Jump to content
GAZ NZ

Ryzen CPU - Intel latest Gen latest tech vs cm2

Recommended Posts

Has anyone found performance improved using Ryzen chips or latest Intel coffee lake etc?

I'm about to get a Ryzen system with nvidia 1080 gpu ssds 3000mhz ram etc and I'm curious as to wether or not CM2 loads faster ; performs better in big maps with multi cores and better gpus etc

Tech has gone a long way and does this game run well with newer CPUs GPUs?

What's your experiences?

What is the engine optimized for?

Cheers

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GAZ NZ said:

What is the engine optimized for?

It's not.

The engine first roamed the land back in the days of the dinosaurs when openGL was the normal thing to use for a game. Driver support for OpenGL is waning, but CM is stuck using it. From what I read on this board, it's because the developers don't have the resources to switch engines.

5 minutes ago, GAZ NZ said:

Tech has gone a long way and does this game run well with newer CPUs GPUs?

In my experience, no. It runs, but not well. Lots of glitches with shading and shadows flickering on and off. Textures regularly seem to get reloaded (?), leading to temporary freezes. Performance is usually "playable" but varies from smoth to very sluggish.

In short, don't expect miracles in CM from newer hardware.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
50 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

It's not.

The engine first roamed the land back in the days of the dinosaurs when openGL was the normal thing to use for a game. Driver support for OpenGL is waning, but CM is stuck using it. From what I read on this board, it's because the developers don't have the resources to switch engines

In my experience, no. It runs, but not well. Lots of glitches with shading and shadows flickering on and off. Textures regularly seem to get reloaded (?), leading to temporary freezes. Performance is usually "playable" but varies from smoth to very sluggish.

In short, don't expect miracles in CM from newer hardware.

Well then you read the wrong stuff it seems.

OpenGL was naturally the first choice as it provides the only true multi-plattform backbone running on PC and MAC without making complicate ports a neccessity and allowing Mac users to enjoy CM. Just because Apple tries now to force their own engine doesn´t mean OpenGL is from the days of the dinosaurs, what a bs, get a clue.

Also wonders me that a guy with 3k posts still has troubles like this. I spent years playing completely modded CM2 games with additional Reshade on low budget mediocre 7/840m notebooks without any performance issue. Every wise man here knows not to set the two detail settings to high as they will cause bad performance on all PCs, no matter what NASA stuff you got in. When you keep them on "balanced" (and also test the HPP setting) you can pretty much enjoy most scenarios with great fps even on low-end systems without loss in visual fidelity except the unimportant vegetation drawing distance perhaps (which however kills fps).

Battlefront really should modify or even remove some of these graphic detail settings as it is issue no. one when people report bad performance because everyone usually goes for the max out. Would probably lower post count on performance issues on this forum by 70-80%.

Edited by MANoWAR.U51

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MANoWAR.U51 said:

Just because Apple tries now to force their own engine doesn´t mean OpenGL is from the days of the dinosaurs, what a bs, get a clue.

My clue, again from reading this forum, is that Battlefront is aware that there are problems, but that they can't do anything about them, because they are driver related. As I understand it, they argue that the graphics card companies such as Nvidia do not implement OpenGL well in their new drivers. Probably because OpenGL is not very used any more in mainstream gaming.

By the way, here's an article I came across, where they compare a modern game (the new Civilization VI) running on OpenGL on a Mac and DirectX on a Windows PC:

"In our tests, the game only achieved about 22 frames per second during an internal benchmark at 1,620 x 1,050 resolution, on medium settings. We ran the benchmark on a 15-inch MacBook Pro with an AMD Radeon Pro 455 graphics card while running in MacOS. The same system hit 66 FPS when we ran the same benchmark on Windows 10."

https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/why-mac-gaming-is-still-dead/

By the way, I'm not posting this to belittle mac users, nor to praise PC gaming. I hope Mac users can continue to play the game, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I can't game on a laptop, but my anecdotal evidence, as far as upgrades go-

Even the largest maps load in about 2-3 minutes, tops on my trash-can MacPro (which is a terrible computer for other reasons). It was the same for my older MacPro, which did a fine job overall with CMx2. My home-build PC takes the same scenario about twice as long to load. That machine is kitted out with whatever was top of the line about a year ago (two SLI higher-end NVidia cards, fastest i7 processor, lots of RAM, etc). I can check specs later. Upgrading it from my 4 year old home-build improved load times significantly, and I gained frame rates by doing so. It certainly won't hurt.

My main issue with the Mac is my mouse scroll speed, which is fairly slow compared to the PC. Enough so that I tolerate the slightly longer load times on the PC.

Overall, the PC is a bit smoother, and can run everything completely maxed out, even on larger maps (I don't play multi-battalion games like some of you oddballs, but I like larger sized maps with medium sized forces). The Mac can do the same, but scaling down the settings helps keep frame rates smooth.

Edited by benpark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, sburke said:

Thanks @Bulletpoint

@MANoWAR.U51no need to get hyper aggressive. Even if you disagree with him you don’t need to make it personal. Relax 

I am relaxed, don´t be such a sensitive snowflake. I am pretty sure Bulletpoint didn´t get seriously hurt in the process of reading my post and this has nothing to do with agressiveness, agreeing, or disagreeing but with simply pointing out untrue facts. His posts suggest that Combat Mission runs like garbage on every computer and then proceeds with false explanations about engine technicalities which I then happily call bs, simple as that.

 

 

Edited by MANoWAR.U51

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

It's not.

The engine first roamed the land back in the days of the dinosaurs when openGL was the normal thing to use for a game. Driver support for OpenGL is waning, but CM is stuck using it. From what I read on this board, it's because the developers don't have the resources to switch engines.

In my experience, no. It runs, but not well. Lots of glitches with shading and shadows flickering on and off. Textures regularly seem to get reloaded (?), leading to temporary freezes. Performance is usually "playable" but varies from smoth to very sluggish.

In short, don't expect miracles in CM from newer hardware.

To be fair, most of those problems pertained to CMSF1, it's gotten a lot better with CMBS and CMBN.

I also think the CM-series prefer Intel CPUs and Nvidia GPUs, but not sure about it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
41 minutes ago, MANoWAR.U51 said:

I am relaxed, don´t be such a sensitive snowflake. I am pretty sure Bulletpoint didn´t get seriously hurt in the process of reading my post and this has nothing to do with agressiveness, agreeing, or disagreeing but with simply pointing out untrue facts. His posts suggest that Combat Mission runs like garbage on every computer and then proceeds with false explanations about engine technicalities which I then happily call bs, simple as that.

Really, that is your response? Okay so I expect you will be able respond with the same diplomacy as bulletpoint did when someone responds to you with things like 

 what a bs, get a clue.

Also wonders me that a guy with 3k posts still has troubles like this.

Using the term snowflake when requested for a little more use of civility isn’t exactly a grown up response.

 

Edited by sburke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, sburke said:

Really, that is your response? Okay so I expect you will be able respond with the same diplomacy as bulletpoint did when someone responds to you with things like 

 what a bs, get a clue.

Also wonders me that a guy with 3k posts still has troubles like this.

Using the term snowflake when requested for a little more use of civility isn’t exactly a grown up response.

 

Hear, hear!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been building a new gaming PC every 2 years from the old i7-860 up to my current 8086k@5.2 ghz, and I have not noticed a significant performance change in Combat Mission. Unless your current PC is a dinosaur you won't notice any difference.

 

5 hours ago, MANoWAR.U51 said:

Well then you read the wrong stuff it seems.

OpenGL was naturally the first choice as it provides the only true multi-plattform backbone running on PC and MAC without making complicate ports a neccessity and allowing Mac users to enjoy CM. Just because Apple tries now to force their own engine doesn´t mean OpenGL is from the days of the dinosaurs, what a bs, get a clue.

Also wonders me that a guy with 3k posts still has troubles like this. I spent years playing completely modded CM2 games with additional Reshade on low budget mediocre 7/840m notebooks without any performance issue. Every wise man here knows not to set the two detail settings to high as they will cause bad performance on all PCs, no matter what NASA stuff you got in. When you keep them on "balanced" (and also test the HPP setting) you can pretty much enjoy most scenarios with great fps even on low-end systems without loss in visual fidelity except the unimportant vegetation drawing distance perhaps (which however kills fps).

Battlefront really should modify or even remove some of these graphic detail settings as it is issue no. one when people report bad performance because everyone usually goes for the max out. Would probably lower post count on performance issues on this forum by 70-80%.

Apple is doing more than trying to force people off OpenGL, given they plan on removing support entirely in future versions. It's likely that the recently released Macbook Pro will be the last one people will be able to play CMx2 games on. Of course, new Apple machines mix high costs, fast cpus and fancy cases with low quality cost-saving garbage components and no one should buy them.

 

OpenGL was definitely the choice for cross-platform development in the mid-2000s, but OpenGL was not a great choice for developers with limited experience or resources vs DirectX, given how much more difficult it was to implement OpenGL correctly. As a consequence, there are issues in CMx2 which will likely be with the game until its end. Whether the pain and increased problems for Windows users was worth it to onboard some Mac people is a question only Battlefront can answer.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, sburke said:

Really, that is your response? Okay so I expect you will be able respond with the same diplomacy as bulletpoint did when someone responds to you with things like 

 what a bs, get a clue.

Also wonders me that a guy with 3k posts still has troubles like this.

Using the term snowflake when requested for a little more use of civility isn’t exactly a grown up response.

 

I already gave you an explanation.

1 hour ago, SgtHatred said:

I've been building a new gaming PC every 2 years from the old i7-860 up to my current 8086k@5.2 ghz, and I have not noticed a significant performance change in Combat Mission. Unless your current PC is a dinosaur you won't notice any difference.

Same here, upgrading to a sophisticated gaming rig didn´t give me that much benefit for CM which already was running fine on my low end systems. Same applies for dozen guys here running CM2 without a problem on mainly notebooks considered "crappy" by modern gaming standards.

Same goes for dozen other games out there. Graviteam Tactics (which surprise surprise runs on modern directx iteration without mac support) also won´t run that much better on a new high end beast and also goes crap when maxed out even on NORAD hardware without looking that much better. So no it isn´t a Combat Mission, OpenGL or whatever exclusive problem or issue and I again call this disputed claim happily B S.

Sure CM2´s engine is far from perfect . However I´ve seen no big performance issues observing it on countless (crappy) systems but people come here and leave melodramatic posts about how cursed the performance allegedly is. Sure there are people with real issues and there is a lot of room for improvement but I am pretty sure many here exaggerate. What I´ve definitely observed are plenty of guys trying to cruise on completely messed CM or system settings in CM2 who then love pointing fingers.

Stating the following won´t earn me Burke´s diplomacy award but in 8/10 cases the main problem is not in the CM2 engine but exists between chair and keyboard.

Edited by MANoWAR.U51

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, MANoWAR.U51 said:

 

Same here, upgrading to a sophisticated gaming rig didn´t give me that much benefit for CM which already was running fine on my low end systems. Same applies for dozen guys here running CM2 owithout a problem on notebooks considered "crappy" by modern gaming standards.

Same goes for dozen other games out there. Graviteam Tactics (which surprise surprise runs on modern directx iteration without mac support) also won´t run that much better on a new high end beast and also goes crap when maxed out even on NORAD hardware without looking that much better. So again I happily call this disputed claim B S .

Sure CM2´s engine is far from perfect . However I´ve seen no big performance issues observing it on countless (crappy) systems but people come here and leave melodramatic posts about how cursed the performance allegedly is. Sure there are people with real issues and there is a lot of room for improvement but I am pretty sure many here exaggerate. What I´ve definitely observed are plenty of guys trying to cruise on completely messed CM or system settings in CM2 who then love pointing fingers. Have to exclude Mac systems because I have not much experience with them as not many here use them.

Stating the following won´t earn me Burke´s diplomacy award but in 8/10 cases the main problem is not in the CM2 engine but exists between chair and keyboard.

Well, I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, but I certainly don't agree with you. No performance gain in 9 years of hardware advances would be ok of CMx2 was lightning fast already, but it absolutely is not, and this indicates a design issue with the engine. I'm not sure how you could come to any other conclusion... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, SgtHatred said:

Well, I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, but I certainly don't agree with you. No performance gain in 9 years of hardware advances would be ok of CMx2 was lightning fast already, but it absolutely is not, and this indicates a design issue with the engine. I'm not sure how you could come to any other conclusion... 

Since when is "same here", I agree with you on every topic? I said that upgrading didn´t give me a performance upgrade either but explained that is was running already fine for me. Stopped reading your tech mumble after "likely" nor is your performance problem since 9 years my issue as CM2 runs perfectly fine for us. I´m not sure how you could come to any other conclusion.

Edited by MANoWAR.U51

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, sburke said:

Really, that is your response? Okay so I expect you will be able respond with the same diplomacy as bulletpoint did when someone responds to you with things like 

I recommend everyone just add him to your ignore list. Then you don't have to see this silliness.

Quote

Using the term snowflake when requested for a little more use of civility isn’t exactly a grown up response.

I know - that's why I like the term so much :D

Edited by IanL
spelling - of course

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, IanL said:

I recommend everyone just add him to your ignore list. Then you don't have to see this silliness.

I know - taht's why I like the term so much :D

Sure group ganking other forums members just because they have an argument with the "old guard" here was always your biggest strength here IanL. How about you stalk forum accounts like in the old days? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My brother and I upgrade our PCs almost every year.  The framerates for both of us have improved only slightly.  My current laptop is an i7-8650 (3.8GHz) with an nVidia 1060  It runs and loads only slightly faster than my 4-year old i7-4720 (2.3GHz) with a 745 .   At max settings, the 8650 sees around 31 fps in Barkmann's Corner.  The 4720 saw about 29.  The biggest difference I saw was an SSD that allows somewhat faster loading and seems to load textures on the fly a little faster.  My brother has a desktop he just built from scratch with a similar CPU, but a 1080 and sees almost no difference.

The short of it is, CM2 doesn't really take advantage of new capabilities of CPUs and GPUs and hasn't for years.  CM2 likes raw horsepower.  If all you run is CM games.  Get the fastest CPU you can, regardless of the number of cores.  An average 1-2 year old GPU is more than enough.

One slightly weird thing is my son has a school laptop optimized for CAD, where OpenGL is a mandatory support criteria.  His runs CM2 better with an MX150 than my 1060.  Everything on DirectX my laptop kills his.  But not CM2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Thewood1 said:

My brother and I upgrade our PCs almost every year.  The framerates for both of us have improved only slightly.  My current laptop is an i7-8650 (3.8GHz) with an nVidia 1060  It runs and loads only slightly faster than my 4-year old i7-4720 (2.3GHz) with a 745 .   At max settings, the 8650 sees around 31 fps in Barkmann's Corner.  The 4720 saw about 29.  The biggest difference I saw was an SSD that allows somewhat faster loading and seems to load textures on the fly a little faster.  My brother has a desktop he just built from scratch with a similar CPU, but a 1080 and sees almost no difference.

The short of it is, CM2 doesn't really take advantage of new capabilities of CPUs and GPUs and hasn't for years.  CM2 likes raw horsepower.  If all you run is CM games.  Get the fastest CPU you can, regardless of the number of cores.  An average 1-2 year old GPU is more than enough.

That is a good summary.

1 minute ago, Thewood1 said:

One slightly weird thing is my son has a school laptop optimized for CAD, where OpenGL is a mandatory support criteria.  His runs CM2 better with an MX150 than my 1060.  Everything on DirectX my laptop kills his.  But not CM2.

Interesting. I wonder if it is an OpenGL implementation difference between the drivers he has for the m50 and the drivers you have for the 1060.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think all the teeth gnashing and hand-wringing still only points at OpenGL and the way its implemented in CM.  IIRC, not only is BFC using OpenGL, their libraries are based on older versions of OpenGL.  OpenGL has progressed over the years and the video card makers have to progress with it or be out of the CAD market, which is a big market.   It might be a double whammy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, IanL said:

I recommend everyone just add him to your ignore list. Then you don't have to see this silliness.

Good suggestion.  Done.  Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
35 minutes ago, MANoWAR.U51 said:

Since when is "same here", I agree with you on every topic? I said that upgrading didn´t give me a performance upgrade either but explained that is was running already fine for me. Stopped reading your tech mumble after "likely" nor is your performance problem since 9 years my issue as CM2 runs perfectly fine for us. I´m not sure how you could come to any other conclusion.

CMx2 only "runs fine" for you if you have low standards. CMx2 works, but performance is an issue.

Edited by SgtHatred

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, MANoWAR.U51 said:

Stating the following won´t earn me Burke´s diplomacy award but in 8/10 cases the main problem is not in the CM2 engine but exists between chair and keyboard.

Actually have no problem with that statement snowflake, but you seem unable to understand the point and not be so subjective. 

But hey good idea, Burke’s diplomacy award. Today’s award goes to bulletpoint!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
59 minutes ago, SgtHatred said:

CMx2 only "runs fine" for you if you have low standards. CMx2 works, but performance is an issue.

Well then okay I have low standards because I don´t realize how crappy my CM2 runs, whatever you say, suit yourself.

Just put me on the ignore list like IanL suggested, there is no point in keeping this going.

Edited by MANoWAR.U51

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it strange with all the discussion about how CM2 performs and even BFC stating it isn't optimized for modern PCs that you would come in be surprised when a number of people push back.  Bulletpoint isn't out in left field on this issue.  Its a well discussed topic.

How about telling us your PC specs and what you get for fps on specific scenarios.  That should settle it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×