Flyby

Well guys, no matter how it shakes out we're in for a good time. DCS will lead the way to combat simulation heaven. Eurofor perhaps your interpretationis the correct one: a multirole a/c for the other side. That works for me! Oh, no problem, Yellonet. Sometimes I miss something the wife says when she's sitting right next to me (years of practice)!:lol: Flyby out ps if she ever reads this, I'm dead meat!:P

Yellonet, As I said, releasing a rival pair is probably not very likey.:smilewink: The present process DCS is using may support a dual release at this time. I don't really know one way or the other. But here's an idea. Enlist recognized modders to speed up the process where applicable. Perhaps a well coordintated plan could result in a dual release, if not in the near future, perhpas down the road? Just a blockhead trying to think outside his box. That's me!:P Flyby out

hmmm... an idea... Superserb has a rgeat idea! Why not release counterparts at the same time? At least one set of them anyway. I think that would be great for those who like flying online, and even good for those who fly primarily offline. Probably not a very likely scenario, though.:( Flyby out

rgrt GGT no matter how you slice it, combat or air racing, tossing the Ka50 about in violent manuevers ought to be a real blast! I just hope I do't pull so hard I encounter a blade-on-blade collision. Wheeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!:D Flyby out

sobek, that's just sick!:megalol: Not sure I want to be in the lead in a race with you! Hey Viper, racing through a city sounds like a plan to me!:thumbup:

wait one, GGT... It might not be so bad. In IL2 on hyperlobby someone was (is?) always hosting an air race. With the fabled agility of the Ka50, this would be a chance for pilots to strut their stuff. Accidents might be minimalized by simply racing the clock, not one another. But racing one another through pylons might be a blast too. This idea might gain more traction after BS is released. It might be a fun way to practice controlling the chopper for the time when wild and extreme evasive action is required in a combat zone. Hey, it could happen!:music_whistling: Flyby out

I can see it now... I foresee a fun competition ala the RedBull Air Races with the pylons. Same flight routine, but using the Black Shark. Imagine the pilots' views when whipping through the slaloms, then pulling up and over to do it again from the oposite direction! All the while trying to get the best course time. Hey! It might be fun! :D I'd love to see how the head movement might be implemented there. But not at the expense of Tract-IR performance. ;) Flyby out

zokier, imho... When I had a BFG 6800 Ultra LO/FC ran pretty well, and it's no match for the newer GPUs you mention. I don't know what your e2140 is clocked at, but if it's a dual core clocked at 3.0ghz or higher, either card should be just fine at the rez you mention. ATi has seemingly fixed that old AA buggaboo it had with earlier cards, and has the best value/performance cards out there. The 4850 goes for a little less than the 9800gtx (see the link I've added) but if you're going with a single card solution, and have an Nvidia chipset on your mobo I'd go with the Nvidia card. Otherwise I might recommend the ATi 4870 if you can afford that card. It really is the best proce/performace value card out there now, imho. now for the link: http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=559&card2=566 Of course you can select any two cars to compare. page down a bit and you'll see pricing too. Flyby out ps LO/FC is like most modern aerial combat sims, including those on the horizon; usually cpu bound even when mated with a modern gpu. Again, I understand the "fix" is a dual core cpu clocked at 3.0 ghz and along with that modern gpu.

hey EB... thanks EB. I don't know how I missed that. Also I guess my search of the FAQ was inadequate. Good stuff though, and a nice touch.:thumbup: Flyby out

Just a quick question about the pilots pov. Does it change slightly to reflect how gravity, inertia and other flight forces act upon the pilot? Just asking. Flyby out

the base of my build plan Red Tiger, I certainly plan to build my system around the processor. Also I plan to select my video card based in part on my monitor selection. Whateevr the native resolution of that monitor, I intend to buy a gpu that will handle the next highest resolution easily, just in case someone sends me a stack of $100.00 bills about ya----------------------------------------------------------thick! Then I could buy a larger monitor! :D Also I've read at various places that running a resolution lower than the native rez of the monitor can cause lag in some models. There appear to be a few where this lag is minimal. I guess it's best to find a really good technical review of any monitor befreo buying. Thanks to all who have taken the poll so far. Especially thanks for the additional comments about your monitors. I hope others can learn something from your comments like I am. ;) Flyby out

great responses thanks for the replies, guys. I see there are some really large screens out there, but so far mostly the monitors are below 24 inches. most importantly to me is the resolutions being run. I did not see anyone running 2600x. I've been reading about the new uber GPUs: 4870X2, and GTX-280. Very powerful, but very expensive. I can see where they are best used at very high resolutions. Your responses indicate to me that such cards may be overkill. Also, if you guys have stressed anything, it's that combat flight sims such as LO/FC are primarily cpu-bound, at least since the last two generations of GPUs. I suspect that even when Black Shark comes out it will require more so a fast cpu, at least a dual core. Anyone with a decent video card from the last two generations might be in good shape otherwise. Perhaps a 9800GTX might even be a bit overkill with a fast (near a 3.0ghz) modern processor, Conroe or Penryn. Interesting results... thanks guys Flyby

This is a poll about monitors. What screen size do you own? 19 inch 20 inch 22 inch 24 inch 26 inch 30 inch Please also share your brand, model number, game resolution, (gtg response time is extra) and video card in your answer. How does your monitor perform for you in combat flight sims? The poll is simple, but what performances are important to you in selecting a monitor? Sorry if this is too much detail to ask for. thanks you. Flyby out

these pictures aer great! thanks for sharing. I promise it won't hurt my feelings if you post more one day! :D Flyby

Well guys, truth be known I've not had a gaming fix in nearly three years now, since my gaming rig fried. I belong to an online IL2 squadron, but haven't flown that sime or LO/FC in all this time. Lots of reasons for that, but in the final analysis I can be a bit more patient. But still I am itching for a new system. I think I'd like the X38 chipset, and maybe an overclocked 4870, down the road a little ways. As for processors, well Intel is supposed to have dropped prices recently, and I expect them to do so again with the arrival of the Nehelam, so maybe a nice q9xxx will fall into my plans. Too bad the U.S. dollar is down, but that's life. Can't wait forever. Anyone want to buy some 8-track jazz tapes? :D Sims of interest include: SoW_BoB Black Shark (of course) Jet Thunder Knights of the Sky (imagine online combat with a modern WW1 sim!) The new Korean air war sim (if it ever sees the light of day). MY new system will be purely a gaming rig. The wife's pc serves all other functions. Flyby out

late to this party, but I look forward to this sim too. Just think about the online fights between the MiG15 and the F86!:thumbup: I don't care which one I fly as long as the flight models have a high degree of fidelity to the real ones. In fact, I'd prefer this new sim to start off as a study sim with the two jet fighters to start off. People always want to wage war about the porked, hosed, screwed up, flight models in IL2. "Oleg fix this plane! Oleg fix that plane!" Well it seems to me (and I could be wrong here) that it would require too much processing power to try to have many advanced flight models in one sim. Even complex engine management in IL2 is not really complex; not like Black Shark will be. Again, too many planes, especially online. So I say let this new Korean sim have just the two advanced flight models. Maybe release other versions of the sim where maybe the Yak9 and the Skyraider have the AFMs in one release, then two more planes in other releases. All Korean air warbirds. But get this idea. Suppose it was possible to have some people fly the first release then haev some people fly the second, or third releases online, all in the same online room? Some guys flying fighters, some guys flying strike aircraft. I load up the fighter version,and select either the MiG or the Sabre, flying the afm for release, and someone else loads up the strike plane.;) Imagine that...:pilotfly: Flyby out OK time for my meds. I've thought too much for one session.

I think what he's asking for... He needs a program for slowing down the cpu. I think he's saying the game runs faster than normal due to his upgrade. Maybe someone here recalls such programs for running older games on newer PCs?

Pilotasso, need a little interpretation what settings are you used to playing SC at? I am not familiar with that game, but I think you imply that where there is a heavy cpu load a quad core is better than a dual core at the same ghz. So maybe a combat flight sim, survey style, would be a better indicator? Do you tink a study combat flight sim would be better run on your q6600 at 2.66ghz versus an E8400 at 3.0ghz? Maybe it depends on how many cores a sim can make use of? You see, I'm looking for the definitive approach to building a system for combat flight sims only, since that's all I'd play. Flyby out

link to a good article on multicore processors/gaming here's a good read on multicore processors. I'm sure most f you have read it. http://www.guru3d.com/article/cpu-scaling-in-games-with-quad-core-processors/1 Tell me what you think. Flyby out

So in some instances a sufficiently overclocked quad is better suited for testing a gpu than a similarly clocked dual core processor? I can see this where the particular test can take advantage of multi cores. It makes sense in that vein. I suppose that's it then. 3.6ghz on a single core does not perform the same as 3.6ghz on a dual core which does not perform the same as a 3.6ghz on a quad. Must have something to d with all those little Windows processes running in the background, sucking up resources.

I wonder how many of those tested games actually take advantage of quad cores? I wonder if suing a quad core is overkill. I will have to write to some of these test sties and ask why they use quad cores with large caches instead of perhaps a q6600? Would even a dual core like the E8500 do? It's supposed to be easily overclockable to nearly 4ghz with standard cpu cooler. Of course I'm assuming it's about bandwidth and ghz. My point is it seems odd to me to read a review where the object is try to get as much from a gpu test as they can, only to present results that the average pc gamer (system) might not achieve. Why not test to the average system? It might reflect real world results, and might even make decision-making a bit simpler. As it is now, the test results seem to require a "filtering down" in order to guesstimate real world results. Whew! it got windy in here!:megalol: sorry. Flyby out

actually, My most solid plan was to buy the 4870 card. I hope it is easily overclocked as that would be a bonus. I figured I'd need at least an X38 chipset to eventually run two cards in Crossfire, both at x16. The price of a 4870 will drop again one day, hopefully just in case I want to go that route. So the savings in selecting the 4870 could be put towards the mobo. I noticed that a lot of the tests use a quad 9xxx cpu clocked at about 3.6 ghz. I'm not sure why the use of a quad cpu for testing. Any ideas? I wonder why not test with, say, an E8500 clocked to 3.8 ghz? Maybe it's because the games tested cam make use of multiple threads? I mention FSX because it's the only flight sim I've seen in testing lately as there are no newer releases about. Actually a new combat flight sim is what I'd like to see in testing. But it will probably be more cpu-bound that gpu-bound. I tihnk any of the newer cards would be fine for that kind of simming, 4850, 4870, GTX260, etc. Flyby

thanks for posting the links, stealth I've been leaning towards the 4870 card. But it's really hard to make a decision. Almost too much information. Now add the 4870x2 to the mix. At over $500.00 USD it will outperform the single gpu GTX280, which is just below the X2 in price. Further, it seems to be the reviewers' consensus that ATi needs to really work on the power demands of this card, and the drivers (scaling issues). I don't know about you guys, but power-hungry cards concern me too. The card runs hot as well. I know it's said there will be more optimization, but how much and will it be great enough to really matter? Remains to be see, I know. But I think what will be best for me is a single GPU solution. I'm not a wealthy man, so it's really a no-brain-er. I'll need to see a comparison between the 4870 and the '280 in FSX to see how they handle the busy world of a modern flight sim. Then I'll hope the price of the '280 drops again! :D Imagine if that happens? I've seen where the 280 in SLi outperforms the X2 in Crossfire. Prices will drop again one day making the purchase of a second card a nice upgrade down the road. What a headache!:doh: Flyby out

Ok all Stay positive. A sniper mission sounds good to me, but I'd like it to be against a Western convoy. I'll play hide and seek if the terrain allows. Hey it's my mission, so why not?;) Maybe then I'll seek out enemy field headquarters, and nail them. Then I'll sneak up on the field armories, and supply depots, and give them a good raking over after I fly to my secret farp to refuel and rearm, and grab a cup of coffee. Of course my flight will be with me, what's left of them. I'll leave the insurgents to those with high blood pressure!:D Flyby out (and spoiling to take on the best the West has to offer)

but... Will the real battlefield be available in Black Shark? I mean there will be NATO equipment to go up against. Right? I think I'm losing focus here. Flyby out