sinelnic

GG, I love it when you talk dirty... :thumbup:

Ethereal and GG, Just out of curiosity, but you're describing two different limiting factors. It's one thing to have a perfectly modular modular design (sic), but not have the time to test properly that the modularity was well implemented, and another thing to not really have a perfectly modular modular design, and then by force be forced to update theoretically independent modules when one of them is changed. I wonder which is the case, I would assume that if you're inheriting an engine not designed for modularity then the latter case is the likelier.

Feliz Navidad!!!

It is, but CPUs need data to process, and when that data is not in the RAM, they need to go look for it in the HDD, and wait... It´s like having a Ferrari with a 10 gallon fuel tank, it´ll go real fast... for two blocks... As for SDDs, their main advantage is their zero seek-time, which means a random read is executed immediately, whereas a normal HDD has to spin and position its head over the correct place before it can read. Now so far I understand that their (SDDs) sustained data transfer rate (sequential read) is smaller than normal HDDs, so for some applications you´ll notice no difference, or even a degraded performance. For flight sims, though, despite longer load times, you should get much less stutter, which normally happens when a particular object needs to be displayed but its data is not still in RAM.

Another suggestion: whenever attacked my preferred maneuver is a deep dive while tossing flares, and ideally I dive to the side so I can change direction very quickly and run the hell out. In order for this to work, while entering enemy territory you should register what zones where safe, and also keep track of hills and/or mountains that could act as cover, so you don´t escape right into another SAM. As a last resort hiding behind a building can help also.

Hi Flyby, The SSD will help with the loading speeds of the terrain, FSX will usually show blurry textures when flying low and fast as it can´t load the textures fast enough. Also, FSX after Acceleration, IIRC, actually uses all available cores, one for the sim, the rest for handling the loading of textures into the engine (i.e. texture streaming).

Totally OT but I´d like to warn the owner of the LeadingEDGE Training shop that there´s a certain Tim Langdell lurking around all things called "EDGE", and might very well annoy you should you get any commercial success. Google is your friend!

Please make the AI FAC-CAS into DCS. Please make the AI FAC-CAS into DCS. Please make the AI FAC-CAS into DCS. It's a little step for you, but a huge leap for mankind.

Oooohhh no collidable grass? I want collidable grass!!!

Let's say that when ED finally models the virtual spine of the virtual pilot, you will be able to make loads of money by selling the virtual chiropractic add-on for the people that fly with the ball off-center...

Hi Mnemonic, I read the VR920 have a resolution of 640x480... how does DCS:BS feel and play with that resolution? I would buy those immediately if the experience is really good...

S.T.A.L.K.E.R. the prequel?

Martillo, answers are not important, what matters is the question... :megalol: EtherealN you speak spanish?? or just for ordering beer :D?

Try Kh-25s... If you´re going to try to sink her with Vikhrs or guns, you might as well land on her with a screwdriver and a six-pack...

Thanks for the kind words! :blush: Come to think about it, there´s another thing related to the article worth mentioning: see how ATI came out with their 5970 card, DX11 and all, and nVidia is not even close to releasing their own? This is because nVidia believes that the PC market has little growth potential and is focusing on expanding their market towards the budget number crunchers (those who cannot afford Deep Blue). They see a big ka-ching potential there. This is sad news (we simmers know what it means when "our" market is not seen as attractive) but on the other hand, something must be wrong when those who have everything to win in the convergence market (AMD/ATI!!), are not pushing hard for that, but even pushing further for DX11 and the PC graphics. Now, DX10 was heavily capitalized by nVidia, but we did not see any noticeable enhancement in graphics, basically because DX10 was more about optimizing the API than new features. DX11, on the other hand, brings the absolutely revolutionary feature called "Hardware Tesselator". See for yourself: The funny thing here is that ATI cards have been having hardware tesselators included for at least 2 generations, but never used, while nVidia never had one. Just food for thought. But between DX11 and Eyefinity, for the first time in eons my next card will be an ATI.

For us gamers, the problem in following the article is that its written from a completely different perspective, that of the people who use GPUs to perform pure number crunching, as in scientific applications (goelogical, wheather, folding@home, etc). The article goes on as explaining how ATI and Nvidia struggle to provide a much tighter interoperability between the CPU and GPUs. The main news at least for me, is that the new GT 300 will be able to run some C/C++ code, which is remarkable. But before anyone believes that you´ll be able to run DCS A-10 in that card and magically get colllidable trees and intelligent AI (:P) the first thing you have to know is that it can run very very specific C programs specially coded and compiled for it, which, having no affiliation with ED, I can say with 100% certainty will absolutely not be the case of any DCS product in the foreseeable future. Then it explains that the true brakthrough will come when nVidia finds a way to run standard CPU code on their GPUs, which requires a kind of special "hardware front-end" for the GPU. But that´s way farther down the road (i.e. not in the GT 300) and there is even the possibility that nVidia will need to have cooperate with Intel to do so. At the same time, Intel´s Larrabee should do the same, but, what does Intel know about high performance GPUs? So for us gamers this implies that by around 2012 we´ll have to upgrade or entire systems again. This convergence should allow developers to more easily incorporate number-crunching intensive functions into games, such as physics, AI, advanced lightning, and the like. It´s more a benefit in the ease of coding, rather than in actual new hardware capabilities. It is not stated in the article but it is my personal opinion that if nVidia gets any kind of success (money, of course) with moving general purpose CPU code to the GPU, Intel will look kindly into buying them.

The current 5870 can only run 3 monitors, it has 4 ports but two of them are mutually exclusive. For more than 3 you have to wait for the Eyefinity6 edition that will come with 6 displayports around christmas.

Maybe this can help http://en.wiki.eagle.ru/wiki/Export_1_0_1 also http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/index.php?end_pos=567&scr=default&lang=en

Of course its not unlimited... but to settle in the middle, the true cost for the US economy of the F-22 program bar any profits from it, is many times smaller than what an equivalent project would have truly costed in any other country in the world, adjusted for economy size. That was my point, I stand by it. Anyways I´d much more like to discuss my second point... if there´s any information on the subject I´d be more than happy to absorv it...

Using the data export functionalities in DCS and a hardware interface... nobody said it would be easy...

Hi EtherealN. What you describe about money supply is absolutely true, but applies when the money is good only within your own frontiers. Now, up until very recently, the only currency you could use to buy oil -the prime raw material of any economy- was dollars. So, imagine you are, say, Argentina, and want to buy oil because you don´t have enough: first you have to get some dollars, because the fake ones you print are not really good enough to fool the arabs. So in order to get dollars, you have to sell something to the US. Since the US has no interest whatsoever in your lousy currency, you have to sell them an actual thing, probably something that took labor or at least has some intrinsic value in it, say, food. So the actual transaction is, you send food to the US, and they send you back "paper". In fact, actually they just modulate an electronic signal to let you know that you can come by and collect your paper any time you want. So, extrapolating, if country A wants to perform any economic transaction with country B, whoever those countries are, they need to do that using US dollars, so the US is basically profiteering (i.e. getting free stuff) from every commercial transaction in the world. It is far more complicated than this, but the general idea is true. The US main export is Dollars, hence the debt. With the irruption of the Euro the story changed and as Asia develops its own currency this will no longer exist, but since about the vietnam era the US has been effectively subsidized by the world. Hence the US can freely "print" much more money than your average country because the US dollar operates(d) as the global de facto currency.

I´m in the process of conceiving the idea of some day thinking about taking the proper steps to eventually build a cockpit replica :)

I would like to add a couple of points to the F-22 debate that have nothing to do with its combat capabilities: 1- From an economic standpoint, the cost of the F-22 program is irrelevant; it doesn´t even equate the cost of the paper of the money it costed because it was surely paid for with electronic transfers. The US is in the unique position of freely disposing of unlimited US dollars because dollars are made out of thin air... and effectively the whole US economy has been subsidized by the rest of the world up until now. So the F-22 was virtually free. 2- What IS relevant is how the program creates value for the country, if any. There are three main ways in which the program can accomplish this: a- It gives the US a better bargaining position in global economics, as in this is my gun, let's negotiate. This is beyond me to estimate, but I believe as the world turns multipolar, keeping the biggest guns for yourself is invaluable. So you spent 1 Trillion US$ to have the upper hand in global energy business negotiations... it's money perfectly well invested IMHO. b- Derivative projects that CAN be profitable, such as the JSF or other revenue-generating derivative projects. Assuming that that project is profitable, and that it leverages all or some research and logistics developments from the Raptor program, then you have to effectively add all generated revenues and substract to all combined costs. If "a" was positive, then at least directly recovering the costs for the combined programs is a dream deal. It's literally a bargain. c- Generating innovations that can be leveraged by the rest of the economy. It is my humble opinion that the main reason why the west turned the tide in the cold war was not because of the relative effectiveness of the economies but because the value created by the innovations generated from the military spending could be capitalized by the west economy while the soviet economy had no way of leveraging that value. So take for instance the internet, which is derived from military research. This innovation is leveraged in the business world because it gives a competitive advantage, such as faster information and business flow. The world doesn't take long to adopt it, but by that time, you have all the key technologies already developed in the US so you buy from them i.e. CISCO, IBM, Microsoft and the such. Now I have no idea what innovations from the Raptor and friends can be leveraged in the business world, but I would think there should be many. Of course not as game-changing as the Internet, but valuable novertheless. So after in "b" you recovered costs, the true profiteering from the project for the country comes in "c". A dreamy dream, almost pornographic deal. So the true question is, what could the US have better invested those 1 trillion US$ in, considering all a, b and c? I have so far been unable to find such discussion in the media, maybe you can point me in the right direction.

:lol::lol::lol: It sounds very similar to "Sopor", which in spanish and english means a state of deep sleepyness, as in a hot and moist summer day. So I thought Azrail made a big effort to overcome sopor and answer my question!!! (BTW, I find myself in sopor state mor often than not...)

Thanks, Gracias and Спасибо!! It´s funny how some words google can´t translate but I understand anyways, such as "жопорезе". In fact I think I can incorporate that word to my vocabulary :D. Thanks again!