Getting new PC rig, need advice on best CPU for CM

[rocketman]

I know that CM relies a lot on the CPU so a great one is one of my top priorities. Also know that single core performance is important. Which is most important, clock frequency or single core performance?

I'm thinking about an Intel Core i9 10850K with 3,6 GHz 20MB or the Intel Core i7 10700K with 3,8 GHz 16MB which is about 20% cheaper. How important is the MB for CM?

See this chart for single core performance: https://browser.geekbench.com/processor-benchmarks

 

[z1812]

My rule of thumb is always to buy the most I can possibly afford. I would go with your i9 configuration.

What type of Monitor are you thinking of? 2 years ago I bought a 34 inch curved screen monitor. This monitor has greatly increased my gaming immersion and works extremely well for CM. The resolution is 3440x1440, which really delivers crisp and clear visuals.

I also upgraded all of my HD's to SSD's. 

[A Canadian Cat]

1 hour ago, rocketman said:

I'm thinking about an Intel Core i9 10850K with 3,6 GHz 20MB or the Intel Core i7 10700K with 3,8 GHz 16MB which is about 20% cheaper. How important is the MB for CM?

Performance scores are interesting but if they are combining multiple factors to create a score then they will not tell you want you need to know here. I am quite certain that clock speeds for the same generation *do* make a difference. I am not totally clear on if an i9 that has a slightly slower clock speed than an i7 is actually slower in terms of single core performance.

The CM games on windows are compiled as 32 bit apps with large address awareness enabled. That means the game has access to a maximum of 4Gb. So as long as your rig has 4Gb available for the game along with anything else you might be running you are good to go. 16Gb is totally fine.

[rocketman]

1 hour ago, z1812 said:

My rule of thumb is always to buy the most I can possibly afford. I would go with your i9 configuration.

What type of Monitor are you thinking of? 2 years ago I bought a 34 inch curved screen monitor. This monitor has greatly increased my gaming immersion and works extremely well for CM. The resolution is 3440x1440, which really delivers crisp and clear visuals.

I also upgraded all of my HD's to SSD's. 

I just got a BenQ EX2780Q monitor which is 1440p and seems like an awesome monitor, but my old rig can only produce 60Hz refresh which I want for other stuff than CM which probably can't push that limit anyway.

Edit: going to run all my games on a SSD and other less load intensive stuff on a mechanical drive.

Edited November 27, 2020 by rocketman

[rocketman]

36 minutes ago, IanL said:

Performance scores are interesting but if they are combining multiple factors to create a score then they will not tell you want you need to know here. I am quite certain that clock speeds for the same generation *do* make a difference. I am not totally clear on if an i9 that has a slightly slower clock speed than an i7 is actually slower in terms of single core performance.

The CM games on windows are compiled as 32 bit apps with large address awareness enabled. That means the game has access to a maximum of 4Gb. So as long as your rig has 4Gb available for the game along with anything else you might be running you are good to go. 16Gb is totally fine.

I wonder if the "turbo boost" performance could be beneficial for CM. As I understand it, it is used when a single core is pushed to the limit. The i7 has 5,1 GHz and the i9 5,2 GHz so its increase in boost mode pushes it ahead of the i7. So i9 it is?

[z1812]

My monitor and computer is set to 100Hz refresh. So far it seems to work well for CM.

[z1812]

Here are 2 recent articles concerning the i9 versus i7.

https://www.gamingscan.com/intel-core-i7-vs-i9-for-gaming/

https://www.pcmag.com/news/intel-core-i7-vs-core-i9-whats-the-difference

I too am considering a new PC, but will wait until later next year. I probably will go with the i9 as I use  photo and music editing software.

[rocketman]

37 minutes ago, z1812 said:

Here are 2 recent articles concerning the i9 versus i7.

https://www.gamingscan.com/intel-core-i7-vs-i9-for-gaming/

https://www.pcmag.com/news/intel-core-i7-vs-core-i9-whats-the-difference

I too am considering a new PC, but will wait until later next year. I probably will go with the i9 as I use  photo and music editing software.

Thanks, will have a look at them. I do a lot of photo editing and want to get started on video editing as well, so maybe the i9 is the better long term solution. My wallet won't be happy, but I will  

[z1812]

1 hour ago, rocketman said:

Thanks, will have a look at them. I do a lot of photo editing and want to get started on video editing as well, so maybe the i9 is the better long term solution. My wallet won't be happy, but I will  

The articles I linked generally seem to suggest that if gaming is your prime interest then the i7 would be fine. If one is using a lot of productivity software, and may have software for specialized work like photo, video, or music editing, then the i9 is probably the best choice.

[rocketman]

2 hours ago, z1812 said:

The articles I linked generally seem to suggest that if gaming is your prime interest then the i7 would be fine. If one is using a lot of productivity software, and may have software for specialized work like photo, video, or music editing, then the i9 is probably the best choice.

Yes, I'm leaning more toward i9 after reading the articles. 

I have never read anything in this forum about overclocking the CPU for CM. I have never tried it, but if CPU power is key for CM maybe it could unlock more potential for higher FPS or better handling of enormous scenarios.

[z1812]

Your video card choice will also be important. 

[z1812]

I have a very modest system compared to the one you will get. However I have never had to overclock in order to have clear, crisp, and smooth video. With your new set up overclocking is something you shouldn't have to consider.

[MikeyD]

CM generally plays well on 'whatever'... generally speaking. It may be more useful to ask what to avoid. Processor chip X does odd things, graphics card Z causes problems, laptop Y is a struggle to get a good picture. if you avoid those you're in the clear.

[Lethaface]

13 hours ago, rocketman said:

Yes, I'm leaning more toward i9 after reading the articles. 

I have never read anything in this forum about overclocking the CPU for CM. I have never tried it, but if CPU power is key for CM maybe it could unlock more potential for higher FPS or better handling of enormous scenarios.

Because the engine runs one a single core, higher clock frequency does indeed mean more performance for CM. So the single core turbo boost is interesting for this. For the processors you name, the single core turbo speed is same as far as a I can see. 

20 hours ago, rocketman said:

I'm thinking about an Intel Core i9 10850K with 3,6 GHz 20MB or the Intel Core i7 10700K with 3,8 GHz 16MB which is about 20% cheaper. How important is the MB for CM?

The 'MB' is about processor cache: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CPU_cache

This is important and bigger is better in theory, but how I understand the concept in short is that it's more something which you can have too little of, but having too much doesn't make a CPU clock run faster  The cheaper CPU's (celeron etc in the past) used to have much less of the expensive cache and this bottlenecked their performance in certain area's. 

In short; I wouldn't worry to much about the cache, the quality of CPUs you are looking will have adequate cache.

---

Since a couple of years I have a i7-7700k 4.2 Ghz, runs CM quite fine. I think turbo boost is 4.5 Ghz. I didn't bother with overclocking although it should be quite easy for this CPU/mobo combination. However I'm not sure how much difference one would see in CM from overclocking from 4 to let's say 5 GHz. It might be noticable in very large firefights, but not dramatic I think. Overclocking is mostly more of a hobby for enthusiasts (imo).

Purely from CM perspective you don't need that i9 I'd say. But when buying a new rig I'd also advice to either go for a new generation of hardware and pay the big bucks usually rather long lasting performance, or go for a budget build which won't last you that long (or at least will be outdated sooner) .

 

Edited November 28, 2020 by Lethaface

[samuraiman]

I am interested in this topic as someone working on a hugest level CMBS scenario trying to push CM to the max on largest detailed map possible with battalion level combat.  If the battle is too big the game will crash to desktop.  Also, if I save the gave before crashing and then exit and try to load it again, it will crash to desktop during loading.  I have an Intel i9-9980HK CPU @ 2.40GHz and an nvidia gforce RTX-2080 gpu, 64 gb ram and 1T ssd, windows 10 pro.  Is there any PC configuration that will play CM totally maxed out?  I've also heard Macs perform better due to 32bit CM app but I prefer to stick to PC for any future upgrade.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Not that I've discovered on my rig (water cooled i9-9990 @ 3.6Ghz, water cooled RTX-2080Ti, 32gb RAM, monster cache, dedicated .5tb system SSD, 2tb SSD, 4tb SATA), a 4km x 4km 'Delta' style map crashed CM:FI pretty promptly.....But it should run Cyberpunk 2077 nicely (eventually)! 

Edited November 29, 2020 by Sgt.Squarehead

[Artkin]

Uhhh have you guys not been reading the news?

Amd has smashed intel and took the crown. Their newest processors run on significantly less power, are cheaper, and are way faster than Intel's current offerings. I'd switch to team red now. It's only been 10 years... 

[Artkin]

18 hours ago, samuraiman said:

I am interested in this topic as someone working on a hugest level CMBS scenario trying to push CM to the max on largest detailed map possible with battalion level combat.  If the battle is too big the game will crash to desktop.  Also, if I save the gave before crashing and then exit and try to load it again, it will crash to desktop during loading.  I have an Intel i9-9980HK CPU @ 2.40GHz and an nvidia gforce RTX-2080 gpu, 64 gb ram and 1T ssd, windows 10 pro.  Is there any PC configuration that will play CM totally maxed out?  I've also heard Macs perform better due to 32bit CM app but I prefer to stick to PC for any future upgrade.

Download the Rad Full 2 map for CMRT. It's 5.7km x 5.7km. And it works too!

[Sgt.Squarehead]

13 minutes ago, Artkin said:

Uhhh have you guys not been reading the news?

Amd has smashed intel and took the crown. Their newest processors run on significantly less power, are cheaper, and are way faster than Intel's current offerings. I'd switch to team red now. It's only been 10 years... 

Pssst.....I don't think it's the hardware! 

[rocketman]

25 minutes ago, Artkin said:

Uhhh have you guys not been reading the news?

Amd has smashed intel and took the crown. Their newest processors run on significantly less power, are cheaper, and are way faster than Intel's current offerings. I'd switch to team red now. It's only been 10 years... 

IIRC someone posted back when AMD released their new processors that they had problems getting CM to launch or run well. I might have dreamt that though...

[samuraiman]

3 hours ago, Artkin said:

Download the Rad Full 2 map for CMRT. It's 5.7km x 5.7km. And it works too!

So I just tried loading the Rad Full 2 map 5.7km x 5.7km converted to CMBS and got to 54% before 'out of memory' crash on my system.  Are you saying this will load on the AMD?

[Sgt.Squarehead]

I suspect he's trying to wind you up, here are the author's comments:

On 4/7/2014 at 6:35 PM, Pete Wenman said:

Guys - just to mention the 5.6k x 5.6k map still exists. It can be loaded into the editor but it cannot be opened in 3d view unless it is reduced in size to the appropriate maximum dimensions.

 

Any body interested in it ?

 

 

Just remember that 5.6k x 5.6k is the same area as 31 seperate 1k square QB maps. It is very big

 

P

 PS - I have it on fairly good authority that 4km x 4km is the practical limit.....As I said a map that size was more than enough for my machine!  

Edited November 30, 2020 by Sgt.Squarehead

[samuraiman]

5 hours ago, Artkin said:

Download the Rad Full 2 map for CMRT. It's 5.7km x 5.7km. And it works too!

I love the Radzy map.  But I really do want to utilize full 5.7km by 5.7km maps or larger with battalions.  Is that too much to ask?  But seriously, I would like to know the optimal PC system to run the largest battle possible.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Try turning the graphics settings down, but TBH I still think it will crash.....Too much foliage etc.

Radzymin is also available in much more pactical bite-sized chunks.....They're still bigger than most maps.

Edited November 30, 2020 by Sgt.Squarehead

[Artkin]

8 minutes ago, samuraiman said:

I love the Radzy map.  But I really do want to utilize full 5.7km by 5.7km maps or larger with battalions.  Is that too much to ask?  But seriously, I would like to know the optimal PC system to run the largest battle possible.

Sorry, I thought I had a scenario of it @ 5.7x5.7 but the only scenarios I have are 5x5km. I had thought I got it to work. Or 5.5x5.5... Either way I'm able to push 4-6 battalions of mech forces on the 5x5 rad full 2 (trimmed to 5x5). The fps suck on real time. I wonder if they'll be better on wego with just longer  turn load times.