Hardware Spec to run SF series

[getpeter]

Hi folks,

 

Just curious to know, any one of you has ever run SF series Wo* with Unlimited graphics settings with smooth frame rates up to 60 and beyond? If so, what is the spec of your rig? Appreciate if you would share your experience here coz I want to do a major upgrade from my Q6600 + 560 Ti + OCZ SSD system, thanks in advance!

[+MigBuster]

The only way I can get good rates with series 1 which uses a single core only is to use the HDR mod - thats on an intel i7/6GB RAM/Ati HD5770.

 

To improve on that you could get a High end GFX card - but cant guarantee Series 1 would actually be smooth.

 

IMO - Ditch series 1 and go with SF2 which is actually programmed for multi core, win 7 and DX10 to get better performance out of modern systems.

Edited September 14, 2011 by MigBuster

[getpeter]

What is holding me back to get SF2 is the number of add-ons are far less than those available for SF1. Another thing is that sale only from Thirdwire website, I wish it would be available from Amazon for instance.

 

Back to my original question, my rig is an aging Q6600 but with a modern card GTX 560 Ti. Also, there is a 60GB SSD in my system. Still with all the default installation settings, graphics being set to High, I can only get 34~36 FPS in FE1.

 

Out of sheer coincidence, I discovered modifying the High Details Option in FlightEngine.INI mainly the horizon distance parameter that will give a boost to the frame rate. But still, I have to sacrifice game experience for frame rates.

 

Are there a demo of SF2 available so that I can try it out before I buy?

[Gunrunner]

So, let me get this straight...

 

You're ready to shell out hundreds of dollars worth of hardware to get a few more FPS when it's already good enough, but you don't want to pay 30 dollars to get the better game...

 

And you do realize that SF1 mods are easily ported to SF2, provided you pull your fingers out of your backside, right ?

 

Besides, almost no one's releasing for SF1 anymore and most SF2 releases are updated, upgraded and full packs rather than bits and pieces as it was for SF1, so instead of having to get the plane, the updated FM, the updated cockpit, the skins, the variants... you get everything in one package without having to ponder whether this release has the latest FM, or whether to take the FM from that one but the avionics from this one.

[+Stary]

simple, get the SF2

[+Dave]

Um no brainer here...get SF2......don't be a yutz and shell out big dough for the older series game.....

[getpeter]

Coul d u do me a favour to supply me with a jet flying on the deck in Sf2 i want to see if it has that sense of speed before I purchase it

[Lexx_Luthor]

pete, SF2 is great, although SF1 will also benefit from a major upgrade. I have both now, and SF1 is much better. Go Sandy Bridge. I just did (i5-2500k).

 

--

 

MiG::

IMO - Ditch series 1 and go with SF2 which is actually programmed for multi core, win 7 and DX10 to get better performance out of modern systems.

As for multi~core, actually, we have never confirmed this. We have yet to test the multi~core in various game conditions. I'd love it if TK programmed the game so additional AI units, air and surface, will be dispersed to more and more cores, without limit, as we add more AI to our missions. When I get time to get back into SF I hope to run tests on AI unit quantities and see what happens with the cores in Win~7 task manager. I have seen that SF-1 uses only 1 core.

 

Dave::

Um no brainer here...get SF2......don't be a yutz and shell out big dough for the older series game.....

 

lol one of the reasons I went Sandy Bridge is for single core performance, in SF1 but also in other old software I run. Mind you, this is before streakeagle poasted that TK's recent update opened up horizon distance again for us, which is important for me. I have not had time to get back into SF 1 or 2 to confirm streak's poast, and then I need to thank TK....BIG TIME.

[getpeter]

pete, SF2 is great, although SF1 will also benefit from a major upgrade. I have both now, and SF1 is much better. Go Sandy Bridge. I just did (i5-2500k).

Good to have someone to confirm this. Thanks!

--

 

MiG::

As for multi~core, actually, we have never confirmed this. We have yet to test the multi~core in various game conditions. I'd love it if TK programmed the game so additional AI units, air and surface, will be dispersed to more and more cores, without limit, as we add more AI to our missions. When I get time to get back into SF I hope to run tests on AI unit quantities and see what happens with the cores in Win~7 task manager. I have seen that SF-1 uses only 1 core.

 

Dave::

 

lol one of the reasons I went Sandy Bridge is for single core performance, in SF1 but also in other old software I run. Mind you, this is before streakeagle poasted that TK's recent update opened up horizon distance again for us, which is important for me. I have not had time to get back into SF 1 or 2 to confirm streak's poast, and then I need to thank TK....BIG TIME.

I use coretemp to keep track of my CPU temperature. I also use dual monitor and run SF in windowed mode. It's an observation that only core 0 is constantly loaded whereas others are almost idle.

 

I have solved the frame rate issue. One day I was playing FE, and thought such beautiful terrain, what if a Sabre runs in the theatre...then I cut and paste the add-on Sabre to the aircraft folder. It just runs fast!

I'll capture the video to you later tonight or tomorrow.

Then I found out the Flightengine.ini. Having said that, one of the drawback, slight drawback, is that you lose some "far" distance sight having the horizon distance cut off. Also the whole scenery from certain altitude looks misty. Apart from that, everything is fine fine and fine!

[+Fubar512]

Coul d u do me a favour to supply me with a jet flying on the deck in Sf2 i want to see if it has that sense of speed before I purchase it

 

That depends on terrain or shader density. This is from SF2 (Windows 7 under DX10), with a custom water shader and water normal map.

 

water.wmv

[Lexx_Luthor]

Yep, reducing horizon distance manually helps fps. That happens automatically when you select lower settings.

 

There are some tricks you can do manually in Flightengine that go outside the binned automatic settings.

 

Do you use the HDR mod in SF1. It almost doubles frames for me. Its not needed in the SF2.

 

The major trick I use, in any SF, is tile size. I run 5km tile sizes in my terrain, while stock is 2km. But, I make my own terrains with Terrain Editor. Double the tile size, and you can double the horizon distance in game. I can get away with large tiles because I am working on a fictional strategic campaign focusing on high altitude, 1950s style. When you fly 50,000 feet, the apparent tile size that you see (for my 5km tiles), and terrain detail, is the same size and detail as the stock 2km tiles give when you fly at 20,000 feet...

 

50,000ft x 2km / 5km = 20,000ft

 

Most SF players don't get much above 20,000 feet, as the real tactical air wars were like that as well. My game will have air units spending most flying time above 40,000 feet, so my large tiles look like smaller tiles from down low. I run 300km horizon distance in SF-1 -- HD 4850 video / mirrors on / HDR / 60fps -- as I have a few other small tricks as well, but the big secret is large tile size. Its all about trade offs.

Edited September 15, 2011 by Lexx_Luthor

[getpeter]

Yep, reducing horizon distance manually helps fps. That happens automatically when you select lower settings.

 

There are some tricks you can do manually in Flightengine that go outside the binned automatic settings.

 

Do you use the HDR mod in SF1. It almost doubles frames for me. Its not needed in the SF2.

 

The major trick I use, in any SF, is tile size. I run 5km tile sizes in my terrain, while stock is 2km. But, I make my own terrains with Terrain Editor. Double the tile size, and you can double the horizon distance in game. I can get away with large tiles because I am working on a fictional strategic campaign focusing on high altitude, 1950s style. When you fly 50,000 feet, the apparent tile size that you see (for my 5km tiles), and terrain detail, is the same size and detail as the stock 2km tiles give when you fly at 20,000 feet...

 

50,000ft x 2km / 5km = 20,000ft

 

Most SF players don't get much above 20,000 feet, as the real tactical air wars were like that as well. My game will have air units spending most flying time above 40,000 feet, so my large tiles look like smaller tiles from down low. I run 300km horizon distance in SF-1 -- HD 4850 video / mirrors on / HDR / 60fps -- as I have a few other small tricks as well, but the big secret is large tile size. Its all about trade offs.

 

What is HDR?

Also how big is the deal to use the Terrain Editor to change the tile size? Can you enlighten me up on this?

 

THANKS

[+hgbn]

I have been running the 1.st gen series on this old rig and got 15-30 fps without the HDR mod to 30-100 fps with the SF2x series on unlimited with the same hardware except for a new GTX460 vid card.

 

So the performance boost in the new series is worth alone the admission fee of the new games Not to mention bump and specular mapping which isn't supported in old games

[getpeter]

My rig Q6600@3.6 + GTX 560 Ti produce the following performance:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=L2XT6SNcmFU

Edited September 19, 2011 by getpeter

[Bossco82]

I have to say I agree with the others, move upto SF2 it delivers far superior framerates over SF1.

 

On the other hand if your willing to stretch to a major upgrade then get an i5-2500k cpu, (or an i7-2600k) and midrange P67 motherboard like the Asus P67 pro or the Gigabyte P67 UD3 and overclock it to 4.6ghz. Your gpu will be fine with these.

 

I have similar to that now and I can fly in SF2V using the expansion pack dropping an lgb over hanoi in linbacker 2 while B52's are dropping bombs nearby and maintain 60fps on high/unlimited settings. Thats pretty much the most demanding scenario in SF2 you will come across. I tried this with several cpu/mobo/gpu combinations and a P67 mobo with an unlocked i5/i7 sandybridge cpu is the best i've found.