Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Raven Morpheus]

Hello

I have a query regarding SAS Mod Selector and memory usage settings.  Sorry, I think this is the wrong sub-forum but I couldn't find the correct one to post this in.

I understand that the game runs in a java engine (?) and that the RAM I have in my system (8GB @ 1333mhz) isn't exactly related to how much memory the game uses and that the java engine has a limited amount of memory (?).

I see that we can select the memory usage in the SAS Mod Selector, but when running the game with it set to 1024mb I have found some missions crash and I get other problems (such as the screen going black on me).

I seem to get an FPS boost with the memory in SAS Mod Selector set to 1024mb, so my question is this - is there anything I can do so that I can run the game in a stable manner whilst using the most memory?

Thanks in advance.

[KiwiBiggles]

Hi Raven,

Back of the envelope answer is that for me, in all game versions I've tried over many years, I get the best game play with 256mb (I don't use texture compression, and some very large maps seem to cause crashes on my system no matter what setting I use). 

I use 1024mb only when I'm using the map builder, because otherwise some maps won't load into the map builder (even though they play fine on 256mb in normal 'game' mode).

I've seen other players mention similar experiences, but I also defer to more techo explanations. 

[Raven Morpheus]

Thanks.

Do you get better fps when using 256mb over lets say 512mb (which is what I currently have my install set to)?

I tend to suffer on the fps at times (despite having what I'd say is a good rig, specs below), and sometimes on approach to carriers/airfields it gets down to 30 or below and I'm sure that's one reason I find landing difficult.  One of the campaigns I've downloaded (think it's Facing the Wind) has a mission at Pearl where you have to tale off from a carrier, circle and then land on the ground at Pearl, and that drops to 9 fps - it was almost unplayable.  But the readme does warn there's a lot of objects and fps is likely to take a dive!

I've been through the conf.ini and tweaked all that I can (although admittedly I could lower the graphics from Perfect, but I shouldn't really have to I think, and it'll look far worse, especially the water), so the memory in the SAS Selector is the only thing I really have left.

My rigs specs -

AMD Phenom II x4 955 BE @3.2ghz
Gigabyte GA-880GM-USB3 motherboard
Corsair TX650 PSU
Sapphire Radeon HD 5870 1GB
8GB 1333mhz RAM
Hitachi 7200RPM HDD
Windows 7 64bit

[KiwiBiggles]

Hi Raven,
 
Your rig is quite a bit more powerful than mine, but the performance is similar.  My gut feeling is that even a very modest rig these days is way beyond the capability of our creaky old game engine.  I still love the ol' girl though! 

I like to play with fps 30+ at 1920 x 1080 4xAA 4xAF, 'perfect' settings, no texture compression, forest=3, water=3, effects=1, TypeClouds=1, landgeom=3 etc.

If I go over 256mb I tend to start getting glitches and crashes, so it isn't worth it for me.  256mb is rock solid for me, and I have my own self-imposed limitations - I'm pretty selective now with mods.  For example I run stock fx or the 'lite' fx package that comes with SAS modact, and there are some maps I have to avoid.  I also write my own missions (aside from a few old favourite campaigns) and I only include the essential stuff (to me) - I figure if I can't see it from the cockpit, it isn't adding anything to my game experience.  I don't build 60 plane missions, 'cos I can only shoot down a couple with a load of ammo.  Similarly, I usually fly in good weather, and when I do use inclement weather, I use stock clouds.

Back in the day, SAS~CirX was the king of 'lite is best', and I've kinda gone back to that philosophy myself.  It works for me.  'Heavy' mod installs would usually end up causing me grief, and I'd rather build missions and fly, than wrestle with a low performing or glitchy install.  I'm very happy with my current modact builds.   

All the best
KB

[greybeard]

Raven

I think you should experiment with RAM usage, stepping down until you find your own highest stable RAM to use. I, for instance, started from 1GB (2GB was out of question) having crashes in some mission; stepped down to 786 MB which works fine for me from ages.

Another resource hog are clouds; please try my Little clouds, it will work with your SAS ModAct and you'll be surprised how it increases FPS.

In addition to 4xAA, as already pointed out by KB, I suggest not to use any external AF, but the one which comes with game; this latter virtually has no impact on FR, on the contrary of an external one (I mean provided by your videocard).

Besides, again as correctly mentioned by KB, discard missions overloaded of objects. Indeed, campaign makers should mention system requirements for their work or, better, should comply with original IL-2 ones (PIII - 256 RAM).

[Raven Morpheus]

Thanks guys. 

@KB - I run similar settings, although my water is currently on 2, I use texture compression, and I tend to flop between no AA and some AA (usually 2x or 4x Edge Detect Multi-sampling).  In general flight whilst I'm in the air I usually get about 40-60 fps, I can't say for sure that AA settings ever affect that.  But whilst that's playable fps it's never constant, and can drop severely as already mentioned.

I'll give those "little clouds" a go greybeard.  Think I tried 786mb and didn't notice much of an fps boost and also ran into the same instability issues as with 1024mb, I'm currently on 512mb.

Basically I'd like to find a way of getting a constant and stable, hopefully 60fps (or more), but without sacrificing eye candy in a game that already doesn't look as good as RoF or War Thunder (both of which gave me 60fps constantly with no probs when I tried them) so that I can rule out any input lag that may be caused by bad fps as a cause to my inability to do things.