Thanks Trooper and Msalama - I didn't mean to review it - I just got excited today "pulling it out of it's box" for the first time. I've only really flown it for about 4 hours, maybe a little more. I did spend 8 or 9 with the Russian language I have to tell you.

I actually didn't mean to post so much but got a little carried away.

I thought I saw someone ask me to start a new review thread. Well it's like almost 6 AM and I've been up all night (at least it was a weekend) - so let me see how I feel in after I get up tommorow and have more time with it. After I face the wife of course She was acting tonight like she's living with an alcholic that just fell of the wagon.... Poor thing, she's an Il2 widow.

"The morning after"

Then I'll start a new thread and try very hard to be very objective.

One thing I certainly do know - whatever anyone does - do not buy any hardware until this code has been optimized. Just wait a little bit. One exception to that maybe a Warthog. I'm running a Warthog throttle and Cougar U2Nxt with my Cougar throttle moved and modded to a project box. The extra sliders are very very useful.

Also, I forgot to mention - I'm displaying the sim on a 27" Dell flatscreen - (2707). Abolutely no "tearing" while panning my head.

S!

Gunny

Yes, Bandy I do know what a multi-threaded application looks like. I certinaly know how ROF scales.

I never said it was running correctly. I pointed out that there is CoD activity on the other three cores. And there is. You see the sim start - you see the QMB scenario start and you see the execution from flatline on Core 0 and increased activity on Core 1/2/3. It's very unbalanced. All of my processes (TrackIR, Fraps and other background executables) were stable from the start of CoD, and from the Start of the mission. The graphs were sampled at the longest setting of Task manager.

It's not balanced and it's not fully threaded. I never said it was. If you think I'm missing something please point it out.

Actually, maybe you could post the Fist Eagles activity from the start of the application. I cannot see the start in the graphs. Actually, I can't see the application begin in any of your graphs. You can see the load increase in mine.

S!

Gunny

I truly hope it can be optimized, but as you mention, and others have pointed out, the core activity you show does NOT look at all like a multithreaded application.
The CoD activity looks like other single core sims where the thread is being bounced between cores, but not like original IL2. See my post on page 4 this thread for the comparison.

Not whining, not trying to let air out of the balloon of optimism, trying to find reality. If it doesn't run on multicore, I might as well give up given my system.

EDIT: FROM FIRST EAGLES, look at the blue line, you'll see it step up...

Understand and don't at all think your being negative. You seem properly concerned.

Roger - noted the blue line depicting RAM use as start. Thanks. I'm sleepy.

Just note the start and then stablization of the load. Nothing is happening - then something is happening - all from the start of CoD. My takeaway from observing this several times today, is that there is a portion of the code that's threaded. Currently - a smaller portion than I or anyone else would like.

If I'd had a load prior to the start of CoD my core behavior would match yours, but it doesn't. You can see that my load cross-core is very very minimal. On Core 0 - almost flat at that scale. The all 4 cores spike.

In the end, I had no process load to move to those cores - as I was at less than 2-4% load on core0. You cannot move what isn't running.

Man, I hope I made good sense there

S!

Gunny

Im sure they are working on it as we speak.


I think its safe to say that the EF Filter isn't entirely to blame, has to be something else causing it also.


As they pointed out that stock missions (50 ac max) are designed to run on minimum spec. machines one would assume that the stock settings in game is for just that machine (maby assuming to much here) Clearly thats not the case as it stand now.

Unless those neat things like Dynamic Lighting is a real recourse hog.

Not that i have any idea if Dynamic Lighting is turned on or off in default settings. Im guessing they are turned off?

Hi Gunny. Nice data there, certainly gives us a greater insight into the game's performance. Could you tell us how you disabled the epilepsy filter, how you know for sure it actually was disabled and what difference it made (if any)? Was it the before & after prop graphics?

Keep at it TX. You are among the first of the many and we appreciate your time and trouble. Wishful it isn't, but all will be corrected.

And S! back. Yes, I truly want to play this sim, but unfortunately won't be able to afford to replace my system if required. If any negativity was expressed by me re: your posts, I was just venting frustration with the inability to actually get straight answers, even though CoD is now in hand.

What I should have said in my earlier posts was that the evidence as presented by task manager can be interpreted in different ways, and depending on your perspective/outlook, that evidence can be misinterpreted. We see what we hope/want to see; it is human nature.

I am a scientist by career, not an uber computer geek (not pointing fingers either), so basically the message is (as I see it) we need another test to distinguish whether there is any multithreading since the results still support these two hypotheses.

I'm sure there is some system tool/applet out there that can actually measure multithread activity. Or perhaps someone with CoD can shut down as much background processes as possible, then run CoD without TIR, without joystick, no audio etc. to try to reduce the background process 'noise'.

Still not ideal, but the real answer to whether CoD is multithreaded (AND therefore can be optimized by a patch...) is in the hands of the devs, and they are strangely mum. It seems all so deliberate, almost sinister the way things have transpired. So many disappointed and frustrated people... It is a crying shame.

Tree's crusade is pointless because it doesn't matter if it's a new engine or not, or if he's right or wrong. He gets no medal at the end if he's right.

The problems with whatever the engine is exist though and that's the problem. It may be a new engine, but it appears to be built for 2005 technology. To not have true multi-core or SLI support in 2011 is ridiculous.

It may be a fine game, but the problem is clock speeds aren't going past the levels of these overclocked 4.0ghz I7's anytime soon, if at all because of the multi-core direction. So if it continues to put a heavy load on a single core you will continue to top it out and suffer big performance problems (just like FSX).

Waiting for technology to catch up can't happen if technology is going a completely different direction.

where is the technology heading too? more and more cores?

Thx Gunny for a great small review! Really seems fantastic.

May I suggest you start a whole new thread with your "review" so this valuable info don't get lost here.

Cheers
Kammo

Yes. Look at clock speeds over the last 5 years. They've actually gone down across the spectrum.

sorry gunny, but all you are seeing there is that there is processing on the cores - not that it's COD, Could be anything from windows indexing to virus scanning, to soft-drivers using cpu to process things that should really be done in hardware.

Or any other thing...

What we really need is someone to run some proper process monitoring software and provide data.

When I get my copy I will be doing a technical analysis for myself, so I can figure out what the sim is doing and look for ways of improving how it performs on my rig. If no-one else has done so by that time I'll drop my observations onto this forum.


EDIT: saw you talked about this stuff in later posts in is thread.

Good stuff gunslinger, thanks!

The yanks have two beta tester teams actually. The Russians right now, and Europe next week. lol

The information the Gunny is giving is not getting lost here! This thread is getting plenty of views and Gunnys

experience is being much appreciated so stop trying to hijack us. You can start a new "lovefest" thread yourself if you want to.

Yes I am a bit miffed at your implication. I for one am objective enough I can take the good with the bad. I think most people can.

I will be getting this game though I said I would wait for reviews. Well, based on what Gunny said, Its not in great shape but its good

enough for me. I am confident the problems will be mitigated and or fixed. Why I would dare say that by the time the American version gets here

things will be much improved. I might slag the game at times, it doesnt mean I dont like it. It means I want it to to fulfill its destiny!! ..

"The best WW2 combat flight simulator and game ever"... thats what I want the headlines to be about this game.

for sure

It will be and can be as long as we stay positive, look for the issues, report on them but none of this crazy hyperbole that we've seen on the forums so far.
Guys we gotta look at it this way as well, there is not a single optimised graphics driver available for this. Nvidia and AMD should be falling over themselves to help 1C to offload some of the shadows / physics work onto the gpus. This could well be the killer app that actually shows what can be achieved.

Who is talking crazy hyperbole now. What makes you think CoD has made it onto the radar of the two biggest gpu conglomerates in the world? The company carrying the game, Ubisoft, hasn't taken the time to advertise let alone update their website to reflect they are selling it.

Nope, this is all on 1C's plate alone.

After follow on task manager testing today I concur with the both of you. I stripped my system of unnecessary process, and then started "core watching" with Il2.

Found exactly what you've been trying to say. Large changes in distributed load across cores with Il2 and we know, it's a single core application.

Bandy, I'm a Principal Investigator at a major U.S. University, Applied Physics Laboratory. I actually manage/direct/am abused by a team of PhD's, Engineers, Analysts and Technicians so I feel we may be coming from similar "points of view". As you know, the essence of it all is critical observation and honesty in error - and I've made one here. Just wanted to clear that up.

No evidence of threading - but we can hope that through the optimization of processes and further work by the development team - we'll get more efficient and scalable processes.

I will upgrade my RAM at some point very soon to 8GB. I don't think I'll see any change in this version of the codes RAM utilization - but it's a small investment and I have a "gut" feeling that with aquired investment from release - that optimization development directed toward 64bit architecture will eventually come.

Again for all innocent onlookers - I retract my claim of the apprearance of multi-threading in current CoD code. My observations were in error.

S!

Gunny

Once again, on another forum, Tree is doing all he can to be negative about this game.

What exactly is your point Tree?

Are you being paid to be completely destructive? Do you really get a thrill out of being the most negative person on these forums?

Instead of doing all you can to tear down this game with meaningless negativity, why don't you suggest some constructive response?

Yes, it seems the game is only using one core of any given processor, obviously there needs to be some work done.

And if you put your point in a positive way, without all the personal attacks, then maybe something useful might result from your comments.

People here ARE a little disappointed at the fact the game is not exactly in the best state of optimization, but it is clear there is a lot of potential, and given Oleg's track record, why not give him the benefit of the doubt?

Where else are we going to get the next gen flight sim?

There is only one group of people who are going to improve on the current state of CLIFFS OF DOVER, that is Oleg and his development team.

And attacking them personally and smearing the game is not going to increase the chances they will be able to deal with the issues.

If you are not willing to moderate your tone and post constructively, what's the point?

If you are just here to indulge your ego and your vindicativeness, you might as well give it up, no one really is interested in that kind of feedback.

You've made perfect sense all through your posts, you are as logical and to the point on the boards as you were on the Ghost Skies servers...

Thanks for your insight!

Cheers RAF74 Buzzsaw