Jump to content
Siipiorava

What do I need for better performance?

Recommended Posts

My computer specs are:

Motherboard: ASUS M5A97 R2.0

Memory: 8G DDR3

Processor: AMD FX-8150 8-core processor 3,6 GHz

Graphics card: AMD Radeon 7870

 

I am getting good framerates of 40+, when I fly up in the sky with few other planes in the air, However the performance suffers when there are big bomber formations or when I'm on the ground (for example, in the Veteranen Chir-front missions I got FPS lesser than 20).

So I'm asking, how can I improve the way the game runs? Mainly, is the problem the Graphics card or the CPU, or something else?

If I was to upgrade my rig, I wouldn't like to get a new motherboard, so do you have any knowledge on best alternatives, that would fit in the old board?

 

Also, I've circled these forums for some time and I've heard that the game is not fond of Multi-core processors, is this true? Would a Four-core work better than a Eight-core, if I was to upgrade?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a topic in which you are not likely to get an "objective" answer.

 

My system is similar to yours , but I have 16GB of RAM, my 8 core AMD processor is running at 4.6Ghz, and I have an R9 270x 4GB

 

I experience the same problems you describe to where the game becomes unplayable when flying low AND/OR with large numbers of aircraft in the vicinity of where you are.

 

I've spent a considerable amount of time playing with settings and have not come up with any solution and my suspicions are that this problem is not solvable by the user.  Some people have Brute Forced "better" frame rates with high end Intel and Nvidia systems.

 

But the lack of objective benchmarking with lets say a prerecorded track like the old IL-2 Black Death track makes objective comparison among systems and configurations nearly impossible and as things stand right now it is entirely subjective and a time sink with no way out in determining what can be done.

 

The lack of custom graphics settings has not helped this situation

Edited by skullbiscuit
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since you cant step up to a 8350 w/o a new board start by overclocking. You should be able to get over 4Ghz easily.  Then maybe consider a R9 card they are getting very inexpensive and you can prob recoup some of the cost by selling the old card. http://www.reddit.com/r/buildapcsales/search?q=GPU&sort=new&restrict_sr=on

Edited by driftaholic
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My computer specs are:

Motherboard: ASUS M5A97 R2.0

Memory: 8G DDR3

Processor: AMD FX-8150 8-core processor 3,6 GHz

Graphics card: AMD Radeon 7870

 

I am getting good framerates of 40+, when I fly up in the sky with few other planes in the air, However the performance suffers when there are big bomber formations or when I'm on the ground (for example, in the Veteranen Chir-front missions I got FPS lesser than 20).

So I'm asking, how can I improve the way the game runs? Mainly, is the problem the Graphics card or the CPU, or something else?

If I was to upgrade my rig, I wouldn't like to get a new motherboard, so do you have any knowledge on best alternatives, that would fit in the old board?

 

Also, I've circled these forums for some time and I've heard that the game is not fond of Multi-core processors, is this true? Would a Four-core work better than a Eight-core, if I was to upgrade?

 

 

I have a similar rig.. with the exception of my MOBO which is a M5A99X.. my CPU is an 8350 and my RAM is 32G.. A 4 core would not be an upgrade.. with your rig.. if I were to upgrade anything I'd add another 8G of RAM..  I had an 8150 and I sold it kind of early on and got an 8350.. that was a slight boost as the 8350 runs a little more efficiently but the only reason I was able to do it was because I sold the 8150 for $125 at the time... about a year ago..

 

Maybe a GPU upgrade... What drivers are you using? I am using 13.152.0.0

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Typically, when you add a lot of bombers and the frame rates drop this is most likely do to the CPU but the fact that you are getting bad frames down low where there is more ground detail popping up would lend itself to the GPU. What kind of resolution are you playing at and what kind of anti-aliasing settings are you using?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am playing in 1920x1080p with AA at 2x with Vsync on

The game is running in "balanced" preset.

Edited by Siipiorava

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a similar rig.. with the exception of my MOBO which is a M5A99X.. my CPU is an 8350 and my RAM is 32G.. A 4 core would not be an upgrade.. with your rig.. if I were to upgrade anything I'd add another 8G of RAM..  I had an 8150 and I sold it kind of early on and got an 8350.. that was a slight boost as the 8350 runs a little more efficiently but the only reason I was able to do it was because I sold the 8150 for $125 at the time... about a year ago..

 

Maybe a GPU upgrade... What drivers are you using? I am using 13.152.0.0

What the heck does he need another 8G of ram for?! Thats wasted money and wont get him a better frame rate. Most games barley utilise 8GB going to 16 is a total waste. Your 32GB is complete overkill for gaming. The only reason anyone needs 32GB is video rendering or graphics work. 

 

The frame rate he's getting is 100% perfect for his hardware. He not going to get more without an upgrade or further lowering the graphics. 

 

I have 4970K/GTX980 and 8GB of ram. I assure you your ram is not an issue. The best way to tell what is choking your system is run process explorer while playing and see what has the most usage during the frame rate drops. http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896653.aspx

 

I would go 8350/r9 290 or 285x if i were upgrading from what you have now. If performance/$ is key. If money is no object and you want to stay AMD then 9590 with a good cpu cooler and a 295x2 :D

Edited by driftaholic
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does BoS run better with intel chips?

 

As far as ram, I thought the same as anything over 8 is not used

 

 

 

 

What the heck does he need another 8G of ram for?! Thats wasted money and wont get him a better frame rate. Most games barley utilise 8GB going to 16 is a total waste. Your 32GB is complete overkill for gaming. The only reason anyone needs 32GB is video rendering or graphics work.

 

The frame rate he's getting is 100% perfect for his hardware. He not going to get more without an upgrade or further lowering the graphics.

 

I have 4970K/GTX980 and 8GB of ram. I assure you your ram is not an issue. The best way to tell what is choking your system is run process explorer while playing and see what has the most usage during the frame rate drops. http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896653.aspx

 

I would go 8350/r9 290 or 285x if i were upgrading from what you have now. If performance/$ is key. If money is no object and you want to stay AMD then 9590 with a good cpu cooler and a 295x2 :D

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I have been rocking 8 gigs of ram for the past 3 and a half years and have no plans of upgrading any time soon, it isn't a bottleneck in gaming at this point and running more memory will not fix his problems.

 

I wish I knew how these games were running with AMD chips these days but for the past 4 years, Intel has been the clear choice for performance. I know that 8 cores is not useful for gaming, most games still only use 2 or 4 cores but I doubt the 8 core 8150 would be that bad? If anything it's clock rate is kind of low in comparison to newer AMD chips and Intel cpu's of the past 4 years.

 

A good test would be to set all the graphics on low with no super-sampling and run a low monitor resolution at like 800x600. At this point you want to get in the sky high above the ground with no other planes and see what kind of frames you get. After that you will want to fly low to the ground (where you usually get poorer frames) and see how big the drop off is if any. After this you are going to want to load up the sky with a lot of bombers and see if the frame rate drop off was at a similar level as it was before when you were running your normal graphic settings.

 

This should give you a better idea if its the 8150 or the 7870 (or both!) causing you the problems in the game.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know AMD doesn't preform well in BOS and ROF for two reasons.

 

1) Both are DX9 applications and AMD's support for DX9 is poor.

2) Both games are sensitive to singlecore CPU performance. AMD's singlecore performance is not great comparing to Intel.

 

I remember some time ago, when i moved from AMD 7870 to NVidia GTX 670, it was a huge leap forward. My CPU was i7 3770 a the games were clearly bottlenecked by the GPU. I'm not sure about the AMD 8150. But i believe it's safe to say the 7870 will not perform even combined with an Intel CPU.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Single core/thread performance is what is needed for BoS/most flight sims and a four core produce best results

 

While AMD 8 core chips are great for programs that are optimised for them such as video rendering and photoshop etc. and they are great value for money in a lot of commercial/work programs as yet 99% of games do not use that, and compared to intel even the top AMD chips are way down on single thread performance, they are simply not designed for that use

 

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

 

O/C of intel chips is the best way to get more performance and can easily be seen in an immediate minimum FPS increase and this is because of the improved single core performance

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did some tests with lower res and process explorer, with 800x600 I got a nice increase in fps while on the ground. Taking that into account and looking at the cores, the problem could be both CPU and Graphics card

 

Here is a screenshot of the process explorer while the game was running

 

c4ole5M.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry but your problem is  100% in slow FX CPU u have...Your GPU hd7870 is actually fine for bos.I my self have FX 8320 OC@4,5 ghz and experience low frame rate (also with hd7870 and GTX660 now)in ROF and BOS and ARMA 3...after i upgraded to Core i5 3570 OC @4ghz my FPS in those games are sometimes almost doble,the big difference is mainly in minimum fps when i get (ROF over channel map for instance)26 fps minimum on FX on 4,5ghz and 40 fps minimum in same place with Core i5 3570.So in my opinion for now keep your gpu 7870 and sell FX cpu and buy haswell core i5 and mobo ,forget abou upgrading to new FX they just perform pretty bad in those types of games.Right now i have core i5 3570 with only GTX660(i will buy GTX760 or R9 280 this month actually)and bos run great ultra settings in 1080p and 2x AA when i fly over Stalingrad city i got 40 fps+,in other places in air battle 6vs6 aircraft i got from 50 to 80 fps.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep looks like its a combo of both your cpu and gpu being underpowered. If you're not brand loyal the best bang for the buck would be i5-4460 / GTX-970

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107.html

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106.html

 

If you do photo/video editing step up to a i7. If it's purely a gaming rig then don't worry about hyperthreading. I would highly consider a k model and overclocking even with the preset overclocks as games tend to rely more on clock speed. You can prob sell your old video card to a bit coin miner

Edited by driftaholic
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as ram, I thought the same as anything over 8 is not used

I recently upgraded from 8gb to 16gb RAM and did not see any game performance improvement. Video editing did work faster though I think.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Technically since BOS is still a 32 bit game, it shouldn't be able to access more than 4GB of memory, leaving whatever else you have left over for system resources and other programs running at the same time.

 

I'm running 2 AMD 6970's in Crossfire and they are working pretty good, especially for being 4 year old cards with 2 GB of VRAM. The 7870 is a little bit better of a card but even so, if you were to tell me I could no longer run 2 cards in my system I would probably upgrade very quick;y. I'm sure I would have similar feelings with a 7870 too. 

 

Judging by your FPS increase on the ground with lowered graphics, its apparent that your GPU is affecting the slow down when it's at higher settings.. but I am guessing adding a bunch of planes to the scenery will be on the CPU.

 

It may be time for an upgrade to late model intel motherboard and cpu in your future along with a newer gpu if you are not content with your current performance.

 

As a stop-gap measure you could get a 2nd 7870 and run that in Crossfire if your motherboard and power supply support it but running 2 graphics card can be a very delicate process that needs a large amount of patience from the user. It looks like 7870's are going for around $100 on ebay, so it might be a cheap way to get close to double your video performance.. if IL-2 plays nicely with your configuration.. Who knows.

Edited by Scott_Steiner
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In this game CPU speed affects directly over GPU perfomance, but in other side the CPU use it's very low...is a little strange but it's like this

 

My tests and results :

 

- AMD X4 955 - > 4 cores at 3,7 ghx with CFX HD5850

  Only I can play in LOW PRESET with AA 4x or Balanced without AA -> MAX 40FPS, min. 20fps more or less. 

  Very bad FPS perfomance in this case, but smooth. The GPU use was < 60% aprox.

 


- I5 4690k -> 4 cores at 4,5ghz with CFX HD5850

 I can play in ULTRA with AA 4x, MAX FPS 60, minun about 40 fps. From T/OFF normaly all time I have 60fps apox.. The GPU use it's all time at 99%

 Now, with a GTX970, I'm playing with DSR 1600p without any change in FPS...(my screen has 1200p)...and with DSR 4k I can play at 30 or 40 fps very smooth. Not thanks to graphic card, yes to CPU speed (I think)


 

Same graphic card and different CPU / Core speed .... and the result was very perceptible.

 

My conclusion, this game need a high CPU speed (Intel in this case it's better, better work per core vs AMD). Users with FX without OC, try to apply OC at your CPU without change any other hardware. In any case, we can use FlightFX and  to avoid AA filter with a very good graphics quality

 

 

EDIT : This is the last test that I did with I5 4690k with CFX HD5850, using FlightFX or AA. Take only MAX and AVG fps.

 


Frames 125950 Time (ms) 2289751 Min 19        Max 62      Avg 55.06       ULTRA AA4X


Frames 155475 Time (ms) 2737817 Min 23 (+21%) Max 62 (0%) Avg 56.78 (+2%) ULTRA FLIGHTFX

Edited by SuDoKu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- I5 4690k -> 4 cores at 4,5ghz with CFX HD5850

 I can play in ULTRA with AA 4x, MAX FPS 60, minun about 40 fps. From T/OFF normaly all time I have 60fps apox.. The GPU use it's all time at 99%

 Now, with a GTX970, I'm playing with DSR 1600p without any change in FPS...(my screen has 1200p)...and with DSR 4k I can play at 30 or 40 fps very smooth. Not thanks to graphic card, yes to CPU speed (I think)

 

Are using a cooler on the CPU to attain the 4.5 ghz? I have the same chip running at turbo, 3.9 ghz, with a stock cooler and the temps are well below the maximums. I might want to try boosting it but I'm sure I'll need a new CPU cooler.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 
My conclusion, this game need a high CPU speed (Intel in this case it's better, better work per core vs AMD). Users with FX without OC, try to apply OC at your CPU without change any other hardware.
 

 

 

S!

 

I can only second that. My old system had two GTX 670 (before SLI support, so only one was running), as SLI support was finally added I had nearly no FPS increase on ground and low altitudes (GPU usage only at about 60%). As I got my watercooled setup running, with three 780 GTX I had no performance increase at all. GPU usage was at about 40%. Overclocking my CPU from stock to 4.6 GHz gave me a good FPS increase and the GPU usage went up. Especially for low alt and ground performance a strong CPU is very important.

 

I still would like to know how many threads IL2 BoS is using. Are they using a single or a parallel thread for rendering and have they a separated physics thread, so that the load can be distributed to more cores?

 

Zettman

Edited by Zettman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Are using a cooler on the CPU to attain the 4.5 ghz? I have the same chip running at turbo, 3.9 ghz, with a stock cooler and the temps are well below the maximums. I might want to try boosting it but I'm sure I'll need a new CPU cooler.

 

I'm using  Noctua NH-U12P SE2, and 1,195 of vcore, no need more

Try with your actual cooler before take new one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm using [/size]

 Noctua NH-U12P SE2, and 1,195 of vcore, no need more[/size]

Try with your actual cooler before take new one

 

Thank you. I just may give this a try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...