IL-2 Korea System Requirements

[FuriousMeow]

Vulkan vs DX12, especially well coded DX12, is mostly a wash. They are both low level APIs. Vulkan vs DX11, there's a very good argument there for significantly better GPU performance.

Its definitely not going to be a GTX2060 going from 30fps in DX12 to 45fps with Vulkan. More like, maybe 50fps to 54fps.

[[CPT]Rhino]

Anyone know if testers were supposed to receive instruction or some sort of download link by now? Been watching email and the forum but havent seen or heard anything.

[FTC_Oakwoodson77]

23 hours ago, [CPT]Rhino said:

Anyone know if testers were supposed to receive instruction or some sort of download link by now? Been watching email and the forum but havent seen or heard anything.

I think you may not have been selected as the Beta Test has already begun I believe.

[[CPT]Rhino]

I was selected, I realized yesterday when I sent my NDA, one of the pages that had all the critical items on it, failed to go through. Just my luck. 

[SlR]

3090 in 4k is equal to 5070, and it should be better than 5070 for VR.

5090 is better for VR, but there are much fewer of them than 3090, 4080, and 5070ti

It's likely that 45fps is still achievable on a 3090 in this game

We are waiting for the game to be released, and it is quite comfortable to play mfs2020 and mfs2024 in vr on a 3090.

Edited February 22 by SlR

[Lusekofte]

I understand both sides of these requirements 

I am on the low end already for DCS multiplayer. I really did not expect it to be other than that in this gameengine. 
And for people already spent hard earned money to get high end games. It is a drag if a software got to consider low end PC’s

Its just too pricy for many to keep up, and it’s not beneficial for the developers either if there is less buyers. 
For me, I hope this Korea module meets everyone’s expectations. It might motivate people to upgrade. I fly only DCS atm, and it alone really hasn’t convinced me to upgrade yet
 

[Aapje]

People don't necessarily have to keep up. They can keep playing GB (or other games) and then step into the new engine later on when they are ready for it.

[AndreiTomescu]

I guess it's not the dev's dream to work so hard on a new game (it's not a module!-but a brand new sim) and have less sales (=earnings) due to the fact that many of us need better hardware.

From my corner, a couple of questions, please not official answers, but best educated guesses:

- prologue: Ryzen 7 5700G, Rx 6600xt 8 GB, 32 RAM, SSD. Works decent for 1080p, 90 fps most of the time. I have overclocked cpu, gpu, ram, cooling. (Moderate with dedicated software) saw no noticeable difference in GB, except for lower temps, even 8-10 Celsius!!

1. for such a new sim, 60 fps, if achievable for me, are ok for a good experience?

2. Setting lower than 1080p resolution and upscaling with dedicated AMD software (FSR) is beneficial ?

Thank you guys, I would really appreciate your answers since a good deal of you really know this hardware stuff, I am more of an.....self taught.

[Dash,Polder]

Great Battles was hitting the Great Wall with it's older code, let's wait and see.  Newer code most certainly can run more efficient on even yesterdays hardware.  You could shell out all the $$$ you want but Great Battles is never crossing it's own baked in over time limitations.  Don't judge Korea's performance metrics on it just yet, wait and see.

[Lusekofte]

3 hours ago, AndreiTomescu said:

1. for such a new sim, 60 fps, if achievable for me, are ok for a good experience?

I play well with 45

not ideal in some cases but when a server is populated and your in the mids. It can be a lagg or two. But liveable.  
I am not a dogfighter. I hate that, but ain’t bad at it if cornered. But low fps in such situations is bad. For ground pounding and transport fps do not matter much as long as it’s not a slideshow

[Avimimus]

Older sims used to do 25 fps (some can't run faster than that). So long as the minimum frame rate is above 25 fps it should be playable. Of course it is more enjoyable above 45 and probably becomes most ergonomic around 100.

Anyway, consistency in frame rates can be more important than having a high peak framerate - what one really wants to avoid is... well, situations like the original Il-2 - where if I strafed a vehicle and it blew up the sim would stutter long enough for me to fly into the ground! 😄

[Biggs]

On 2/23/2026 at 2:09 PM, Avimimus said:

Older sims used to do 25 fps (some can't run faster than that). So long as the minimum frame rate is above 25 fps it should be playable. Of course it is more enjoyable above 45 and probably becomes most ergonomic around 100.

Anyway, consistency in frame rates can be more important than having a high peak framerate - what one really wants to avoid is... well, situations like the original Il-2 - where if I strafed a vehicle and it blew up the sim would stutter long enough for me to fly into the ground! 😄

Sounds like late 90's dial up......  🙂

[blitze31]

On 3/14/2026 at 1:26 AM, Biggs said:

Sounds like late 90's dial up......  🙂

Operator - find me a Hard Exit 

On that note, if your fps is smooth, then yes a lower fps experience in VR is a decent experience.
The issues had with the older engine was more an AI taxing the system with many vehicles or multi engined aircraft.  They have simplified the AI on NPC vehicles (streamlined it) so it would be less of an issue.  How that plays out - we'll see.  I know some previous sims have given a decent player experience with simpler AI / aircraft models.

We see how the requirements pan out as people experiment with what is released.

As for building systems - well thank the AI cowboys and Cloud computing muppets for the blowout of DDR and storage costs.  All these wonderful DataCenters going up that don't even have connection to a power grid and/or use up drinking water for cooling - hmmmm Golf Clap Humanity, Golf Clap.

"You will own notzink und be HAPPY" - pass.

[Elem]

Thank you for this, team. Any chance you can give an approximate date for the Korea release, please?

[kestrel79]

4 hours ago, Elem said:

Thank you for this, team. Any chance you can give an approximate date for the Korea release, please?

There's a roadmap graphic that came out a few weeks ago. I think it's still Q2 2026 sometime this Spring/Summer.

[CzechTexan]

How many GB needed for storage memory?  My Great Battles is 118 GB.

I can put KOREA on a portable drive and run it from there, correct?

nevermind.  I'll just add m.2 NVME SSD to motherboard.

Edited March 25 by CzechTexan

[Nacht]

Hello.

I need to know if the Korea simulator would support 2 installations (not to play simultaneously) and if it would be like today a kind of "portable" application that can be copied to other locations and run.
I ask because I currently have a PC ready for Korea with specifications between the minimum and recommended, but for family reasons I can’t access it and fly as much as I want (maybe 2 times a week), and now I have a very good chance to get another second-hand PC at a good price for what I know now, and which I could access better and with which I could do missions with the editor and distract myself. It would then need 2 installations.

The second-hand PC is:

AMD Ryzen 9 3900X 12-Core Processor
ASUS ROG STRIX B550-F GAMING (WI-FI)
16 GB DDR4 SDRAM Wilk Elektronik IRP3600D4V64L18
16 GB DDR4 SDRAM Wilk Elektronik IRP3600D4V64L18
16 GB DDR4 SDRAM G.Skill F4-3200C16-16GTZRX
16 GB DDR4 SDRAM G.Skill F4-3200C16-16GTZRX
MSI RTX 3060 Gaming X Trio LHR (12GB)
Seagate ST2000DM008-2UB102 (2TB)
WD_BLACK SN770 (2TB)
Corsair RM650

What you think about this second PC?

But the main question is if 2 installations of the sim would be possible.

Thanks.

 

 

Edited April 7 by Nacht

[Panzerkatze]

My mill, which I made from parts stolen from museum, seems to fulfill minimum easily, except GPU is 1080-series. Still, being just 1080, it has 11 Gbps GDDR5X memory and 11 GB frame buffer, which should be enough. 

[Aapje]

My assumption is that the same developers will use the same portable setup, which is great. Don't know how strict the current version is about running two install with the same key. Haven't seen people complain about it.

Of course, only the devs can say whether this assumption is correct.

The PC is at the bottom of the requirements. Unfortunately, AMD stopped selling the X3D-CPUs for AM4, because I would otherwise put in a 5800X3D or 5700X3D if the price of those is half-way decent. Rumor has is that AMD is going to bring back processors for AM4, but who knows whether that rumor is true.

You can try removing the 3200C16 sticks of RAM and then enabling XMP. There is a good chance that the system will run faster and 32 GB should be enough.

The videocard is the 12 GB version, which is much better than the 8 GB version, also if you want to upgrade later and resell it.

[Nacht]

Thanks by the answers 🙂.

Well, the CPU Ryzen 9 3900x have a base frecuency of 3.8Ghz and Turbo frecuency of 4.6Ghz. I hope it do well... but we won't know until we have the game. Anyway its main purpose isnt to fly but mess with the editor .... and may be new Tank Crew (please, please 😅 ).

Also i didnt know that for use XMP is better with only 32Gb Ram, at the risk of straying a bit from the topic, why would it be better to remove that particular  3200C16 sticks RAM modules? Yes I'm not really up to date on PC mounting.

Hope two installations will be allowed.

Thanks again.

[Aapje]

You have mismatched RAM (2 sticks are 3200C16 and 2 are 3600C18). That means that at best you are able to run at the XMP speed of the slower RAM, but it is also possible that XMP doesn't work at all and it is off. Then the RAM would be running at default speeds (2133 MHz, 2400 MHz, or 2666 MHz, depending on the RAM).

And for most games 32 vs 64 GB should make no or relatively little difference, probably (much) less than the impact of the slower RAM.

[Nacht]

aah, ok. Thanks.

It’s a second-hand PC and that’s how it comes, but very good to know, in any case I can test it if I buy it and then resell the RAM that does not suit me. At the prices they are now can even be a good deal.