Questions before buying..

[phuture]

After playing IL2 1946 modded for years the numerous youtube clips of this game has got me seriously wanting to buy it.

However I've a few questions......

First I have a very poor broadband speed (less than a 1mb usually). What sort of size is the game and updates to download on Steam ?

Would the DVD version help in this, and is there any difference between the DVD and Steam version ?

 

Lastly the old fav of computer speed. I have an AMD FX 8350, 16 gig of ram and an Nvidia GTX750 ti with 4gig video ram. I see the AMD chips are not so great for this game but am I likely to get ok frame rate with some of the graphics turned down or running at 1280x1024 ???  

 

thanks for any replies

PH

[76IAP-Black]

Hi, if you buy it, buy it directly on the il2 side, so all the money will go to the Dev`s, and nothing to steam.

 

I have purchased all the titles over their side and all goes with a "launcher", it`s very comfortable, you can download it when ever you want and pause it without any problems.

 

About your specs.. good question, after the DX11 improvement, its far better in performance, but i would upgrade your PC, I know how it was as il2 FB was released and i couldnt play it on perfect

[Yogiflight]

Hi phuture, the DVD version is nothing else than the STEAM version, I own it myself. Like Black wrote, buy on the IL2 homepage, to give them all the money. You can download the game over night, for example.

I can't say anything about your CPU, but I have the same graphic card and it runs with highest settings pretty well. But it runs all the time with 100%.

[LeRocket]

I have the same CPU and I've used it with a gtx 550 and gtx 970. Overclocking the CPU to 4.4 with the 550 got me around 30 fps. It would drop on occasion though. With the 970 I got a constant 60 fps while in the air, with it dipping below 60 on the ground.

 

This was before dx11. The performance on the ground now equals the performance in the air for me with dx11.

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

Hey Phuture,

 

Generally speaking, your CPU shouldn't have a large affect on your graphics fidelity - that's going to be up to your GPU to handle although the CPU will play a part in that relationship. You may be able to squeeze some extra FPS out by lowering some settings but IL-2 BOX is fairly well CPU bound - the higher clock speed you can reach on your chip, the better you will be able to hand the back-end simulation cycles that the sim runs on.

 

Also, I echo the sentiment of buying it from the store directly - the guys at 777/1CGS are a tight team that delivers great content and they need every drop of our support that we can muster.

Edited January 26, 2017 by 4./JG52_Space_Ghost

[Quax]

Buy it on the IL2 website. It has more advantages, not only that steam doesn't get money

Edited January 27, 2017 by Quax

[Finkeren]

As others have said: Buy it here.

 

Also: While I have a very different CPU my system is well over 5 years old and runs the sim flawlessly, especially after they made the move to DX11.

[Dakpilot]

Patches/updates are much larger through Steam than through direct download

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[1./KG4_Blackwolf]

Buy it here..not steam as others said. I run a AMD FX 8320 8 core with 16 gig of ram and a XFX480 8 gig and Vive VR and I have no problems running the game at all. FPS at 60.  As soon as the Devs can get VR support going (hint hint) I'll be running it a lot more.

Coming from IL2 1946 you are going to love this, though the menus and the way you set it up (controllers and all) are different. To get an idea of how your system will run it and how it looks go download Rise of Flight, its free to play with two free planes. Made by the same company, most of the set up menus and so on are about the same. 

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

-snip-

 

To get an idea of how your system will run it and how it looks go download Rise of Flight, its free to play with two free planes. Made by the same company, most of the set up menus and so on are about the same. 

 

As Blackwolf said, testing ROF on your system is a good start. The developers actually suggested this in the past as a benchmark to determine whether or not you meet the system requirements.

 

It's worth noting that if you can run ROF you should definitely be able to run IL-2... ROF doesn't have the massive performance upgrade that DX11 provided for BOX which generally doubled the performance for most users.

[ShamrockOneFive]

I wouldn't sweat the broadband speed. The majority of my game folder that is not screenshots (I should clean those up) is 14GB. It'll take a while to download on 1mbps broadband but unless you have a serious datacap I'd just let it trickle download while you're sleeping and you'll be good to go the next day. The patches that come along will take a bit to update too but plan ahead and you'll be fine.

 

AMD chips have traditionally had poorer single thread performance vs comparable Intel chips in recent years. We'll see if Ryzen change the tune on that. Nonetheless, the improvements in DX11 performance AND the AI optimization that has been underway should improve performance. I was pretty happy 80-90% of the time on an even older system than yours until more recently and I think you'll be able to run it fine. Not Ultra settings but it should still be pretty good. I'd still think about upgrading in the next year or two as performance demands will slowly increase (as they did with IL-2) but you should be fine to get started. Just don't ask too too much from it.

[=TBAS=Sshadow14]

On 1080P You system should easily pull 60-100 fps in single player and 40-70 fps in multiplayer

FX-8350 @ normal 4.2 ghz handles the game flawlessly (4 cores out of 8 load up about 45-65%)
And Obliterates chips like Intel i5/i7 4xxxK series chips from the

I have the same system except a GTX780 (3gb) and i get high frames thats listed above.

Edited January 27, 2017 by =r4t=Sshadow14

[phuture]

Ok thanks for all the replies. I'm downloading ROF now to see how it runs on my system.....I should know by the end of Feb ;-)

Point taken on buying il2 BOS from the IL2 homepage. I suspect I'll be doing that soon.

Thanks again

PH

[Dakpilot]

Hope it does not take till end of Feb to download RoF 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Ribbon]

Again buy it here!

Overclocking your cpu will help! Game is cpu single core heavy, and since amd cpu's have poor single core performance overclocking it should increase fps, like in arma!

If you ever decide upgrade your pc ask here i'm sure lot of us could help, not only for il2 but for every game.

This year will be special for il2, new map and battlefront are coming, and career mode for whole game.

See you up there!

Edited January 28, 2017 by redribbon

[=TBAS=Sshadow14]

IL2 Uses 4 cores almost evenly (not single core anymore)

As for AMD single core perf. (please ignore the propaganda & corparate espionage toms hardware and pc magazine push they are both owned by intel and are swines/scum/filth
.
my FX8350 @ 4.2 ghz Destroys 4660K,4770K and so on last gen i7 have no hope in both single core and multi perf and with all that i run @ 45*C max cpu load while intel is pushing 65*C on the same cooler

Edited January 28, 2017 by =r4t=Sshadow14

[ShamrockOneFive]

IL2 Uses 4 cores almost evenly (not single core anymore)

 

As for AMD single core perf. (please ignore the propaganda & corparate espionage toms hardware and pc magazine push they are both owned by intel and are swines/scum/filth

.

my FX8350 @ 4.2 ghz Destroys 4660K,4770K and so on last gen i7 have no hope in both single core and multi perf and with all that i run @ 45*C max cpu load while intel is pushing 65*C on the same cooler

 

Sounds like a conspiracy theory to me

 

Who has a reliable and reputable benchmark? I can't find any where AMD isn't behind. I have high hopes that they'll pull a rabbit out of the hat for Ryzen but I've been disappointed before.

[Dakpilot]

IL2 Uses 4 cores almost evenly (not single core anymore)

 

As for AMD single core perf. (please ignore the propaganda & corparate espionage toms hardware and pc magazine push they are both owned by intel and are swines/scum/filth

.

my FX8350 @ 4.2 ghz Destroys 4660K,4770K and so on last gen i7 have no hope in both single core and multi perf and with all that i run @ 45*C max cpu load while intel is pushing 65*C on the same cooler

 

Il-2 BoS and RoF always have used multi core

 

Please stop spreading non factual info

 

here are benchmarks based on many thousands of actual users/customers not propaganda or company owned sites

 

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+FX-8350+Eight-Core&id=1780

 

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-4770K+%40+3.50GHz&id=1919

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[=TBAS=Sshadow14]

Il-2 BoS and RoF always have used multi core

 

Please stop spreading non factual info

 

here are benchmarks based on many thousands of actual users/customers not propaganda or company owned sites

 

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+FX-8350+Eight-Core&id=1780

 

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-4770K+%40+3.50GHz&id=1919

 

Cheers Dakpilot

i never said the game used single core

 

also replicate those tests yourself and see what you get.

in real world my FX-8350 smashes my brothers 4770K in Cinebench by about 45 seconds

 

Edited January 28, 2017 by =r4t=Sshadow14

[=TBAS=Sshadow14]

Sounds like a conspiracy theory to me

 

Who has a reliable and reputable benchmark? I can't find any where AMD isn't behind. I have high hopes that they'll pull a rabbit out of the hat for Ryzen but I've been disappointed before.

To be clear i never said they are better they are just not as bad as labelled.

 

[Dakpilot]

To be clear i never said they are better they are just not as bad as labelled.

 

 

It would now seem that way..... after you edited your post!....

 

heers Dakpilot

[ShamrockOneFive]

Going back on topic... the improvements announced in this week's Dev Diary should also help people with older systems keep up in AI heavy situations. My old Core i7 870 was struggling when things got too intense and even my new Core i5 6600 was having a bit of an issue at times but all of that has been smoothed out and that was before the latest round of AI updates.

 

So the game is running better for most people as well.

 

Still... after 5-6 years its always nice to try and build a new system. I'd way though... see what AMD has in store with Ryzen and then price out the best bang for the buck.

[Ribbon]

IL2 Uses 4 cores almost evenly (not single core anymore)

 

As for AMD single core perf. (please ignore the propaganda & corparate espionage toms hardware and pc magazine push they are both owned by intel and are swines/scum/filth

.

my FX8350 @ 4.2 ghz Destroys 4660K,4770K and so on last gen i7 have no hope in both single core and multi perf and with all that i run @ 45*C max cpu load while intel is pushing 65*C on the same cooler

Ok, try run arma3 with your cpu and you'll know difference between good and bad single core performance, it's not conspiracy.

I tested it my self, and thousands others who come play arma.

Google floating point speed and rounding is!

Amd has terrible sc performance. I'm not sure about new zen but with your cpu arma would be terrible experience.

I had amd cpu 25-30fps phenom 3.4ghz(same results ppl have with your cpu in sc games), switched to i7 70-120fps.

IL2 Uses 4 cores almost evenly (not single core anymore)

 

As for AMD single core perf. (please ignore the propaganda & corparate espionage toms hardware and pc magazine push they are both owned by intel and are swines/scum/filth

.

my FX8350 @ 4.2 ghz Destroys 4660K,4770K and so on last gen i7 have no hope in both single core and multi perf and with all that i run @ 45*C max cpu load while intel is pushing 65*C on the same cooler

Didn't know that, thanks for the info!

I thought it was single core heavy. Good for il2 then.

[=TBAS=Sshadow14]

hmm maybe one day i will try..

i know my 8350 runs FSX and PRepare 3d better than most i7's except the $2000 cpus

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

-snip-

 

my FX8350 @ 4.2 ghz Destroys 4660K,4770K and so on last gen i7 have no hope in both single core and multi perf

 

-snip-

 

When I see it, I'll believe it. Highly unlikely, though.

 

-snip-

 

i know my 8350 runs FSX and PRepare 3d better than most i7's except the $2000 cpus

 

I maintain - I'll believe it when I see it.

[Ribbon]

hmm maybe one day i will try..

 

i know my 8350 runs FSX and PRepare 3d better than most i7's except the $2000 cpus

how do you know, did you test it?

i did and amd is cheaper with reason, amd has terrible floating point speed and single core performance. Only i see ppl with AMD saying against intel without they test it, i did test both and all i can say intel is more expensive with reason, i7 6700k will  perform better than fx8350 in all games that is fact, no matter are they multi or single core heavy. As i said google what is floating point speed and rounding and how it affects gaming. Don't get me wrong i wish AMD have equaly good cpu's it would be better for my pocket

[ShamrockOneFive]

Even if you're more of an Intel CPU fan, one would hope that AMD's new architecture puts some serious pressure on Intel in multiple categories (performance, per watt, etc.). We all benefit if the two of them are competing. Intel was pushing some lazy updates for a while there and AMD was the king with the AMD Athlon XP and Athlon 64. Those were great! I hope they can do a little bit of that again.

[71st_AH_Mastiff]

 Larger Picture:

Over the next few years we plan to meet four major goals with our engine, technology and products.

1. Build the technology and features the community wants to see in our products and try to re-capture some of the magic that made the original Sturmovik so much fun. We call it the “Spirit of ‘46”.
2. Continue to use the Eastern Front as the proving ground for our engine, technology and game design for a little while longer. By making Kuban next, we will leave the Eastern Front a well-appointed theater that fans of the Eastern Front can enjoy it for a long time.
3. Move to the Pacific Theater and build a first-class simulation of Carrier Warfare which dominated that theater.
4. Develop features, methods and opportunities to increase community involvement in the creation of interesting content and increasing social interactions between players to build a stronger community.

If our plan is successful, our engine and product line will evolve into one of the biggest and best combat sim series ever.

Our long-term vision includes the following battles, but not necessarily in this order and final selection is not concrete.

Battle of Kuban
Battle of Midway
Battle of Okinawa
Battle of ??????

Additional improvements and features are planned for later products. We simply could not fit all possible features, content and changes into one product. And some features and changes have to come before we can build others. It is necessary to take a methodical, responsible approach to how we develop the engine and product further to ensure long-term success. No one wants us to release an unfinished or broken product. To do so would be the end of our team.

We have conducted much internal and external research on where we should go next and thought about the future vison of what you, the combat flight-simmer, wants us to make. It’s not easy to balance the wants and needs of the entire yet diverse combat-sim community with our budgets, deadlines and available resources. However, Battle of Kuban along with its new tech and features is a strong, aggressive step in the direction the community has requested we go. Please remember, the original Sturmovik as well as our earlier title Rise of Flight, was not built in a day, but over several years. However, with your continued help and encouragement we can make this vision a reality and keep the Spirit of ’46 alive!

You can discuss this announcement in this thread and read further comments from Jason that address this plan in even more detail.

See you in the skies and thank you for your continued enthusiasm and support!

The IL-2 Sturmovik Team

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/25072-announcing-battle-kuban-and-development-plan/

[Ribbon]

Even if you're more of an Intel CPU fan, one would hope that AMD's new architecture puts some serious pressure on Intel in multiple categories (performance, per watt, etc.). We all benefit if the two of them are competing. Intel was pushing some lazy updates for a while there and AMD was the king with the AMD Athlon XP and Athlon 64. Those were great! I hope they can do a little bit of that again.

i not intel fan, just recently moved from amd(cpu and gpu). Becouse of Arma3, otherwise i wouldn't change cpu. yeah like i said before i wish AMD is equal competitor it would be better for my pocket.

[ShamrockOneFive]

i not intel fan, just recently moved from amd(cpu and gpu). Becouse of Arma3, otherwise i wouldn't change cpu. yeah like i said before i wish AMD is equal competitor it would be better for my pocket.

 

That's what I'm saying