Cyclic Posted January 8, 2009 Posted January 8, 2009 Would anyone like to comment on what would give me the biggest frame rate boost in BS. Oclock CPU- from 3.16 - 4.2 Gig OR Buy another Gforce 280 Ultra to run in SLI Current system Intel E8500 - XFX 790i Mobo - 4 Gig Corsair Ram - 1 XFX 280 (1 gig GPU) I either Spend the money on a new GPU or spend the money on a proper cooling system to OC the Proc.... Current Frames on BS average around 45FPS but every now and then it drops to teens briefly. If I turn down distance view in the settings the FPS jumps up to 55 average. I dont have heat blur on and water is set to medium.
ED Team Groove Posted January 8, 2009 ED Team Posted January 8, 2009 The CPU Option Our Forum Rules: http://forums.eagle.ru/rules.php#en
Shrubbo Posted January 8, 2009 Posted January 8, 2009 The CPU Option What he said :D i9-9900K,Z390 Aorus Master, 32GB GSkill Trident F4-3600 DDR4, ROG Strix RTX 2080 Ti, Oculus Rift S. Thrustmaster Warthog T&S, TPR Pedals.
Crow_Bar Posted January 8, 2009 Posted January 8, 2009 Ive just purchased the G-Force 280,( for when the blessed DVD come's to the shops as I dont have a copy of BS yet...hint...hint...;)) but Ive heard that basically, if your spec runs well in Flaming cliffs, It will run well in Black shark for the now. So Groove's opion is to boost the CPU, Can I ask ED?, Have I enough time ...say a month to save up for a better Processor, before the DVD is released?:music_whistling:
Feuerfalke Posted January 8, 2009 Posted January 8, 2009 If you know what you are doing, overclocking is the option. It gives you a good FPS-Boost and it is cheaper than buying a new gfx-card. But you really got to know what you are doing, because you lose varranty in most cases, when damaging a component by overclocking! Cooling is a vital factor in this as well as the painstaking process to find the lowest possible Voltage for the CPU while maintaining stability. But you will benefit from it for sure. I use my C2D E6660 2.4 at 3.6GHz - a difference of 15-20 FPS in average! You should also have fast memory to really gain an advantage from overclocking - and a fast board won't hurt either ;) MSI X670E Gaming Plus | AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D | 64 GB DDR4 | AMD RX 6900 XT | LG 55" @ 4K | Cougar 1000 W | CreativeX G6 | TIR5 | CH HOTAS (with BU0836X-12 Bit) + Crosswind Pedals | Win11 64 HP | StreamDeck XL | 3x TM MFD
Cyclic Posted January 8, 2009 Author Posted January 8, 2009 Thanks Groove for quick definate response. I hate those posts that waffle on about this and that and in the end anever commit to a sigle straight forward answer. Would BS take advantage of Quad Core Processors? Would I get more performance from say a Q9650 or Q9770 or again better of running a E8500 @ 4.2-3 gig
Cyclic Posted January 8, 2009 Author Posted January 8, 2009 As for the the old comment on getting similar performance in BS as you were getting in FC well thats not quite true. I get double FPS in FC over what I get in BS.
Cyclic Posted January 8, 2009 Author Posted January 8, 2009 My memory is corsair 2GIG each stick which run at 1066mhz (To be honest with you I have not a clue what thats means and as for Oclocking, well hopefully I can get a mate to do it for me because to date Im sure im the only twat in existance who has managed to underclock my CPU the last time I fiddled with it. At least I never had heat issues...
sobek Posted January 8, 2009 Posted January 8, 2009 Thanks Groove for quick definate response. I hate those posts that waffle on about this and that and in the end anever commit to a sigle straight forward answer. Would BS take advantage of Quad Core Processors? Would I get more performance from say a Q9650 or Q9770 or again better of running a E8500 @ 4.2-3 gig BS is not multi-CPU capable (in XP at least, there seem to be some benefits under vista), so if the architecture of 2 CPUs is comparable, the one with the higher clock speed will give you more FPS, regardless (see before) of the number of cores. Good, fast, cheap. Choose any two. Come let's eat grandpa! Use punctuation, save lives!
ED Team Groove Posted January 8, 2009 ED Team Posted January 8, 2009 I will try to sum up your hardware upgrade priority list. 1st: RAM, at least 2 GB. 2nd: CPU, faster the better, Core2Duo or Quad is your target. 3rd: Videocard, at least 512 MB VRAM, go for more if you plan to run it on high res and AA. 4th: Fast Memory FSB, the faster, the better. Our Forum Rules: http://forums.eagle.ru/rules.php#en
LIONPRIDE Posted January 8, 2009 Posted January 8, 2009 . Agreed ! the CPU is the way to go. I use my C2D E6660 2.4 at 3.6GHz - a difference of 15-20 FPS in average! . Hey PM me with your settings Feuerfalke ... I'm running the same CPU and can't get it over 3.0 w/out locking. What MB you using? . - - - - - - - - TO FLY IS HEAVEN. TO HOVER IS DIVINE - - - - - - [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Icarus2 Posted January 8, 2009 Posted January 8, 2009 BS is not multi-CPU capable (in XP at least, there seem to be some benefits under vista), so if the architecture of 2 CPUs is comparable, the one with the higher clock speed will give you more FPS, regardless (see before) of the number of cores. Read this. Wombat's script doubled the FPS with BS on my quad. http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=35091
sobek Posted January 8, 2009 Posted January 8, 2009 Read this. Wombat's script doubled the FPS with BS on my quad. http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=35091 [ ] You understood my post correctly ;) Good, fast, cheap. Choose any two. Come let's eat grandpa! Use punctuation, save lives!
Icarus2 Posted January 8, 2009 Posted January 8, 2009 [Yes ] You understood my post correctly ;) I am totally agreeing with you, but adding a link for those with Vista who want a big boost in FPS from Vista multicores.
diveplane Posted January 8, 2009 Posted January 8, 2009 I am totally agreeing with you, but adding a link for those with Vista who want a big boost in FPS from Vista multicores. think i might switch to vista .just for blackshark gain some frames. https://www.youtube.com/user/diveplane11 DCS Audio Modding.
192nd_Erdem Posted January 8, 2009 Posted January 8, 2009 Do both? Overclocking doesn't cost anything the last time I checked. 1
Feuerfalke Posted January 8, 2009 Posted January 8, 2009 Do both? Overclocking doesn't cost anything the last time I checked. As long as you don't wreck your hardware (or software), that is... :smilewink: MSI X670E Gaming Plus | AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D | 64 GB DDR4 | AMD RX 6900 XT | LG 55" @ 4K | Cougar 1000 W | CreativeX G6 | TIR5 | CH HOTAS (with BU0836X-12 Bit) + Crosswind Pedals | Win11 64 HP | StreamDeck XL | 3x TM MFD
JDski Posted January 8, 2009 Posted January 8, 2009 If BS doesn't support dual processors in XP, do you think should I turn hyperthreading ( I believe that what simulates dual processors) off on my old Pent 4 3.2? To be honest, I've never noticed any difference in performance with anything whether it's on or off.
zika1234 Posted January 8, 2009 Posted January 8, 2009 Can somebody confirm how much boost will i get from changing from Intel Core 2 duo E6600 to Intel Core 2 duo E8500?
sobek Posted January 8, 2009 Posted January 8, 2009 I am totally agreeing with you, but adding a link for those with Vista who want a big boost in FPS from Vista multicores. [ ] I understood your post correctly. :poster_oops: :D Good, fast, cheap. Choose any two. Come let's eat grandpa! Use punctuation, save lives!
AlphaInfinity Posted January 8, 2009 Posted January 8, 2009 Whatever you end up with, make sure that water is not on "high". This drops my FPS by at least 50%. I can run with everything else on high. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] |Core i7 5820k@3.8ghz|ASUS X99 Deluxe mobo|16GB Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR4 2666|EVGA GTX980 SLI | 4x500GB Samsung PRO SSD|Corsair RM1000 GOLD|Track IR5|5x LG 27inch LCD| Windows 8.1 PRO
Icarus2 Posted January 8, 2009 Posted January 8, 2009 Can somebody confirm how much boost will i get from changing from Intel Core 2 duo E6600 to Intel Core 2 duo E8500? That depends on the speed they are set at.
TwoLate Posted January 8, 2009 Posted January 8, 2009 (edited) That depends on the speed they are set at. This is funny I had a E6600 and just got a E8500 one month ago. I have a evga 8800gt card and 4 gigs of memory. Pic a mission and I will tell you what i get for FPS. I can tell you I get about a 100% increase of what the mghz is increased. Default e6600 is 2.4 mghz. I can run all day long my e8500 default at 3.17 at 4.2 on air cooling. I did get it too 4.6 running. I backed it down to 4.0. According to cpuz my voltage is only 1.29. So this cpu rocks. When I had a e6600 at default 2.4 now at e8500 at 4.0 that is a 75 % increase in FPS. Like I said post what mission you want me to run and I will post you the frame rates. You can run the same mission on your e6600 Edited January 8, 2009 by TwoLate Clarification added [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
4c Hajduk Veljko Posted January 8, 2009 Posted January 8, 2009 think i might switch to vista .just for blackshark gain some frames.That's what I've done. Thermaltake Kandalf LCS | Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R | Etasis ET750 (850W Max) | i7-920 OC to 4.0 GHz | Gigabyte HD5850 | OCZ Gold 6GB DDR3 2000 | 2 X 30GB OCZ Vertex SSD in RAID 0 | ASUS VW266H 25.5" | LG Blue Ray 10X burner | TIR 5 | Saitek X-52 Pro | Logitech G930 | Saitek Pro flight rudder pedals | Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit
Ali Fish Posted January 8, 2009 Posted January 8, 2009 i got me a 4 year old pc. still on AGP its running at 2 ghz, 1 meg of ram. with a GF7800GS or is it GT. im not sure. its the better one of the 2 with 512 meg ram. running 1152x86 with max settings produces about 9 FPS. if i increase my resoultion to 1600 x 1200. for some reason im knockin out 25 fps in cockpit and 35-40 in external. within a mission with objects rendered too. can anyone explain this.. ? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Recommended Posts