PC Performance

[HiFly62]

A lot of people tryed their best to explain the limitations of this sim to you. All of us would like higher FPS, nicer looking game but most of us managed to uderstand that one works with one has. No amont of whining will change the game. You accept it or you move on.

 

You will be missed but the community will survive.;)

[124SqZeljava]

Only thing that is great with this gfx is that with normal graphic set up now i can go trought bunch of clouds with so much storms and fps will not be lower than 50, so i don`t get it, this efects are much more heavy to made than some few buildings. Btw Cuda and PhysX are done very good job with this efects, with 8600gts i coudlnt think about set up this kinda weather on map. So conclusion is that Nvidia will reaper this FC engine just when they had enough time, ED will do...

[124SqZeljava]

And this game is definitly not 15$ if we look how much we spent money on hardware...

[EtherealN]

what do i need for this RUSSIAN game 8,0ghz(WTF)CPU

 

No, you need to adjust your settings to fit your hardware.

 

...they say directX is on in black shark, but with this(mine) configuration i have same fps even lower then FC.

 

I have no clue what you are trying to say. "DirectX is on in black shark"? Of course it is. It's a piece of software that uses the DirectX libraries. Of course DX is "on"...

 

What we can expect on FC 2.0, i mean WTF, BS is same engine as FC and nothing else, do something ED team programers, call some yankey to help you with engine, this is FUNNY!!!

 

Actually, BS is not the same engine as FC. If you are going to insult people and use foul language you might want to start by getting your facts straight...

 

Point is, that i do not wanna lower my settings cos every other game runing smoothly, but this game from this publicier running like "tttttttttttttttttt" on high setings.

 

Okey, so you have a slightly weak processor, budget RAM sticks (acceptable GPU tho, shame this is a simulator and therefore doesn't really care about your GPU), probably run XP, and then feel that you can insult people because you can't run a simulator on maximum settings without consequences?

 

FIX ENGINE OR WHAT EVER YOU HAVE TO DO. so much money for PC and playing like this, 15$ is too much for game running like this.

 

I guess you could have tried the demo version before purchase, then... ;)

 

But "so much money for PC"... The only expensive component listed in there is the graphics card, and your processor has some amazing weaknesses in it's cache. That thing is old tech.

 

Well that`s the problem, now is 2010 and that suck runing on 1 core, I SAY **** MISILLE MODIFIED IN 2.0 AND MAKE US PLAY WITH WOODS, TREES OVER FULL CITIES WITH 60 FPS, i have PC for that, every other game runing nice, and i do not wanna listen it is SIMULATOR lmao, it`s game, nothing else...

 

Underscored the part in here that makes it obvious that you just have no clue at all about what you are taking about. You understand that computers and software is a complex thing, right? This is not a talking barbie doll from Mattel. ;) Try the one about airshows again.

 

You need to learn how these things work. You do NOT have the PC to get you consistent 60FPS in a simulator because your CPU is, quite simply, not good enough for that. You can clock it up however much you like, but it's still old and has serious memory and bandwidth issues. Add to that the fact that your RAM count is slightly on the low side while you are trying to run at maximum... I mean come on?

 

But I'll mirror a request made by someone else: get Stalker: Call of Pripyat and put it on max. Let's see you maintain 60FPS with that machine. :)

 

And this game is definitly not 15$ if we look how much we spent money on hardware...

 

Now you are being rediculous. Did you purchase your computer from ED or TFC? No? Then stop making yourself look silly.

[124SqZeljava]

If I have to choose, I'd say, the **** with trees and full cities with 60fps, i want better(more realistic) missiles. If you only want nice scenery, go play HAWX.

 

And by the way, your Athlon is not powerful enough so that the GTX260 can really show what it can do. And in a very-CPU dependant game like lock on the results as you see are far from spectacular. You know it's not only the frequency of a processor that counts. A Core i3/i5 even running at 2.4 Ghz will vastly outperfrom your Athlon X2 @ 3Ghz! Even in games that use only 1 cpu, newer designs are much more efficient and for a lower clock provide better performance.

And again, here above is the problem, when this game was publiced and when this fancy cpu are made:huh:

[EtherealN]

You do know that there has been updates to LO since it's release, right?

[124SqZeljava]

You do know that there has been updates to LO since it's release, right?

No i don`t!

[EtherealN]

So you didn't know that LO has been updated since release, yet still feel qualified to complain loudly?

 

I rest my case. ;)

[124SqZeljava]

So you didn't know that LO has been updated since release, yet still feel qualified to complain loudly?

 

I rest my case. ;)

Cheers, and go by the wind!

[124SqZeljava]

No, you need to adjust your settings to fit your hardware.

 

 

 

I have no clue what you are trying to say. "DirectX is on in black shark"? Of course it is. It's a piece of software that uses the DirectX libraries. Of course DX is "on"...

 

 

 

Actually, BS is not the same engine as FC. If you are going to insult people and use foul language you might want to start by getting your facts straight...

 

 

 

Okey, so you have a slightly weak processor, budget RAM sticks (acceptable GPU tho, shame this is a simulator and therefore doesn't really care about your GPU), probably run XP, and then feel that you can insult people because you can't run a simulator on maximum settings without consequences?

 

 

 

I guess you could have tried the demo version before purchase, then... ;)

 

But "so much money for PC"... The only expensive component listed in there is the graphics card, and your processor has some amazing weaknesses in it's cache. That thing is old tech.

 

 

 

Underscored the part in here that makes it obvious that you just have no clue at all about what you are taking about. You understand that computers and software is a complex thing, right? This is not a talking barbie doll from Mattel. ;) Try the one about airshows again.

 

You need to learn how these things work. You do NOT have the PC to get you consistent 60FPS in a simulator because your CPU is, quite simply, not good enough for that. You can clock it up however much you like, but it's still old and has serious memory and bandwidth issues. Add to that the fact that your RAM count is slightly on the low side while you are trying to run at maximum... I mean come on?

 

But I'll mirror a request made by someone else: get Stalker: Call of Pripyat and put it on max. Let's see you maintain 60FPS with that machine. :)

 

 

 

Now you are being rediculous. Did you purchase your computer from ED or TFC? No? Then stop making yourself look silly.

Blah blah blah, when you are so smart, give me PC configuration for Black Shark that will run on high settings, with ohh let`s say 40FPS all night long, you know when is publiced and what we have today of hardware, and put price for all stuff(optional)???

[EtherealN]

You really do not get it, do you?

 

No matter what computer you get, I can build a mission that will make it cry. All I have to do is keep adding objects until trouble ensues - most effectively ballistic objects or anything else that requires physics calculations.

 

So missions require X machine, other missions require more, other require less. It all depends on what they have in them.

 

This is not Unreal Tournament

Stop thinking that it is and learn the subject.

 

Though my machine will do what you are asking for most of the time. It cost (including screen, HDD's, box, PSU, keyboard, headset & mouse) about $1500 (US). $1200 if you exclude our sales taxes.

 

On the topic of LockOn, which is the topic of this thread and this forum section, it'll maintain 100+ when I disable vSync. (With vSync it'll obviously not go above the refresh rate of 60.)

[EtherealN]

Link: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=45931

 

That track was recorded as a combat mission, and you'll note a minimum of 38, average of 52,577, maximum of 81, at high graphics settings, AA and AF on, 1024 cockpit displays, mirrors on, and everything else standard "high" preselect.

 

That's the machine mentioned. A very cheap machine. ;)

[124SqZeljava]

You really do not get it, do you?

 

No matter what computer you get, I can build a mission that will make it cry. All I have to do is keep adding objects until trouble ensues - most effectively ballistic objects or anything else that requires physics calculations.

 

So missions require X machine, other missions require more, other require less. It all depends on what they have in them.

 

This is not Unreal Tournament

Stop thinking that it is and learn the subject.

 

Though my machine will do what you are asking for most of the time. It cost (including screen, HDD's, box, PSU, keyboard, headset & mouse) about $1500 (US). $1200 if you exclude our sales taxes.

 

On the topic of LockOn, which is the topic of this thread and this forum section, it'll maintain 100+ when I disable vSync. (With vSync it'll obviously not go above the refresh rate of 60.)

Now listen son, in Falcon 4 aliead or what ever is name of the game:lol:, in mission about what are you are talking about, peeps are very satisfied with game engine, and FPS, the production team is probably smarter than ED`s team, everything goes smoth in that game how fans of AF says, so my point all day long is that ED need to employ some smrter programers for final product, cos you can`t go out on market with stuff where if you put 20 ground units thing will flow like butterfly, and if you go with 120 units, well then you need to go into the PC store and buy a litlle more hardware to be good at FPS. That game is not complit until they make it workable with 400 ground units same as 20. So i suggest that they make link on there site for new employer graphic programers, cos like this thing is not going well and it will never be, it is just a half of product, i mean look americans and how they doing there jobs, for every game you have sistem requirements:megalol:

[Fahhh]

haha, each forum has a troll, and we've got ours... When was the last time you played F4:AF. I mean the stock version with the stock textures. Yeah it runs great (despite a decent amount of graphic bugs and glitches that need tweaks - but hey americans made it so its great right? :D ).

 

And yes the LO:FC engine is not perfect, and so what. You need a quite powerful system to run it at max, and so what? Things are the way they are, period. As I see you are complaining about something, and when you are proven wrong, you just change the subject. When again you're overwhelmed with facts, you either jump back to the previous and start repeating or change to something new...

 

It is starting to get funny. I'm not reading your post seriously anymore, and its kinda funny :D

[EtherealN]

Listen, son, you still are only showing that you don't understand how this works.

 

First of all, Falcon 4 Allied Force is based on an engine that was released in 1999 and developed during the 5 years preceding that. It does not do the same things that ED products do. (Though it's flight dynamics might be better than LO, not better than DCS though - not even close. It's ballistics are also simple when compared to DCS.)

 

If you think you can ever reach a place where increasing the amount of units simulated by a factor of 20 that does not have an effect, you need to learn how things work. But I do note with some amusement that when your challenge was actually met you decided to ignore it.

 

And I greatly caution you to not slip back into your previous tone.

 

This here is interesting though:

So i suggest that they make link on there site for new employer graphic programers

 

Why the heck would ED need new graphics programmers? Do you still think it's graphics that is being the bottleneck? Once again: this is not Unreal Tournament. Why is that so hard to comprehend? Look at my machine - I have a WORSE graphics card than you, yet is getting better performance. That means it's not the graphics card that is the problem - it's nothing to do with the graphics. It's all about the CPU - as people have been telling you, only to get insults back.

 

Now please do comment on the fact that I just gave you a very cheap system makeup (note that the computer listed was purchased a year ago, so it's even cheaper now - some of the parts even being so old that they aren't even sold anymore) that met your little "challenge". Go on. Otherwise the topic is closed and the thread can go back on-topic.

[124SqZeljava]

Listen, son, you still are only showing that you don't understand how this works.

 

First of all, Falcon 4 Allied Force is based on an engine that was released in 1999 and developed during the 5 years preceding that. It does not do the same things that ED products do. (Though it's flight dynamics might be better than LO, not better than DCS though - not even close. It's ballistics are also simple when compared to DCS.)

 

If you think you can ever reach a place where increasing the amount of units simulated by a factor of 20 that does not have an effect, you need to learn how things work. But I do note with some amusement that when your challenge was actually met you decided to ignore it.

 

And I greatly caution you to not slip back into your previous tone.

 

This here is interesting though:

 

 

Why the heck would ED need new graphics programmers? Do you still think it's graphics that is being the bottleneck? Once again: this is not Unreal Tournament. Why is that so hard to comprehend? Look at my machine - I have a WORSE graphics card than you, yet is getting better performance. That means it's not the graphics card that is the problem - it's nothing to do with the graphics. It's all about the CPU - as people have been telling you, only to get insults back.

 

Now please do comment on the fact that I just gave you a very cheap system makeup (note that the computer listed was purchased a year ago, so it's even cheaper now - some of the parts even being so old that they aren't even sold anymore) that met your little "challenge". Go on. Otherwise the topic is closed and the thread can go back on-topic.

Well ok son, i get it now, this game will be crapy engine forever, it is so funny when i see how they makeing 3d modeling for SAM sistem where i from 4km alt see just a dot! now this is very smart move from ED:megalol:, i see now where are they calculate mathematics or physx operation, i saw in BS that one truck has very nice tires, i was always wont to have that in simulator=game nice looking SAM guy:megalol::megalol::megalol:

[Mustang]

[RedTiger]

Gentlemen,

 

Why are we feeding a troll?

[EtherealN]

Zeljava, you've obviously never heard of LOD. Nor did you bother to read or even try to understand the point that somehow my computer, with it's 9800, gets much better performance than your much more modern GTX260. If you have any clue about computers, you'll know that this indicates that something other than graphics is the bottleneck - for example the very old processor you have with it's separate and tiny L2 caches, miniscule RAM amount etcetera. It doesn't matter if you have a GTX260, the graphics load here is such that you'll get exactly the same performance with an 8800GT. You don't need more than that. (People have investigated that, you know.)

 

Now either stay on the topic, or don't post. This derail is over. As a reminder, the topic of the thread is tips to assist in boosting performance in Lock On.

 

Gentlemen,

 

Why are we feeding a troll?

 

I'm a hopeless romantic. :P

[159th_Viper]

 

 

[coolts]

Gah! Missed all the fun. Bloody Masterchef!!

Seriously though, how dare ED make a game, (in 2003), that still pushes modern PC's. The very cheek!

[herig2]

To =124Sq=Zeljava

Back in the 70's I took a computer course. I was taught.

Do not buy a computer, then the software. Buy the software then a computer that can run the software.

After 4 years of low FPS, stutters, etc. I purchase a unit just to run Lockon FC, it has a i7 975 processor, 12 GB ram, dual ATI 5870 GPU. In those years I did not complained about the lousy game play, for I realized that it was my computer not the software.

Now my Lockon FC rocks. So spend some money and buy a computer that can run this sim the way you expected it to. Also be prepare to spend money on extras such as HOTAS, gaming keyboard, MFD, etc. to fulfill the Lockon experience.

[element1108]

You don't see that type of **** in here very often...wow

[emenance]

lol mine does ok, i use DCS MAX when I run BS. I am installing a 4870 next week though since my comp is two years old, I thout I would do something to it. :)

[Silent Warrior]

I like you. :thumbup: