price has dropped tremendously. No SLi or Crossfire of me until new scaling technology is available. But I think I styated that already.
Flyby out
-
Also...
If you're looking for a new display monitor, HardOCP has this forum:
http://www.hardforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=78
hope someone finds it useful
-
here's another good article on GPUs
Over at HardOCP they are testing cards again. Note that they are running the tests with a qx9659 quadcore overclocked to 3.6ghz, supposedly to remove any cpu bottleneck on the games used in the test. Can't have too much info when trying to decide on a card, I guess.
Here's the link: http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTU1OCwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==
Flyby out
-
ooooooooooh...I see
I said Dx9 not the current Dx8 wich has a problem for self shadows on planes for Nvidia cards, and background shader bug for all cards. I think some beta testers already told the transition was meant to fix these bugs. What I meant is that there wont be any specific chip optimization due to the engine in DCS is similar to LOMAC's.:doh: gotcha now. I committed a gross inflidibliation of quick-assumption speed reading!:smartass:So I wonder if there will be any advantage to buying a comparable card from either house? Will a GTX 260 be a better performer in Black Shark than a 4870?
-
hmmm
does that mean the shader bug is not fixed in the DCS version?
Flyby
-
A question to the developers: Is Black Shark optimised for Nvidia cards? I ask because (I think) Oleg's Storm of War is optimised for Nvidia cards. Also, didn't I read that the developer's-notes videos were using Nvidia cards? I'll be shopping a new card in the near future and just want to be on the right side of "the law".;)
Flyby out
about comms on multiplayer
in DCS: Ka-50 Black Shark
Posted
say whaaaaaaaaaaaaatt??!!
No word salad? you guys must be a quiet bunch online!:D I actually came across that term while reading Donald Caldwell's "JG26/Top Guns of the Luftwaffe". a German pilot voiced that phrase describing comms while in a whirling dogfight. Great read, btw.
Flyby out