DaveDash Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Hi guys, I just picked up a new computer. Basically, 12GB of RAM, Intel i7 Dual CPU Quad Core 2.93gHz, and an ATI HD 4890 video card. Now the 4890 video card isn't the newest (being about a year and a half old) but it is still probably one of the third-fourth best video cards on the market for gaming today. Every game I throw at my computer it runs at 1920x1200 on max settings fine, including newer games like Dragon Age, Farcry, and so forth. CMSF however the performance on the best settings at 1920x1200 leaves a bit to be desired. It's a bit choppy when viewing a good number of 3D models under "Best" and "Best" (terrain is smooth, but units are not). Having AA/Multisampling on/off doesn't seem to make much of a difference. It's the only game where I cannot run the game satisfactory on high settings. This is purely 3D graphics related and obviously nothing to do with RAM or CPU. Im running the latest ATI video drivers, but just the drivers, I dont have CCC installed, as I am dubious as to whether it helps or not. Happy to be corrected wrong here. Is there any 'tweaking' I can do here, or am I just going to have to suck it up? EDIT: after fiddling around a bit, the biggest cultrit seems to be towns, ie lots of buildings. The game runs best on 'balanced / balanced' which doesn't seem right for this rig. That's what I played on with my laptop which is far inferior spec wise (on 1680x1050 mind you). Downloading and fiddling with CCC doesn't seem to make a hell of a lot of difference. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZPB II Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Try going to task manager with CMSF running, go to processes and set it's priority to high. CMx2 engine is 32-bit and as such doesn't gain anything from, uh I think over 2 or 4GB of RAM and only uses a single core. Just parroting stuff I remember reading aboot here. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 The dual socket Nehalems have one memory bank for each processor and the PCIe slots are on the first processor. It is possible that you can improve the situation by binding the game process to a core that is in the first CPU to prevent it from "wandering off" to the other CPU which isn't directly connected to the PCIe bus and hence the graphics card. It's more likely to be some slowness directly associated with the graphics card, though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveDash Posted January 12, 2011 Author Share Posted January 12, 2011 The dual socket Nehalems have one memory bank for each processor and the PCIe slots are on the first processor. It is possible that you can improve the situation by binding the game process to a core that is in the first CPU to prevent it from "wandering off" to the other CPU which isn't directly connected to the PCIe bus and hence the graphics card. It's more likely to be some slowness directly associated with the graphics card, though. Yeah I feel it's mostly graphics card related. I am wondering if the 1920x1200 resolution is killing the game. I'll change my desktop resolution lower and see if that impacts performance, but I wonder if there are any switches to change the resolution to 1680x1050 and keep my desktop at 1920x1200? It appears the draw distance is way larger on this machine than my previous one, so I am wondering if CMSF does some internal calculations to figure out draw distance that isnt related strictly to graphics settings? I mean trees and vehicles stay high resolution across the map, while grass changes after a certain distance. EDIT: Ok, I am not sure what I have done, but installing CCC, using that to control AA etc, and turning multisampling ON in CMSF (Before it was off!) has given me a huge boost to performance. The game now runs quite well on "Improved" 3D quality (draw distance basically) and Best Textures. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apache Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 All a bit worrying. There is a tendency to expect that 'up everything' and all will be fine where PC gaming is concerned. Fast and powerful processor, modern, big and fast GPU and all will be well. Only reason I am planning an upgrade is that it'll play CMBN better than my ageing Dell XPS which is: PD 830 EM64T 3.Ghz nVidia nForce4 SLI X16 MEMORY DUAL CHANNEL 1024MB (2X512) 667MH (upgraded to 2 GB) 250GB SATA (7200RPM) HARD DRIVE WITH 8MB NVIDIA GEFORCE 6800 256MB SINGLE CARD 600W PSU Even a low end machine would run circles round it I suspect but yours is up in the high end spec, same as the system I plan to build. Hard to know what to do for the best. Last thing I want is to spend big bucks and have it run slow!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveDash Posted January 13, 2011 Author Share Posted January 13, 2011 Well, it doesn't run slow any more after fiddling around with CCC and the in game settings. I get about 30-40fps @ 1920x1200 on "Improved" and "best", with CCC controlled AA (2x) on large maps, which is good enough. But still, it's the only game that I cannot run on a comfortable framerate at max settings. I think it is because on "Best" 3d Modelling (as opposed to improved) the draw distance is a lot higher and there are A LOT of objects to render. Would be interesting to know if anyone can run it on full settings getting 50+ FPS, and what their specs are. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 Yeah, there is something wrong there. My ancient (one year old) system doesn't have your power and I have no problems at all. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 You people need to read his updates. It was just one of the usual ATI driver messes and flipping random switches fixed it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 Not sure if I am one of the "you people" but I was responding to Dave's statement: "But still, it's the only game that I cannot run on a comfortable framerate at max settings." To me, there is something wrong given his powerful system. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apache Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 You people need to read his updates. It was just one of the usual ATI driver messes and flipping random switches fixed it. Well, not sure who made YOU judge and jury dictating what other people should and should not do, perhaps if you took the time to read yourself you would see that something still seems to be amiss. Still, takes all sorts and I did promise myself for 2011 not to waste ANY time getting into arguments with people who demonstrate abrasive and/or obnoxious and arrogant attitudes on forums. Life's too short. You have nice day!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveDash Posted January 14, 2011 Author Share Posted January 14, 2011 Yeah, there is something wrong there. My ancient (one year old) system doesn't have your power and I have no problems at all. Are you ATI or nvidia? Also do you play on best / best? EDIT: Further tests indicate that one of my mods is slowing the game down a bit too (I suspect it's the NATO icons, but will verify in a minute). Removing my entire Z folder gives me an extra 5-10 or so FPS. Still can't play it with satisfactory FPS on BEST 3D Models though, but still it doesnt look to shabby: BEFORE(old computer): AFTER (new computer): 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Dave: I play with highest/best everything and just about every mod available with no problems. I have 6 GB Ram and a good nVidia card (295 I think). I use an SSD for swap files, (but I should have put my whole OS on the SSD as that seems to really make things faster). I would have to see your onscreen movement to determine that maybe I just don't notice jerkiness or whatever you are experiencing. But, you seem well "over-powered" for CMSF, so not sure how you would diagnose other than hiring an expert. MY machine is a dedicated game machine so it has the min of other crap loading at start. May want to check what other crap is running if you have not already. I am sure you will get the cobwebs out eventually. Good luck, it sounds like a great system. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveDash Posted January 14, 2011 Author Share Posted January 14, 2011 Dave: I play with highest/best everything and just about every mod available with no problems. I have 6 GB Ram and a good nVidia card (295 I think). I use an SSD for swap files, (but I should have put my whole OS on the SSD as that seems to really make things faster). I would have to see your onscreen movement to determine that maybe I just don't notice jerkiness or whatever you are experiencing. But, you seem well "over-powered" for CMSF, so not sure how you would diagnose other than hiring an expert. MY machine is a dedicated game machine so it has the min of other crap loading at start. May want to check what other crap is running if you have not already. I am sure you will get the cobwebs out eventually. Good luck, it sounds like a great system. Cheers bud, it's 100% video card related though and not CPU/HDD/RAM. GTX 295 is better than my card I think, that's a very good card. Could also be CMSF just doesn't run as well on ATI's. Some games are like that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apache Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 That's the only thing holding me back from ATI with the new build I will soon be doing. I may not go for absolute top notch GPU for now but maybe a 560 or a 460 and upgrade in 2 -3 years. I hope THAT will be OK. Hope you get it sorted!! And get off those roads........... LOL!!!!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 BTW: My processor is 2.9GHz but combined with other good components and using an SSD for swapfiles, it still seems very competitive with folks with 3.3+GHz 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
normannobrot Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 after having one ATI card, ive promised myself never again...i just found nvidia supported a wider range of games much stronger...good luck dude.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apache Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 BTW: My processor is 2.9GHz but combined with other good components and using an SSD for swapfiles, it still seems very competitive with folks with 3.3+GHz Ah...forgot....the new build will have an SSD (Crucial Real C300 64GB). Thanks for the pointer Erwin!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveDash Posted January 16, 2011 Author Share Posted January 16, 2011 The good news is though this card SLI's very well, and is cheap. I can probably get another -just- for CMSF. Yet these games thus far run on MAX settings at 60+ FPS @ 1920x1200: Far Cry 2 Dragon Age Fallout 3 BF Bad Company 2 Never would have thought CMSF would be the one that pushes my system! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apache Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 Really odd?? Perhaps you could give an update if you find anything else, or if you try and Nvidia card and the problem goes away!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 I always used nVidia. Just be aware that nVidia will show smoke ok but won't show weather FX with Win 7. (Unless there is a fix I don't know about?) Also, I am told that you should put your OS on the SSD for max speed. My builders for some reason argued against that, and I regret I didn't do that (and am scared to uninstall Win 7 from my conventional HD and reinstall onto the SSD - I seem to blow things up easily). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apache Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 I always used nVidia. Just be aware that nVidia will show smoke ok but won't show weather FX with Win 7. (Unless there is a fix I don't know about?) Also, I am told that you should put your OS on the SSD for max speed. My builders for some reason argued against that, and I regret I didn't do that (and am scared to uninstall Win 7 from my conventional HD and reinstall onto the SSD - I seem to blow things up easily). Jeeeeez, it gets worse, no weather!!! It's hard to get an OS other than Win 7 now (albeit XP etc may be available but I don't fancy a new build with an OS that they pull the plug on support wise etc.). It almost seems like building a Win XP machine, on a reasonable but cheap mobo and CPU with an older GPU one or two notches below the 460 may be the best way to go for CM, and save £500 into the bargain!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 If you can afford a powerful dedicated gaming machine without all the other Windows stuff, XP may be the only way to go for now re nVidia and weather. I was really hoping that by now there would be a fix. But, the absence of fog etc. doesn't bother me at all. I used to turn all that stuff off to see what I am doing. BTW: Another guy on another thread (CPT Mike) is complaining about exactly same thing. You guys may want to get your heads together and contact BFC tech support. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveDash Posted January 18, 2011 Author Share Posted January 18, 2011 I always used nVidia. Just be aware that nVidia will show smoke ok but won't show weather FX with Win 7. (Unless there is a fix I don't know about?) Also, I am told that you should put your OS on the SSD for max speed. My builders for some reason argued against that, and I regret I didn't do that (and am scared to uninstall Win 7 from my conventional HD and reinstall onto the SSD - I seem to blow things up easily). Hey mate, HDD speed only comes into play for two reasons in gaming: loading times and if you run out of RAM. I agree that you should use a SSD on your system partition, but HDDs are rarely going to be a bottleneck for gaming. These days it's 80% all video card. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroCat Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Home/Gaming PC: CPU: Q9650@3.6Ghz MB: Gigabyte GA-X48-DQ6 MEM: G.SKILL 4GB/P182 VID: EVGA 580 GTX SSC SND: SB X-Fi XtremeGamer Fatal1ty Pro All latest drivers. Playing under Vista 64. I for sure do not get the performance you'd expect. AA does not make a difference. Model quality does. Turning off trees/shadows does. Resolution does not really matter for fps. I am at 1920x1200 AA-on. I have my driver setting down to Quality and nothing extra forced such as AF or AA gamma. I've been tweaking and building computers for gaming since the beginning and for sure this game has always and still does have real performance issues with graphics rendering. I hope that Normandy has some real graphics engine tweaks. If anyone has any real tweaks that can get those fps up, I'd love to try it! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 I am so surprised that these high power machines are having any problems. I have a 2.9GHz with 64 bit Win 7 and 6 GB Ram. The only really hot component is a 295 nVidia card. I run at 2880x1800 with max quality settings and no problems. There HAS to be something weird going on with your systems. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.