Question about cores and processor speed for running il2

[von_Michelstamm]

Update: up and running on the "more cores but lower mhz machine."
There's a big improvement. I'm now flying on ultra, maxxed AA, high quality clouds, bigger view distance, and SSAO, and getting the same frame rate as i had with lesser settings. And that's with mods like infinite smoke and dynamic explosions on.
Monitor is still 1920x1200.

Perhaps strangest, enemy planes seem to die faster now. Even in QMB! Before they just annoyingly sponged up minengeschoss shells, now a few bursts break them up. Haven't figured that one out yet. I also feel I have to lead a bit more, which i don't get either.

Edited August 1, 2019 by von_Michelstamm

[Yo-Yo_Kirby]

Sorry to necro post in this thread, but this thread fails to highlight throttling issues with the MacBook Pro while having significant discussion relating to it. I have a maxed-out 16-inch MacBook Pro with the i9-9980HK, 64GB of DDR4 RAM, and Radeon Pro 5600M. It has a significantly better cooling system than the 15-inch model. My 6-core 15-inch model from 2018 never got to have good sustained performance in IL-2 because it throttled way too much. Temper your expectations if you do run at the above settings.
 

I ran 4x MSAA and high clouds, while SSAO and other right-side options were off aside from Vsync and Sharpening. My framerate tanks from 60 to 40 at low altitude over the autumn Kuban map in one of the worst case throttling scenarios with 8 fighters in a furball. CPU throttled down to 1.5GHz at 70 degrees Celsius due to VRMs overheating. GPU throttled from 1000-1150MHz down to 600 to 650MHz. I highly recommend to turn off anti-aliasing to significantly improve performance along with using ReShade to get HDR, colorfulness/vibrance and other options with less performance loss (if you are mainly doing single player and want these options) as the ReShade thread suggests. No AA is also the second best option for spotting according to that thread's OP. Doing these save the ReShade stuff, I've been able to get a few minutes of CPU turbo boost and GPU not getting pegged too much in preliminart tests. Disable grass as well. Possibly reduce shadows, but ultra shadows doesn't hurt my performance a lot. This was also done with loading the same Quick Mission scenario repeatedly, which repeatedly pegs CPU with turbo boost. With moderate ambient temperatures and a cold start configuration, you should be able to achieve good sustained performance on the 16-inch model. Modifying the VRMs with thermal pads like some other users have already done can help even further.

 

I'm leaving this advice out for the few >$3000 MacBook users who may end up playing IL-2 GB. In the future, I am going to start a thread about the most optimized settings for IL-2 on the MacBook Pro and other thin, light, powerful laptops that give the best balance of graphics and performance.

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

48 minutes ago, Yo-Yo_Kirby said:

this thread fails to highlight throttling issues with the MacBook Pro while having significant discussion relating to it.

 

Are you sure?

 

On 6/11/2019 at 1:00 PM, Mitthrawnuruodo said:

If you want good graphics performance, don’t get a MacBook.

 

On 6/11/2019 at 1:00 PM, Mitthrawnuruodo said:

base clocks are lowered to fit within a certain power/cooling requirement bracket. That doesn’t matter much, as neither base nor boost clocks accurately represent the speed that you’ll actually get during typical usage.

[Yo-Yo_Kirby]

59 minutes ago, Mitthrawnuruodo said:

If you want good graphics performance, don’t get a MacBook.

Most Intel-based Macs definitely don't. The Radeon Pro 5600M is much more of an exception than a norm. It may be capable of running close to native resolution with compromises, but I prefer to preserve my framerate.

 

1 hour ago, Mitthrawnuruodo said:

base clocks are lowered to fit within a certain power/cooling requirement bracket. That doesn’t matter much, as neither base nor boost clocks accurately represent the speed that you’ll actually get during typical usage.

I agree with this. These clocks can greatly fluctuate. However, I don't see too much content about sustained performance tests of high-end Intel MacBooks. That's super important in a flight sim like this. And OP's example is lacking in details about sustained performance with such graphics settings after approximately x amount of minutes. Based on my experience with my previous MacBook, I don't think its overall performance is represented very well here.

[Jaws2002]

A Macbook for gaming...

 

 

 

 

[VilsonFarias]

I'm also running on a 16" MacBook Pro (i9 / 32Gb / ATI 5500M 8Gb). It keeps fps between 45-60 at 1080 with most of settings from med to max. It could be better but I can't complain.

 

But if it wasn't for working reasons I'd buy a gamer PC instead of a MacBook Pro. You can easily get more for less.

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

On 2/18/2021 at 6:05 PM, VilsonFarias said:

I'm also running on a 16" MacBook Pro (i9 / 32Gb / ATI 5500M 8Gb). It keeps fps between 45-60 at 1080 with most of settings from med to max. It could be better but I can't complain.

 

But if it wasn't for working reasons I'd buy a gamer PC instead of a MacBook Pro. You can easily get more for less.

Could just get a razer blade ?