Jump to content
chiliwili69

Measuring rig performance: Common Baseline (for IL-2 v3.010)

Recommended Posts

Yes, it's cool the I9. 

I test the BF5 with raytracing. That just looks awesome. All maximal, dx12, 120 Hz Monitor and to 99% 120FPS. 👍

Since then you can see the advantage of the 2080ti.

 

 

2018-12-06 18:16:27 - bfv
Frames: 14369 - Time: 120000ms - Avg: 119.742 - Min: 116 - Max: 122

 

@chiliwili69

 

My DDR4 RAM has 3265 MHz

 

 

Edited by I./JG68_Sperber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/6/2018 at 11:38 PM, Virus* said:

2018-12-06 23:05:15 - Il-2
Frames: 10551 - Time: 120000ms - Avg: 87.925 - Min: 44 - Max: 91

Thank you Virus for reporting your latest test in v3.008, that´s great that your initial problem (unknown) disappear magically.

Now you can see that your performance is aligned with the expected one. In the doors of the Nirvana!

 

Thank you also for the screenshoots of SteamVR for SS.With this I have now calculated the ratios for the Lenovo (all WMR except Odyssey) should run the same and updated the table in the link:

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/36160-supersampling-ratios-rift-vs-vivepro-vs-odyssey-wmr/

 

With this  we know that WMR should run the test with 128% SS in SteamVR to have the same load to the GPU.

 

 

On 12/6/2018 at 11:48 PM, I./JG68_Sperber said:

No my test.

 

It means you run the test with the 3DMigoto mod. It is interesting.

I didn´t include that in the instructions just to compara performance with the standard IL-2 VR, otherwise it could be too complex to manage the tests and versions.

It is surprising that you have even better performance with the mod. I touhgt it had a very small penalty in the past, but now it seems that it has even a very small gain.

In any case, I will mantain your record but indicate that you used the 3DMigoto mod.

Edited by chiliwili69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/9/2018 at 9:16 AM, [AoA]Pablo said:

Hi guys!

I have a problem with Fraps and IL2... If i run Fraps the Sim don´t start anymore... There is a solution for that?

Sorry my english...

 

 

Looks like this happens because of reshade. Try moving dxgi.* files from game folder while running benchmarks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Monitor only tests for 3.008

3770k 4.6 GHz, 16GB RAM 2400 11-13-14-32, GTX1080ti

Fullscreen enabled (otherwise 20 avg FPS drop)

 

22265 121 289 185,542
22290 122 299 185,75
22284 122 304 185,7
22279,67 121,6667 297,3333 185,664

 

I have restarted game 5 times until I get consistent FPS, was 155-168, and now 185. Did not change anything in settings, just restarted. So wierd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here with 3DMigoto Mod and 200% SS , before i have 128%....

5,05 GHz CPU and GTX with Boost 1672 MHz and Ram 7000 MHz

 

2018-12-08 14:29:52 - Il-2
Frames: 10523 - Time: 120000ms - Avg: 87.692 - Min: 63 - Max: 90

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IL-2 v3.008

 

2018-12-09 12:23:48 - Il-2
Frames: 5286 - Time: 120000ms - Avg: 44.050 - Min: 32 - Max: 47

 

CPU Mark: 9829

Single Thread: 2249

 

1.5x Steam VR SS

 

DRAM Frequency: 1332.6hz, 32GB, G.Skill DDR3

 

VR Occulus Rift

 

CPU: Intel i7-4770k @3.5Ghz

 

GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 1080 Ti FE 

ASUS Z87-PRO LGA 1150 Intel Z87

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Graphics settings are currently High, 1024x768

 

Well, I think I need to run the whole test over again, in the proper order. Running CPU Mark immediately after exiting Il-2 nets me a 9005 CPUMark and a 2062 single thread, and I was having some odd computer behaviours after the original Il-2 run. For whatever reason, the keyboard didn't really want to process using Shift to capitalize letters. I recently moved a bunch of my devices around, so I'm wondering if the keyboard and rift sensors are having conflicts in the USB. May want to redistribute them to different input spaces. (Motherboard has 6x USB 3.0, on the board, and I've got a 4x USB 3.0 card, and a 4x 2.0 USB card in there. For extra fun, my net connection is through a USB wifi jack (would need to run Cat5 through the attic to hardwire it. Might still, but hasn't been an issue until now.) so it's a bit of a madhouse in there. )

 

It would make sense that ASW is still on; while I believe I followed the commands to turn it off, I didn't see any system response, so it may not have actually done anything.

 

All that said, I am noticing that my single thread performance is about 2/3 of the other good performers, so I'm suspecting that may be my real bottleneck here. I wonder what sort of things could be done to ensure Il-2 was running on its own dedicated CPU core?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/8/2018 at 2:01 PM, TUS_Samuel said:

Monitor only tests for 3.008

 

Thank you Samuel for reporting your test in monitor. This will help also monitor only users to compare performance.

Please, let us know your STMark at 4.6 Ghz.

On 12/8/2018 at 2:38 PM, I./JG68_Sperber said:

Here with 3DMigoto Mod and 200% SS , before i have 128%....

5,05 GHz CPU and GTX with Boost 1672 MHz and Ram 7000 MHz

 

2018-12-08 14:29:52 - Il-2
Frames: 10523 - Time: 120000ms - Avg: 87.692 - Min: 63 - Max: 90

 

Thanks, I have uploaded that mark in the SS tab.

Based in previous SS test we did with older versions you could most likely maintain that performance also with 300% SS.

13 hours ago, Voyager said:

2018-12-09 12:23:48 - Il-2
Frames: 5286 - Time: 120000ms - Avg: 44.050 - Min: 32 - Max: 47

 

CPU Mark: 9829

Single Thread: 2249

 

Thank you Voyager for reporting your performance.

 

Your STMark (2249) is as expected for 3.5GHz. You will probably running with Turbo ( so freq is in range 3.5 to 3.9).

 

 

With that STMArk (2249) your expected performance (based in the correlations with so few samples) is 45fps. So nothing really wrong here with your PC. Just a low STMark.

 

If you want to increase performance you will need to overclock your 4770K. With a right CPU cooler is not too complex (I was doing that as a novice :happy:

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/29881-overclocking-a-4790k-for-better-bos-performance/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey folks, just wanted to chime in with some 3.008 things I have noticed:

  • GPU usage is significantly increased. My 2080 now runs at 98% on Chili's bomber test track, depending on AA/supersample settings. I think this is a good thing.
  • CPU usage is optimized. Previously we were seeing CPU frame times above 11ms on the test track, now I see about 6-7ms with some fluctuation.
  • IL2 appears to be using no/less AVX instructions. My CPU is more likely to run at full speed rather than my AVX "-1" or "-2" setting. I am actually reducing my overclock, re-enabling hyper threading, and reducing voltage and not seeing a performance hit on IL2 yet.

I still think you need a good CPU for this game, but this patch has helped a lot. People with very good GPUs can now likely run the game on Ultra in VR if they wish, whereas previously that would give you 45 FPS a lot of the time. So @dburne and anyone else with an RTX 2080ti should be pretty happy with this patch!

 

My current settings for "mostly 90 fps" are 8086K @ 5.0ghz, hyper threading on, AVX -2, DDR4-3200 @ 3333 CAS 16, RTX 2080, High settings, High shadows, 100km draw distance, Medium mirrors, 4x landscape distance, sharp landscape filter, 4xAA, sharpen on, Oculus Tray Tool 1.1 pixel density (=SteamVR 120%), Open Composite replacement for SteamVR and 3D Migoto mod for super zoom and cloud fix.

 

Works great, very happy. Good job devs!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Alonzo said:

CPU usage is optimized. Previously we were seeing CPU frame times above 11ms on the test track, now I see about 6-7ms with some fluctuation.

 

Yes, this explains the performance increase we have seen all in our machines. They have improved it drastically. The curious thing is that they didn´t announce explicitly as a good thing for VR users. I don´t know exactly how they have achieved that (is it  just the new tree rendering?). Anyhow is very well welcome.

 

It will hepl if you could run the test with the test settings.(even if you run it with the mod)

 

Since we are hitting near 90fps, I was also thinking to raise the bar in the settings of the VR test. Measuring numbers close to 90 fps will tell very little in terms of comparing performance of tweaks or hardware. Of course, this will invalidate previous results, but the point is to have a measuring tool to detect bottlenecks and impact of settings/hardware.

Perhaps raising shadows from Med to High, raising clouds from Med to High, and maybe include mirrors. So, something closer to what most of us use.

 

I would also like to include a tool like fpsVR  ( it costs 3€) or something free to measure frametimes of CPU/GPU and fps. The OTT is only valid for Rift, but I would like something valid for all VR devices. Does anybody know a free tool to use instead of Fraps?

 

 

11 hours ago, Alonzo said:

GPU usage is significantly increased. My 2080 now runs at 98% on Chili's bomber test track, depending on AA/supersample settings. I think this is a good thing

 

Yes, it is a good thing in terms we use GPU more effectively and unload CPU.

But this worries me now when thinking about future VR devices (Pimax 5K), would I need then a Titan RTX???:unsure:

Hopefully I will know this soon...

Edited by chiliwili69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

Yes, it is a good thing in terms we use GPU more effectively and unload CPU.

But this worries me now when thinking about future VR devices (Pimax 5K), would I need then a Titan RTX???:unsure:

Hopefully I will know this soon...

 

Check Sweviver video where he tests the Pimax on IL2 BoX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, E69_Qpassa said:

heck Sweviver video where he tests the Pimax on IL2 BoX

 

Yes, I think you refer to this one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFSS8J9oh3A

 

I saw first day it was released two months ago. But he used a previous version of IL-2, still when CPU was the bottleneck and GPU was not loaded.

With v3.008 things are very different

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I look forward to hearing from normal every day users once they get their headsets.

I don't put too much stock in these "official reviewers".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, unfortunately I'm only going to listen to an IL2 review from someone who actually regularly plays the game, and I'd probably put more faith in what a competitive multiplayer pilot was saying also (I'm a wannabe competitive multiplayer pilot, don't listen to me....)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/11/2018 at 6:39 PM, Alonzo said:

GPU usage is significantly increased. My 2080 now runs at 98% on Chili's bomber test track, depending on AA/supersample settings. I think this is a good thing.


Haven't had a chance to check yet but this would explain why I fell ~10 fps behind chili. Our rigs are similar in cpu and have been performing evenly til lately, despite him running a 1080ti and me a 1070. I should be pegged at 100% gpu load then, will verify as soon as I can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Benchmark results for my 8086K @ 5.0ghz, AVX -2, ring ratio 46, DDR4-3200 overclocked to 3333 CAS-16, EVGA RTX 2080 XC Ultra (stock, so a small out of the box overclock). Note that I'm using OTT Pixel Density 1.2, not 1.22, so I am slightly under the pixel count goal (144% instead of 150%)

  • FPS results: 88.858, 88.775, 88.692
  • Peak GPU usage: ~75%
  • CPU passmark: 2991 single threaded

I increased the settings from the previous 'benchmark' standard settings: Shadows High, Mirrors Simple, Landscape 4x, Clouds High (I would consider these to be close to optimal for multiplayer, especially mirrors and clouds). I still got 88.6 FPS but my GPU usage went up to a peak of about 95%.

 

I tried again, setting everything to maximum within the game (including SSAO and HDR just for fun) and keeping the 1.2 pixel density. I got 70 fps average (not bad!).

 

The new patch has clearly fixed the CPU usage issues. Graphics cards can now be used 100% even without doing silly things like setting very high supersample. An interesting piece of research would be "what CPU / GPU combination do I need to run Balanced/High/Ultra settings on VR?" and "what is the minimum CPU to *not* bottleneck a 1080ti?" and stuff like that.

 

One statement that I believe I can make from my own rig is that "a 6-core Coffee Lake (or later) CPU running at around 4.8-5.0ghz will *not* bottleneck any current generation GPU" and "a 1080ti-class card (~RTX 2080) can now run the game in VR on High settings with some settings to Ultra".

 

So some advice I would give:

  • If you are building a new rig for VR, get an 8600K, 8700K, 9600K or 9700K with a good cooling solution, and overclock it to 4.8ghz+. With patch 3.008 you don't absolutely need a CPU this fast but we don't know how future patches will affect the game. If you are on a very tight budget, an 8350K with a good overclock + GTX 1080 might also be fine, but I would be wary of a 4-core chip.
  • GPU power now scales well with this game. You can get a good VR experience with a GTX 1080 (=RTX 2070) card, and as you spend more money on the card you can crank your graphics settings more and more. GTX 1080ti (=RTX 2080) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/10/2018 at 3:25 PM, chiliwili69 said:

Please, let us know your STMark at 4.6 Ghz.

2548 @4.6GHz

Not as good as @5.1GHz but more stable and cold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/13/2018 at 3:03 PM, Alonzo said:
  • FPS results: 88.858, 88.775, 88.692
  • Peak GPU usage: ~75%

Thanks. That´s very revealing results. We clearly see now that more graphics load has been shifted from CPU to GPU, balancing better the typical CPU-GPU combination.

Now the GPU plays a more important role than before. So supersampling has to be used wisely.

We also see that a 8086K deliver even almost same (or small bit better) results than the 9th gen star: the 9900K.

Anyone with a 8600K, 9600K, 8350K or 8700K is very well welcome to run the test.

 

Since we obtain results very close to 90fps, we clearly need to raise the bar in the graphics settings for the test. Any comment about it is welcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

Since we obtain results very close to 90fps, we clearly need to raise the bar in the graphics settings for the test. Any comment about it is welcome.

 

I think it depends what we're trying to test or show. Clearly a benchmark that is capped at 90 does not help differentiate computers that can get close to (or hit) 90. A benchmark where even the best machines are at (say) 80 is good for a benchmark but might dissuade people who are on the low end.

 

Aside from the benchmark, I think it would be helpful to try to find people with particular kinds of computers and see how they do, then make a guideline. I'm using fake CPUs but something like:

  • For VR we recommend a minimum of Balanced settings with Medium shadows, 2xAA and 120% supersample. For this you will need an Intel XYZ or Ryzen ABC (or better, and single-thread performance matters most) coupled with an NVidia 1234ti (or better).
  • For VR on High settings with High shadows, 4x AA and 150% supersample we recommend X, Y, Z.
  • For VR on Ultra settings you will need A, B, C.

I'm also very interested to hear from some of the people who previously complained that VR was terrible because they couldn't hit a constant 90 fps and anything less than that was a poor experience for them. With the current patch and a reasonable computer, you can absolutely hit 90 fps 95% of the time by just using Balanced settings and not too much supersample.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still regulary see CPU frametimes close to or above 11ms that cause my FPS to drop. In heavy MP on Kuban or over Stalingrad FPS will drop as far as 45fps.

 

The rig i play with is a i7 4790k@4,4GHZ all cores (2639 CPU Mark Singlethread), GTX 1080, 32 GB DDR3 1600 RAM

 

Settings are SS 1.1, High Preset, 4xAA, 70km, distant landscape x4, sharpen, 4k textures, clouds HIGH,Shadows HIGH.

 

Interestingly BALANCED gave less stable framerates than high preset and shadow LOW or HIGH doesn't seem to make a difference and also x2 AA or x4 AA seem to be no problem for the GTX 1080 at all at that relative low SS of 1.1.

 

I wonder if in my case the slow DDR3 is the bottleneck and think about getting some 2133MHZ or 2400MHZ modules.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By having a higher Overcloking, for example 4.8 you could gain about +6fps on average.

Also, having a faster RAM (2400 at least) could also give you some more fps, about +6fps (or perhaps more).

 

Heavy Kuban or stalingrade are the most demanding scenarios, my fps also go in the 50-60fps depending on scene.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just run the test with version 3.009 and it still works OK.

 

Frames: 9481 - Time: 120000ms - Avg: 79.008 - Min: 43 - Max: 91

 

This is about 5 fps less than in the previous version  :(

I have also experimenting with three items in the graphics settings:

 

- Distant Landscape Detail (DLD): From x2 to x3

- Shadows: From Medium to High

- Clouds: From Medium to High

 

In the below picture (4K image) you will see 5 runs of test with MSI afterburner trends:

 

First two runs with the test settings plus DLDx3 plus High Shadows plus High Clouds

Third run is with the test settings plus High Shadows plus High Clouds

Fourth run is with the test settings plus High Clouds

Third run is with the test settings 

 

The Avg fps is quite similar, but the surprising thing is that the lowest fps is just with test settings!

 

The interesting thing I want to show is the load of the GPU in the 3rd, 4th and 5th run. It is around 90%, 80% and 72% respectively.

 

It is clear that from the v 3.008 the rendering techniques are loading more the GPU, and it some circumstances it reach 100%, being then the bottleneck of the system.

It is also nice to see how the load of the GPU go to 50-40% load when the CPU is the clear bottleneck (for example when hitting the first and second bomber)

 

With the new Pimax5K I will need to see carefully what settings should I give up and what to mantain, since the load of GPU will be higher due to the higher resolution.

 

407913942_GPUload.thumb.png.264ed8550d884c071896145faa9a1ecb.png

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry were is the link of the test mission you using. Can not find it on your topic start. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/29/2018 at 2:16 PM, Dutch2 said:

Can not find it on your topic start. 

 

The link is there, just below the Fraps picture

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Case Chieftec/Antec DG-01BD-U

Motherboard
Asus P8P67 RVO
I7 2600k Sandy Bridge @4285Mhz 
Kingston HyperX Fury DDR3 1600 2x8gb 8 8 8 24 31
Asus RTX 2070 Turbo

Samsung SSD 850pro 256gb
INTEL X25m g2 SSD 160gb  (one of the first! )
HD 500gb

 

ram is at 1631,8

 

VR is a Samsung Odissey +

 

CPU MARK 10178

CPU single threaded 2228

 

 


2019-01-03 21:23:06 - Il-2
Frames: 5325 - Time: 120000ms - Avg: 44.375 - Min: 34 - Max: 46

 

 

Toughts?

Wonder if it's worth upgrading the CPU.... The sandybridge is old but still rocking ;)

(in the meantime i will try to watercool it and squeeze more MHZ out of it)

i have low FPS in DCS but good FPS with everything else...

Edited by EAF51_Jimmi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, EAF51_Jimmi said:

Toughts?

Wonder if it's worth upgrading the CPU

 

Thank you for giving your results for this very new GPU (2070) and very old (2600K, but still rocking!) combination.

 

You could try to squeeze more the overclock (Hiromachi was able to reach 5.0 GHz, look at monitor 2.0 tab).

You could also try to upgrade the memory (2x4Gb at 2400 or 2600), but not sure about if the upgrade will be worth.

 

Otherwise you have to do a major upgrade (Mobo, CPU, OS).

 

BTW, you forgot to tell me what headset you use.

20 minutes ago, chiliwili69 said:

You could also try to upgrade the memory (2x4Gb at 2400 or 2600), but not sure about if the upgrade will be worth.

 

For memory don´t go to brand new. Second hand from trusted users could be an option in your case.

This is the DDR3 memory I use, there multiple choices from ebay:

https://www.ebay.com/p/Corsair-Dominator-Platinum-8gb-Ddr3-2933-Kit-Cl12/12009468474

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys/Chili,

 

Firstly, chili, thank you for all of your hard work in compiling all of this data!

 

With the improvements in version 3.008/9 - can you give me some suggestions for in-game settings for an 8600K/1080Ti combo as it seems we may now be able to push the GPU a little harder?

OTT SS / Overall graphics / Clouds / Shadows / Distance, etc.?

I'd like something fairly stable at 90, but I'm not one who suffers badly when it drops a bit below that, so I'm happy at anything above 45, really (as long as it's only sometimes, not constant 45!!)

I also mostly play single-player - scripted campaigns and career.

 

Thanks all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, wheeliemonsta said:

can you give me some suggestions for in-game settings for an 8600K/1080Ti

It will depend on the overclocking you are able to apply to your 8600K.  Having that CPU it is almost a must to do some overclocking if you use it for IL-2 VR.

It will also depend on the headset you use.

 

Assuming you reach 5.0 GHz with a good cooler (which according to silicon lottery 87% of the CPU delidded are able to achieve) and using the Oculus Rift, then you can use same settings than the test settings but with High shadows and /or High clouds.

 

If I had plenty of time I would identify how every parameter affects performance, but since some game engine changes were announced I prefer to wait for them.

 

You can also use the 3DMigoto mod (I still don´t use it) if you want to improve zoom and solve the clouds issue.

There are also recommended settings for best spotting and ID from Fenris pinned in this VR section.

 

You can also can contribute with testing your PC. We have not data from 8600K in this test.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chiliwili69 said:

It will depend on the overclocking you are able to apply to your 8600K.  Having that CPU it is almost a must to do some overclocking if you use it for IL-2 VR.

It will also depend on the headset you use.

 

Assuming you reach 5.0 GHz with a good cooler (which according to silicon lottery 87% of the CPU delidded are able to achieve) and using the Oculus Rift, then you can use same settings than the test settings but with High shadows and /or High clouds.

 

If I had plenty of time I would identify how every parameter affects performance, but since some game engine changes were announced I prefer to wait for them.

 

You can also use the 3DMigoto mod (I still don´t use it) if you want to improve zoom and solve the clouds issue.

There are also recommended settings for best spotting and ID from Fenris pinned in this VR section.

 

You can also can contribute with testing your PC. We have not data from 8600K in this test.

 

Thanks Chili.

 

I'll try with the settings in the thread. I do use the 3Dmigoto mod for the cloud fix and zoom (and yes, Oculus)

I've managed to get the 8600K up to around 4.7 stable with decent (but not fantastic) air cooling but I want it to last, so not pushing it too hard!

 

Once I get some decent time, I'll run the test for you guys on my rig. (I did it back on version 2.012 with a 3gb GTX1060 on the Balapan track but things have changed a lot since then!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/30/2018 at 10:09 PM, chiliwili69 said:

 

The link is there, just below the Fraps picture

 

 

I see but this is an BoK mission anything from BoM or BoS to try. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

 

Thank you for giving your results for this very new GPU (2070) and very old (2600K, but still rocking!) combination.

 

You could try to squeeze more the overclock (Hiromachi was able to reach 5.0 GHz, look at monitor 2.0 tab).

You could also try to upgrade the memory (2x4Gb at 2400 or 2600), but not sure about if the upgrade will be worth.

 

Otherwise you have to do a major upgrade (Mobo, CPU, OS).

 

BTW, you forgot to tell me what headset you use.

 

For memory don´t go to brand new. Second hand from trusted users could be an option in your case.

This is the DDR3 memory I use, there multiple choices from ebay:

https://www.ebay.com/p/Corsair-Dominator-Platinum-8gb-Ddr3-2933-Kit-Cl12/12009468474

 

 

Hi i’m using a Samsung Odissey +

edited the post!

 

ty for making this thread and helping us all understan better how the hardware affect our gaming experience!

 

and thank’s for your suggestion!

i think I’ll  stick to the plan and watercool the cpu and try to go for 5.0 GHz

then may be i’ll upgrade all my rig, maybe with  a ryzen 3 cpu...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Dutch2 said:

I see but this is an BoK mission anything from BoM or BoS to try. 

 

Even if you didn´t get BOK you are able to flight a track record recorded with BOK. Try it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

forgot to state: the rtx 2070 i used for the benchmark was overclocked trough OC scanner to 1785Mhz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back into IL-2 after a while off. Retested on 3.009

 

IL-2: v3.009

CPU: 8600K OC @ 5.0 GHz

mobo: ASRock Z370 Taichi

RAM: 16 GB @ 3200.2 MHz 

GPU: GTX 1080

Oculus Rift CV1

 

FRAPS results: 

Frames: 9855 - Time: 120000ms - Avg: 82.125 - Min: 52 - Max: 91

 

Passmark Results:

CPU Mark: 15287

CPU Single Threaded: 3021

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, KIWIvolshebnik said:

Retested on 3.009

thanks for running the test.

Your 8600K is a solid rock CPU!

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

×