How do I get the best performance

[Spider76]

ok viper.. be cool

[viperBAT36]

and no,i don't take it personnally....i just made an observation of what some have posted about fps and their system.i didn't put down any system specs for those that have problems with what they are running.i simply stated that i can run it smoothly on what i have.sometimes the simplest way can be best for the few that think that "upgrading" is the best way to go.having fun in a sim is not about what your system specs are,but is about if your comp can run it,to the point of playing it.upgrades are good if you are having trouble even getting above 10fps.i just think that if people believe that they have to run it at 80fps,just to post good screenshots or vids on the site,then they are missing the point of the whole idea of the sim.it's about having fun!i could care less if someone has better pics or tracks than me,i just want to enjoy what i'm seeing,and let my senses do the rest.it's not about competition.that cannot be what ED intended.it's just system specs people.what does it matter if someone posts that they can run it on less than you have.i guess,in my experience,in reading posts that SOMETIMES tweeking this and that leads to problems.be happy with what you have,and,if you have the means to upgrade,then by all means do so.just an observation....i've seen this before at combatace.com(an AWESOME SITE)about the WOX series.just play people,just play.

[Spider76]

over all im trying so say build pc that will

(serve / tommorows specs to run X software game or such)

[viperBAT36]

i'm cool,Spider...this isn't an attack on anyone.let's just play the sim and not worry about system specs.i got a good idea that this forum isn't about defaming,but about knowledge.so if someone has a great rig,but cannot play the sim properly,that there is some other interference that is causing problems.and,i am by no means an expert on what causes this,and,i can offer no help.i will leave this to the professionals here.as i'm sure i will run into problems myself and will need the guidance of the said personnel.i haven't delved into the mods for this yet(except for a couple of downloadable missions).so far,i have been subjected to nothing but very pleasing results.and i am not an expert in anything about this sim.i'm a greenhorn here and i mean absolutely no dissrespect to anyone.i will learn to understand the posts that i reply to,as others will mine.

[Migo]

Yea ok was just my idea that if your performance ain't good it's the graphics card. Because it's the weakest part of your PC really old http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/best-graphics-card,review-31661-7.html

 

But yes DCS don't need great graphics card and 1024*768 should run fine.

Other advice that I can give is that you should overclock your CPU to 3Ghz or more.

[viperBAT36]

this is something i don't really know anything about.i'm not sure how to overclock my cpu,as i've not found any instructions.what do you need to know about my system to give directions?thanks in advance.

[Migo]

What's the processor type ? You said 2.4GHz.

Singlecore ? Dual core ? Quadcore ? Intel or Amd ?

 

Just write down your CPU name :)

[EtherealN]

Overclocking primer: http://techreport.com/articles.x/13815

 

Superb application for finding out what your system hardware is, and it's settings: http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php

 

---

 

Now viperBAT, if you didn't take it personally you might have wanted to take a more calm attitude in your posts. Someone made a quality judgement on your GPU and you end up saying that they don't know what the simulator is about? Suddenly they are not here for having fun?

 

That's fundamentally broken logic, I'm afraid. ;)

 

The point is this:

I just think that if people believe that they have to run it at 80fps' date=' just to post good screenshots or vids on the site, then they are missing the point of the whole idea of the sim. It's about having fun![/quote']

 

First of all, you do not need 80fps to make a video. In fact, you need less FPS to make a video than you do to perceive the gameplay as smooth while playing it. However, since the human brain works the way it does, we are much more susceptible to react to "framerates" when we are doing something interactive. High framerates is NOT about screenshots (how could it be?) nor is it about video.

 

High framerates is about smooth video when playing - that is, it's about being able to have fun! Don't presume to judge what others need to enjoy their simulator. If real life ran at 10-20 fps I'd be dead, quite literally, since it would have been very hard to work out some crosswind landings I've done if I were in that kind of visual environment. (Things happen real fast and you need to maintain good SA which, frankly, I find difficult at 10-20 FPS. 25+ it starts getting better, 40+ and beyond I've never managed to differentiate when blind-testing.)

 

What does it matter if someone posts that they can run it on less than you have?

 

That question that has an obvious answer. It matters because it would be an excellent opportunity to analyze a system so that we can give people better answers in future when they perceive problems.

 

It's not about competing with you - heck, no-one had anything to compete about since even in the fps department we don't know what it is you define as good and playable. But that wouldbe interesting to know even then - quite simply because if your system is performing better than expected and better than comparable or even better systems it would be very nice to figure out why that is. Not to put you down, but to raise other people who have problems UP?

Edited October 7, 2009 by EtherealN

[WindWpn]

Also this may seem like a dumb suggestion, but be sure to minimize all "background" processes which are unnecessary by closing them and eating up system resources before you even launch BS.

 

I have a shortcut created to Windows Services so I can see what is running and shut them down to free up computer resources, especially if you use the computer for something other than gaming. I run ColdFusion and DB services on mine as well, but I have these services set to manual and only launch them when I am working on web stuff. Though, if you do not set them, often these types of processes start automatically on bootup.

 

All in all, be sure your machine is background resource "clean" before running BS and this may help.

[Migo]

These services usually don't eat fps.

Has to be a second game or picture editing programm or bad virus then :D

Though I don't like many background services running, too. It doesn't slow down but you have that dirty feeling know what I mean ;-)

[viperBAT36]

it's an AMD Athlon 3400+,pretty sure it's single core.

[Migo]

Yea it is. And I don't know much about overclocking them, my OC "career" started after selling Athlon 4000.

 

I googled some minutes and I think you can get + 300/400Mhz maximum with that Cpu. Means 2.7Ghz. Tha will boost performance,

but just a small amount and I don't think it's worth the time in this case.

[viperBAT36]

EtherealN...you have misunderstood the posts that i made(in which you have painstakinly quoted).i think you are taking too much of what i posted literally.i was being sarcastic,not claiming to associate fps with creating anything.i do not however think that you have "repremanded" the orginal poster that started my sarcastic posts in the first place.look up the orginal post in which my video card was called quote"shit".so you still think someone was just "helping" me by saying this?very un-tactful in my opinion.

[EtherealN]

Running CPU-Z would make a positive ID and give you all details on it and other components in the system. ;)

[viperBAT36]

thanks Migo.i'll do fine with what i have for now.upgrades will come when some extra funds are available.

[EtherealN]

EtherealN...[..] Look up the orginal post in which my video card was called quote"shit". So you still think someone was just "helping" me by saying this? Very un-tactful in my opinion.

 

Here's the exact quote: "Also 8400gs is really bad graphics card, but should be enough if you dont use high resolutions though."

 

He didn't say "shit". He said "that's a really bad graphics card", which it is, but he then added that at low resolution it should "be enough". That's no attack on you, that's not saying anything is shit, it's a judgement on quality and a fair one.

 

Now if we could return to figuring out if your system is actually performing better than expected and, if so, see if we can figure out why so we can have that knowledge on hand when people have issues?

 

EDIT: My bad, he also said "Nearly all Nvidia cards ending with gs or gso are, excuse my language, shit." Well, truth be told, they actually are. They are budget versions that very often are re-labeled old cards. The 8400 seems to have a slightly newer shader system though since they are programmable which the previous generation ones weren't. Now, say what you want of the choice of words there, the quality judgement is something I would agree with. It really is a comparatively bad product - and nVidia has had an unfortunate habit of marketing their lower-end cards like the 8400 with pictures of top-line games, something I believe to be borderline false advertising. (I think it was the 9200 that was marketed with pictures of Crysis with really high graphics settings, which it can do technically speaking, but at absolutely horrible framerates - talking singledigit. That is enough to make screenshots tho. :P )

Edited October 7, 2009 by EtherealN

[Migo]

Yes, sorry for that one. But I excused my language. I just don't like to talk around things, wasn't meant bad or disrespectful.