Pzman

Only three days in NA, so just wait.

Good luck with that.

Seems to be working again, and I didn't change my resident shield settings so AVG must have fixed it already.

Yeah, I'm getting that now too. I cannot play any eLicense games right now... errr!!!!!!!!!!

In terms of raw power, the Core architecture blows the P4 out of the water. The current generation of Core 2 CPUs provides more processing power per clock than a P4. For example, a 2.4ghz Conroe (second generation C2D) is equivalent to a 4.8Ghz P4. The current generation C2D (third generation) is slightly faster yet. [ June 01, 2008, 11:11 PM: Message edited by: Pzman ]

Any 2Ghz C2D or faster, with a 8600M or higher should run the game well. I played CM on a older notebook, 2.16Ghz C2D, with a ATI X1600 and it played okay, on moderate settings. Just keep this in mind, 8400 or lower is low end, 8600GT is mid-range, 8800s are higher end. Try to get a card with at least 256MB VRAM, although 128MB will be okay, at least with the games out right now. Unless the manufacturer underclocks the video card, it should perform at about the same level as the equivalent desktop models. [ May 30, 2008, 11:57 PM: Message edited by: Pzman ]

Yes that worked, thanks!

I upgraded to Vista (32bit) last week, and I've been unable to get any Battlefront games to load up, including CMSF. This is from a fresh install of each game, CMBB, CMAK and CMSF. Not really sure what the issue is, every other game I've tried works fine and don't even know what to try to get the games to work again, help!

Yeah, the move to a 8800GT from a 8600 card is a big one.

I just used Task Manager and affinity settings to switch between using both cores or one core.

Update. Looks worse than I thought, and keep in mind this is only in the main screen, I've not even tried to load a map. 22% load one single core with extreme lag. Load does reach 100% on the single core, once I get a map loaded, but extremely laggy, almost to the point that the game is unplayable. So I exit the map (via Ctr alt del) and put the game into dual core mode, smooth as a whistle, and it is using 100% of both cores now, BFC must have improved dual core support with 1.08! BTW, models and graphics are both set to best. [ April 09, 2008, 10:55 PM: Message edited by: Pzman ]

Yes, when using both cores, they both show 50%, but when using single core it seems to hover around 50% of one. I've not tested this a lot since I really don't have a need to run the game in single core mode (unless I have a virus scan or something like that happening in the background, which is where it is nice to have a dual core system). I'm going to play around with it more tonight and see if this keeps happening, if so I might send an email. Systems I've seen this on: 2.16Ghz Core 2 Duo (MBP with Bootcamp), which means its not just Nvidia because it has a ATI x1600 card. 2.20Ghz Core 2 Duo in my current desktop, with 8800GT AMD x2 4800+ 2.5Ghz, with 8600GT. All systems running XP Pro SP2. That may be an issue, I've heard that SP3 for XP will have a upgraded kernel for better multi-core support so we might see improvements then. [ April 09, 2008, 10:18 PM: Message edited by: Pzman ]

Its not a big deal since when I play with CM using both cores there is no lag, only when CMSF is using one core only. CMSF is the only game that I have seen doe this. I could try disabling one core using the BIOS, but I just find it strange that CMSF wont use full load, while COD4, Crysis and even old games like Battlefield Vietnam do. This isn't just on my Intel systems (notebook and desktop). I've also seen this happen with AMD dual core systems as well.

My point is that CMSF WONT use 100% of the CPU, not even 100% of one core if I use affinity to force it to, rather it just stays around 50% and is laggy, even in the opening screen.

Umm, then why does task manager show CM as using both Cores (1.08)? On my system CMSF never uses more than 50% of both cores (2.2Ghz C2D), since the task is split. </font>

Also keep in mind that Intel CPUs will throttle back under heavy load if it is getting too hot, so make sure your system has a good aftermarket cooler rather than the stock Intel one. Umm, then why does task manager show CM as using both Cores (1.08)? On my system CMSF never uses more than 50% of both cores (2.2Ghz C2D), since the task is split.

One of the big lag factors seems to be AA settings and Vsync.

Yeah, word is that the M3A has some issue with a number of Nvidia graphics cards, so that may have been my problem.

Have a look in this thread if you haven't already and see if that helps. http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=000616 I'm running the game on a 8800GT and its still a little slow. Part of the slowness is coding, the other is the vast amount of units/objects displayed at one time. CMSF is far more taxing on a system than Crysis is, even though the graphics aren't as good looking as a top of the line FPS, for that very reason.

Stay away from that board, or any ASUS board that under $120! I bought one in February, lots of bugs, although they are slowly being dealt with via BIOS updates. The problems were solved when my PSU died and killed it. The board was replaced by the shop for free, but I just had too many issues with the board freezing on boot to recommend it to anyone. I thus moved to an DFI MBO, Intel system, and I am a lot more satisfied.

Agreed, I'm rather surprised they listed such low specs for a game that taxes even higher end systems. I wouldn't recommend playing CMSF with anything less than what I suggested in my post above, unless you don't mind running the game at the lowest possible settings, which is ugly.

Well we agree that the minimum specs are ridiculous, and that the recommended specs are too, which is good enough for me.

Yeah, I know... thats what I just said. Clearly those are based on version 1.01 as you noted earlier, then I posted what I think the lowest specs I would want to play the game with based on the current version.

Ummm the ones you listed are the listed Minimum specs... it says that. I'm say it would run, but it would suck. I ran the original CM on a near minimum spec machine for years, yeah it was painful, but I liked the game. Some people can tolerate/live with low FPS than others.

What is the price you are seeing? If you are looking in the sub $100 range the 8600GT or Radeon HD2600xx are good choices. When you say PCI 2 what do you mean? Just PCI, AGP or PCI-E? I wouldn't advise getting a PCI card, any AGP or PCI-E card will be faster, even if it has less video memory.