Is FB more optimized than the others?

[c3k]

For a desktop, AMD is not really an issue.  But in laptops, if you have the money go with Intel and Nvidia...that is the conclusion.

btw, the AMD backend cores are not full cores.  Hence my comments about the issues with AMD's definition of a core.  The AMD backend cores look like full physical cores, but have limited functional capability.  SO the extra cores over an Intel are fully usable only for certain things.

True regarding the AMD cores. They share some stuff between them, not fully independent. However, there is more "core" than intel. Again, AMD's cpus use more power (i.e., produce more heat) than Intel. Clock for clock, intel is faster. (intel 4 GHz chip is faster than AMD 4 GHz chip.) AMD has better benchmarks/real world performance in video editing software. (Lots of specifics being glossed over with that last statement.) If you're not a video specialist, intel is the way to go, unless you're on a budget. (Intel i7 6700k runs about $430, street price. The AMD FX8350 can be had for $150. No, the 8350 is not in the same class as the i7, but 1/3 the price for 85% (?) of the performance isn't bad. Heck, even if you called it 75%, it's still pretty good. Again, a lot of specifics being glossed over.)

Stock Intel CPU fans run way quiter then AMD ones. I can't bare the noise so I need to get me the extra 3rd party fan to get rid of this annoyance which adds money to the equation which in the end makes Intel CPU's a better choice also for desktop rigs.

You can check how loud stock 6300 FX fans are on youtube...

Intel no longer sells fans or coolers with their cpus. AMD does. So, take my $430 i7 6700k street price and add $35 for a cooler master hyper 212 evo (GREAT little heat pipe cooler. I forget if it comes with thermal paste.) I can't remember the last time I used a stock cooler, so I forgot to add a noise statement about them. (I prefer Noctua fans.)

[Hister]

Oh, didn't know Intel doesn't disclose stock fans with their CPU's but your point remains somewhat questionable when you compare their prices and gaming output.

I can argue that FX 9590 (costs 220€ here) is in lower league gaming wise then i5 4690 (costs 210€ + add whatewer cooler you buy). i7 CPU's are overkill for average gaming.

Yeah, I've got my eyes set up upon hyper 212 evo - seems the best bang for the buck. Unfurtunately my hardware provider in neighbouring Italy (where costs of computer hardware are about 30% less then here in Slovenia) is not selling them any more.

[c3k]

Oh, didn't know Intel doesn't disclose stock fans with their CPU's but your point remains somewhat questionable when you compare their prices and gaming output.

I can argue that FX 9590 (costs 220€ here) is in lower league gaming wise then i5 4690 (costs 210€ + add whatewer cooler you buy). i7 CPU's are overkill for average gaming.

Yeah, I've got my eyes set up upon hyper 212 evo - seems the best bang for the buck. Unfurtunately my hardware provider in neighbouring Italy (where costs of computer hardware are about 30% less then here in Slovenia) is not selling them any more.

Absolutely agree. I was merely picking the 8 core cpus and making a point about cost and benefit. Most games (not CM) are GPU limited. CM puts more stress on the memory/cpu architecture. An i5 would be overkill for most games, these days.

Regardless, I like Hister's posted NCP settings. I use a very similar setup (1/2 refresh rate), with a LOT of high-def modded artwork.

[Hister]

Yeah, I now run it at half refresh rate too. 3D model is set to improved to at least remedy a bit the short drawing distance ie the blur line that comes with the setting. Will make some tests if my rig is able to hold 30 fps if I set it to even higher. Suspect it wouldn't on bigger/dense maps, I'll see.

 

Can't seem to figure out how to set fps to 31 in nvidia inspector as suggested by Steve to remedy the shortened drawing distance. I can only set it to 35 and that doesn't seem to help. Got to test it once more to be sure.

[Lethaface]

Yeah, I now run it at half refresh rate too. 3D model is set to improved to at least remedy a bit the short drawing distance ie the blur line that comes with the setting. Will make some tests if my rig is able to hold 30 fps if I set it to even higher. Suspect it wouldn't on bigger/dense maps, I'll see.

 

Can't seem to figure out how to set fps to 31 in nvidia inspector as suggested by Steve to remedy the shortened drawing distance. I can only set it to 35 and that doesn't seem to help. Got to test it once more to be sure.

Isn't the adaptive half-refresh rate vsync influencing the fps setting?

[LukeFF]

Intel no longer sells fans or coolers with their cpus. 

Is that a recent thing?

[Hister]

Is that a recent thing?

must be since shops in Italy and Slovenia sell them with stock coolers still.

i5 4690 with stock cooler sells for 210€ in Italy.

[Hister]

Isn't the adaptive half-refresh rate vsync influencing the fps setting?

It locks it to 30 fps. Nvidia inspector allows you to set it in 5 fps steps of your choice. Setting it to 31 supposedly removes the much shorter drawing line. But I can't find the option to set it in increments of 1, only in 5.

[c3k]

Is that a recent thing?

Yeah. The i3/i5/i7 6xxx K series are the ones without fans. Sorry for the confusion. "K" means "unlocked" in intel-speak. They assume that anyone who wants an unlocked multiplier is an enthusiast and will need/want better than stock cooling solutions. My bad since I quoted the i7-6700k prices. I did not make the necessary typing effort to delineate the difference inherent in my use of that specific cpu for my example. (All AMD cpus are unlocked. Not all intel cpus are. I tried to keep apples to apples.)

Ken

[Thewood1]

Funny, I have never encountered an unlocked AMD laptop/mobile CPU.

[Hister]

It locks it to 30 fps. Nvidia inspector allows you to set it in 5 fps steps of your choice. Setting it to 31 supposedly removes the much shorter drawing line. But I can't find the option to set it in increments of 1, only in 5.

So I've experimented with the nvidia inspector setting the frames to 35 to see if that would offset the drawing distance that becomes very short with the half refresh rate setting on (Steve suggested going one frame above 30 would aleviate the problem). Unfortunately my test showed going above 30 doesn't fix the problem or atleast going 35 doesn't since I haven't been able to lock my frames to 31.  

Locking the frames forces you to go into the game settings and set the 3D model to one level higher because locked frames make your drawing distance or blur line as called by some almost right in front of your nose (ie camera position) and looks downright ugly.- for example if you want to have the balanced quality setting of drawing distance while locking the frames to 30 or 35 you need to set 3D model quality to improved in order to get it draw in the same distance as balanced without the frame lock. The downside is that upping 3D model quality setting then in turn decreases your overall game performance. Duh. 

So is it better to lock the frames or not? It's a fine act of balancing and nothing is set in stone. For each map/scenario size/density you have to experiment and see what gives you better results.

For example, for me in the Market Garden module "Sheriff of Osterbeek" scenario if I lock the frames I then need to set the 3D model quality to improved in order to get a satisfying drawing distance. But with that I then can't turn shadows and shaders on if I want the FPS to not drop below 25 (where I already notice game to run to slow for my taste). With locked frames game runs smoother though since there is not so much frames fluctuation and my FPS stays around 25-30 all the time. 

Other option I can do is that I don't lock the screen and leave the 3D model quality to balanced. With that I can then turn shaders and shadows on but then get more obvious stuttering due to high FPS fluctuation from high teens to fifty something frames depending on what direction my camera is facing.

So it comes down to personal taste. Experiment and see what makes your gaming experience better. If you are one of the lucky champs whose hardware rig and driver combo is received well by the game such compromises are not necessary but for all of us who are not so lucky there is the constant balancing act of compromises.      

[Macisle]

I find a frequent visible redraw to be more annoying than a somewhat choppy frame rate -- or even a moderately choppy framerate (try glancing around the room at a rolling pace--your eyes have a bit of a natural "lag" anyway).

In the past, when folks posted Nividia CP tweak ideas, I used to try them, but I never found a group of settings that was better than having the game control all settings, maxing them out, and then dropping model quality to Excellent as standard, or lower if a particular map required it (not often).

Now, my rig is getting a little long in the tooth, so I'll start testing things again when I eventually upgrade, but I think there may be more subjectivity in this than meets the eye, as it were.

On AA settings, letting the game control them was noticeably better than any NCP setting. Using the NCP, there was always a slight (or worse) jaggedness introduced, which is a dealbreaker for me and one of the reasons I don't use Movie Mode.

So, for me personally, AA jaggedness is a total dealbreaker, with noticeable redraw being quite annoying, and frame rate lag being not so annoying, unless it is quite choppy, with the first two still being more annoying unless frame rate lag is down to slideshow levels.

[c3k]

Funny, I have never encountered an unlocked AMD laptop/mobile CPU.

You are correct. I've got a lot of assumptions in my previous. Sigh. I was trying to keep this light and generalized due to the "what's the difference between AMD and intel" nature of the initial question upstream. These days unlocked are "k" for intel and "Black Edition" for AMD. (In my defense, as I glossed over all sorts of sordid and arcane details, AMD used to have all unlocked cpus. Sigh.)

(As stated upstream, for most laptops, I think intel/nvidia is what most would recommend for gaming w/gpu. Purely from a power use/heat output perspective, not necessarily raw performance.)

Edited January 21, 2016 by c3k

[Hister]

On 1/4/2016 at 5:05 AM, Battlefront.com said:

That is incorrect.  The eye can not notice anything over about 30fps.  The reason to have something running at 60fps is so when a bunch of things happen to bog down the hardware that it doesn't go below 30fps. 

This is not correct. My eyes can see a huge difference between 30 and 60 frames in your games. While 30 is still acceptable to play, when it gets to below 30 and especially below 25, it becomes a slide show for my eyes. It could be some people don't notice a difference with their eyes being less sensitive then mine. For me a sweet spot in CM is 50 and above. And my rig can only achieve such frames when not much is shown on the screen. Thus I can't enjoy your games as much as I would want to.

If there would be a way for you devs to try to remedy this, I would be a much happier CM games owner.   

[AstroCat]

I will say for sure without question the fluidity of movement of 30fps vs 60 vs 120 is hugely noticeable.

[Dynaman216]

Keeping a constant FPS is much more important than keeping a maximum.  I'd much rather have a constant 30fps then one bouncing around constantly between 60 and 30.

[AstroCat]

Yeah I lock my fps at 40 for that reason... but it still dips pretty low, but it's better than going form 70 down to 20 and then 30, and then to 45, back to 15...etc...