Monitor Settings

[bobhegf]

I am using a Gateway Monitor and am interested in the best refresh rate for CFS2. Mine is running at 75Hz , is that a good refresh rate? AS you can tell I Don`t know much about PCs.

[Sander]

I am using a Gateway Monitor and am interested in the best refresh rate for CFS2. Mine is running at 75Hz , is that a good refresh rate? AS you can tell I Don`t know much about PCs.

60 or less is bad. On Flat Screens, 75Hz is normal.
If your game has higher FPS (frames per second) than the refresh rate of your monitor, you're computer is faster than is necessary for smooth operation of the game.
If the game has lower FPS than the refresh rate of your monitor, you will still get stutters, and you may want to tune down the game graphics settings/scenery complexity.

[bearcat241]

CFS2 doesn't have an optimal refresh rate per se. It takes whatever the monitor will support and just rolls with that. So the better question would be, "what is the optimal refresh rate for a Gateway monitor?" That information is readily available via Yahoo/Google search or the manufacturer's website: http://support.gateway.com/s/MONITOR/7005425/8510469.pdf (look at page 16, Vertical frequency (Hz))

As you'll note in that data, it depends on the video mode you prefer to run in. For any given monitor, every video mode has its own optimal rate. So, the best refresh rate for 800 x 600 mode might be slightly different than 1024 x 768.

From some of your previous posts, no doubt you're in pursuit of max FPS in the 100+ range. Just to be clear, its a known fact that the human eye/brain connection only processes video input at a rate ranging between 25-35 fps. This is the standard in the movie industry and those folks tend to know a lot about video processing. Most of the pursuit and postings in cyberworld of anything higher are superfluous and ego-serving. That said, your best FPS - no matter what the number - is the one that allows your gaming graphics to run smooth as silk with everything maxed out to complex scenery with lots of fast moving objects. If your best FPS number allows you to do this for sustained periods of game-play without deteriorating into a slideshow at ANY time, you've achieved the true objective, no matter what numbers others are posting.

Having a high-end CPU/GPU connection with awesome gaming memory is the key to driving smooth performance. As a combat gamer, i just chase optimal game-play performance these days and i leave that high numbers game to the pure geeks.;)

[bobhegf]

It is not so much about how high the frame rates are but how I can keep the low end at about 35 fps. I have my new to me pc here but not hooked up .I tested it with CFS2 at the store where I bought it in free flight but even though the fps was at 77 it went down to about 15 and then shot back up to 77 fps. with nothing added . The problem is how do I hold the low end fps to about 35fps with a lot of smoke, trees or forest and action lets say with an 80% cloud overcast and about 135 to 145 aircraft doing combat? I GSL all static objects that I am not going to try to distory which helps hold the fps up at the low end but still I always get a real fps drop when I have smoke, fire and heavy clouds.

[bearcat241]

...The problem is how do I hold the low end fps to about 35fps with a lot of smoke, trees or forest and action lets say with an 80% cloud overcast and about 135 to 145 aircraft doing combat?

That can be achieved by what i said above, "Having a high-end CPU/GPU connection with awesome gaming memory is the key to driving smooth performance." If you go the extra mile and put out more coin for the fastest processor and graphics card floating, and then throw down some more on some super gaming memory, you'll get there. Short of doing this, you'll have to find a happy medium in the battle of low cost hardware vs top graphics performance in such extreme scenarios as you've described (135-145 aircraft fighting in 80% overcast was a rarity even in real world WWII combat). Because no two of us have the same hardware/software configurations, its very difficult to get a guaranteed magical tweak recommendation at any forum that works 100% the way you desire. You may have to settle for lighter mission setups for true happiness.

[bobhegf]

I take my biggest frame hits when there are large number of trees, buildings, dark clouds, smoke, none stock aircraft, or a combination of all the things mentioned. This is what I am running on my game pc at the present time. I currently have a 375wat power unit ,Intel core 2quad 2.5Hz processer ,4gigs ram , 1 TB 7200rpm hard drive and an ATI Radeon HD 3600 . I am planning to replace the Radeon 3600 with a Nvidia GT640 with 2 gigs of ram and up the power unit to around 700 to 750wats next month. What do you recommend for a good processer that will help push CFS2 maxed out and hold my low end frame rates between 25 and 35 frames a second with a large amount of GSL infrastructure some clouds and lots of action. My 1st question is, will the NvidiaGT640 with 2 gigs of ram along with my current 4 gigs of ram cut it ? The 2nd question is what size CPU or GPU do you recommend for this set up in order to hold up the low end frame rates and not take a large hit on GSL infrastructure such as a large number of trees, building, some clouds and some action? I also want to thank Sander and Bearcat for there input. Thanks Fellows, you have been a great help.

[bearcat241]

... I am planning to replace the Radeon 3600 with a Nvidia GT640 with 2 gigs of ram and up the power unit to around 700 to 750wats next month...

Your plan is a definite move in the high end direction. The GT640 has a powerful GPU and its 2 GB of integral memory is also a big performance booster. Also, any PC power wattage above 650 is what you want for universal gaming within today's product line.

As for a CPU recommendation, i'm riding with an Intel i7-920+ @ 2.79 Ghz, overclocked to the state of an i7-950 @ 3.15 Ghz. I could overclock it higher, but i'm playing it safe to preserve system stability and also avoid upgrading my CPU cooling system to handle the increased heat at a higher OC level (still mulling over some options, like water-cooling maybe???, but i should upgrade my Vcard first). Just check out the top Intel processor line at any online vendor site like Newegg, TigerDirect.com, etc., or go to Alienware and look at the specs on their current gaming PC lineup. Alienware specializes in building custom, high-end gaming computers with the latest hardware. Their systems are quite beautiful IMO, but they mainly emphasize horsepower above all else. By checking the specs on their systems, you get a good idea of what it takes to put together a righteous gaming rig of your own.

[rhumbaflappy]

It is unlikely that low-end performance is a problem with the video card. To speed up processing in any MS simulator, you need to have a fast CPU and a fast harddrive. Solid-state drives may improve the loading of textures. A 4.0 Ghz, dual-core CPU will help with the processing of the drawcalls and positioning of vertices.

3rd party objects and aircraft pay little attention to speeding up the sim. Each separate texture load, and each separate vertex strains the CPU and harddrive.

The cure will be a combination of a faster CPU and a solid-state drive, along with reworking the models to use a single texture sheet and fewer verticies.

Older DirectX programs tend to use the GPU as a dumb device to just display what the CPU has processed. All the MS sims do this. Prepare3D is being reworked to version 2 which will finally use a GPU to process objects... but it is Lockheed-Martin doing this. Microsoft never could figure out how to use DirectX!

Dick