GriffinCheng+ Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 I rhink someone (probably CDIC) has put up this one before. I finally get my new PC up and running last Sunday (i.e. yesterday. BTW, please accept my apology for all whom I still owe them goodies) It is a Type-B Althon TBird 1.2G. The first game I used to test the new PC is --- (drums rolling) -- CMBO!!! I am running at plain version 1.12 without any mods. I o/c my PC to 1380MHz and load "A Walk in Paris" scenario (not a big one). I was immediately dumped back to desktop (Win98/SE). On the 2nd trial, the game freezes with the screen messed. However, I tried Quake 3 Arena (sorry!) and the "demo" runs like dream @ 1024x768x16! I downgrade the clock speed to 1320MHz. Now CMBO runs very smooth (and beautiful especially @ 1280x1024x16!) Strange, isn't it? BTW, I am still in a process in migrating from my old P2-450 to ATB-1200 later this week. Stay tuned for more tests. Griffin. ------------------ "When you find your PBEM opportents too hard to beat, there is always the AI." "Can't get enough Tank?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Martin Cracauer Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Overclocking is bad. Just because something runs (i.e. Windows with Word), it doesn't mean your computer is working well. There are too many seperate components even within the CPU and some of them may mailfunction without affecting some casual tests. For example, the reason that CMBO is more sensitive is probaboy because it is extremely floating-point heavy. Your FPU isn't even used by most "normal" programs and even many games buidl their mechanism on integer arithmetics. And, BTW, for Combat Mission the cost/performance ratio of the AMD parts is not as good as it usually is, exactly because floating point arithmetic is comparably weaker than in Intel CPUs. I had one of those 300MHz Celeron-A overclocked to 450MHz. All worked well, but the most die-hard test (for me recompiling FreeBSD with itself) showed that not everything is well. The *real* problem here is: what happens when things go wrong. You must not underestimate that most computing is a program is not done for numbers, by for memory addresses. When such a calculation goes wrong, you end up reading or writing the wrong address. If that address is outside the allowed range for a program, the operating systems shoots the program. That is what looks like being dropped to the desktop or the general protection faults. Now, imagine that not only your application (game) is doing address calculation. Your operating system kernel, the part that controls other programs, but harddisks, network etc. as well does address calculation. Combine it with the harddisk write cache every modern OS uses. What happens when you miscalculated an address and write wrong data into the cache? Right, harddisks contents is replaced by random stuff. Now, what happens when the memory range you accidentially overwrite in the cache does not contain cached data contents, but the table that specifies what memory data block is written where on the harddisks: Right, instead of writing the wrong data into the right block, you write into some inncocent data block. Result: You don't even have the contents of files wrong, you have wrong data all over the filesystem, even in files you did not even touch since the computer started up. Now, just for fun, imagine the random location on the harddisk you overwrite do not contain data, but metadata, the tables that say "file XYZ is such and such long and lives in these memory blocks" and "directory abc contains file a b c d...". If you accedentially overwrite these locations, you will end up with deleted files or file that have wrong data block associated with them. The same discussion applies for ECC/partity RAM as well. All my computers are equipped with error-indicating or error-correcting RAM. Not because I think that memory errors are that likely. Because I weigth the possible consequences of the occassional error more than other people. Not to speak of memory modules becoming broken or corroding SIMM/DIMM slots. Martin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GriffinCheng+ Posted March 5, 2001 Author Share Posted March 5, 2001 Martin, First, I would like to thank you lengthly post explaining every technical details here. I actually understand how OS/memory/CPU and CMBO are working together. BUT: (here comes the bad things) And, BTW, for Combat Mission the cost/performance ratio of the AMD parts is not as good as it usually is, exactly because floating point arithmetic is comparably weaker than in Intel CPUs. What makes you think Inter CPUs have superior FPU, or they are better off in price/performance? Check out : CPU guide in Tom's Hardware http://www.tomshardware.com/ and Sharky's Extreme http://www.sharkyextreme.com/ and see the benchmarks yourself. I am using a P2-450 at home and the FPU performance is no where near a G3-400 (yes that is a "lowly" PowerPC on a Powerbook) About the price, toe-to-toe-wise, Intel top-of-the-line 32-bit CPU now is P4-1500 and it costs twice (street price) as ATB-1200B, I have not included the price of RDRAM yet. I am just trying to rationalize my choice of AMD over Intel here. Griffin. ------------------ "When you find your PBEM opportents too hard to beat, there is always the AI." "Can't get enough Tank?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Martin Cracauer Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Originally posted by GriffinCheng+: Martin, First, I would like to thank you lengthly post explaining every technical details here. I actually understand how OS/memory/CPU and CMBO are working together. OK, I didn't mean to insult you. I've seen so many people having corrupted FreeBSD systems and pushing the fault on the OS (which I am working on...) that I thought I should prefer to risk being overly verbose. Check out : CPU guide in Tom's Hardware http://www.tomshardware.com/ and Sharky's Extreme http://www.sharkyextreme.com/ The floatingpoint/integer performance ratio of the AMD CPU is worse than of the intel CPUs, i.e. from SPECfp2000. That shifts the price-performance ratio for a FP intensive program, while I didn't say it necessarily must reverse the better choice. Which in fact would be hard given Intel's highend prices... I am using a P2-450 at home and the FPU performance is no where near a G3-400 (yes that is a "lowly" PowerPC on a Powerbook) Yes, the PowerPC has an even better FP/integer ratio. In fact, the whole 386 architecture was traditionally laughable compared to RISC CPUs. We also shouldn't forget that the floating-point intensive part in CMBO is the combat computation (the blue bar), while slow scrolling can be very annoying as well. For the latter problem, it's probably preferrable to have the cheaper CPU and invest in throughput. Martin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MantaRay Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Why do you find it necessary to OC a 1.2Ghz anyway Grif? The performance boost will not be much, and you run the risk of it overheating (Although you havent OC'd it much) Just doesnt seem like the performance boost is that great to risk it ------------------ When asked, "How many moves do you see ahead?", CAPABLANCA replied: "One move - the best one." Click now for shelter from the Peng thread New Site of the PLA:Rugged Defense Group Ladder The Red Army Mirror Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subvet Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 I have two seperate computers and they are both overclocked by +50%. I've had zero problems with CM or anything else. I think if your computer is just barely stable on low intensity programs then CM would probably give it problems. But if you're rock solid on everything else you can throw at it then CM shouldn't give you a problem. I used the SETI@home software to test the stability of my overclocked systems when I first built them. When I found the limit that the sytems could be run at and remain stable using this program I left them set at that point. My video card is also overclocked by the way and that isn't causing any problems either. ------------------ Craiger All your victory flag are belong to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesreidau Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 I used to have a Celeron 300A too! Overclocked to 450 no problem with either OS or applications/games. I now use a PIII-650E overclocked to 728Mhz with yet again no problems. I`d take it to 800Mhz but my PC100 memory complains too much, I have 256Mb of the stuff and am considering upgrading to PC133 soon to get the extra boost. On a side note, having that new AMD 1.2Ghz CPU must be great! Power to yer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Croda Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 I also am overclocking. PIII 500e @ ~720. I think my PC133 RAM would let me go a bit higher, but my cheap mobo is maxed out. I haven't had a single problem with CM. The only "Side-Effect" I get from oc'ing is occasionally the machine hangs when shuting down. Now, I can't give you anything near the detail that Martin gave above, but that Floating Point/AMD thing sounds feasible. ------------------ Woot! - Maximus2k The New CessPool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer Leader Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Hi Mom! My Athlon 900 is SWEET. No overclocking or other tweaks, just a 32meg Riva TNT2 and the game works without any problems set at 1024 x 768 w/32 bit color. As for the blue bar, it has never taken longer than 15 seconds to compute a turn, and I can play ANY game without slowdowns. My humble opinion: leave the overclocking to the rocket-jocks or wait till your processor is so behind the times that you have to. ------------------ And King Xerxes looked to King Leonidas and spoke. "Our Archers will rain arrows down upon you to blot out the sun." And King Leonidas replied: "Then we will fight in the shade." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 CM is indeed sensitive to overclocking, especially of video cards. It basically says so in the manual. I could not run it without frequent lockups until I un-overclocked my video card (GeForce 256). It didn't seem to mind the CPU overclock, however. ------------------ What a bunch of horsecrap. -Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Heidman Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 I am running an Athlon 750@1.05. I have not had any problems. Rock solid. Whats more, I have never once played a TCP/IP game where the other system ran the turn. Didn't Charles or Steve mention that for CM the Athlon FPU is superior to the Intel? The upper end of chips are always less susceptible to OCing though, since they represent the pick of the chip litter already. OCing is great for getting a below cutting edge chip to run close to cutting edge. You will not have great success getting an already cutting edge chip to run even faster. Jeff Heidman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlin Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Griffin, I assume you've employed proper cooling? Even without OC'ing, a proc with that core speed gets really hot. (Congrats on the new system! I just built a new rig with a 1.1 G Tbird (. I'm getting over 80 fps in Q3 at 1024x768x32 now Too bad CM can't take advantage of it ) ------------------ I pity the fool, thug, or soul who tries to take over the world, then goes cryin' home to his momma. --Mr. T Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GriffinCheng+ Posted March 5, 2001 Author Share Posted March 5, 2001 First, I suppose to be asleep right now but I am surprised to see the number of responses to this one. Thank, btw. 1. I don't understand why people still generalize. AAMOF, K6-3 has FPU almost in par with P2. And Althon/Duron has better FPU than P3 and P4 has WORSE FPU than P3, belive it or now. Please, I mean please, read Tom's Hardware benchmarks on P4 and 1.2G T-Bird. 2. Who don't want ot have get every juice from the system? I have just a Type "B" T-Bird and Type "C" is just avaliable is small quanties here in Hong Kong. They suppose to be even a tag faster. Okay, it is a general understanding that 1.2G T-Bird is not a good o/c platform, Duron 750 or 850 is a far better choice. 3. For cooling, I am using GlobalWin FOP-38 cooler and a good case with 2 intake fans and 1 exhaust fan. In idle condition, Asus Probe tells me the temperature is around 39 degree C and when I run the RC5 (brute force attack on RSA encryption), which makes your cpu works as hard as they could, the temperature is merely 44 degree C. N.B. I have my case sealed and the room temperature is around 20 - 22 degree C. OTOH, that pathetic P3-550 on my office desk, which comes with default fan, goes as high as 45 degree C when idle. It is sitting in an air-cond room! 4. Hence, I am really surprised CMBO is pretty sensitive to o/c. Please note it is not a bad remark, I still love this game. I run the RC5 chrunching and others in 1380 MHz without problems, except CMBO 1.12. I am sorry I forgot to mention that CMBO 1.03 runs perfectly in this speed. Interesting! Thanks for all the kind attention. Griffin. P.S. Where could I get the offical SETI@Home? I read it in a number of o/c sites but well, they don't have a link to it. Bad! P.P.S. I can run the 2 demoes of Q3A but how the FPS rate? I know it sounds dumb. ------------------ "When you find your PBEM opportents too hard to beat, there is always the AI." "Can't get enough Tank?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wwb_99 Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Well, I for one will say there is nothing wrong with overclocking. The Celeron 533A I have running at 800mhz is little different from its faster cousins beyond some paint. Why should I be stuck with a slow machine because I cannot afford to buy newer, more higly rated processors. I did notice alot of problems when I OCed my video card, but those were not limited to CM. I understand the impetus to OC, but then again, how much more speed will you get out of a 1.2 ghz processor to begin with? Most programs cannot use that much power to begin with, much less another 10%. But I see no reason why a PIII 450 should remain a PIII 450. . . WWB ------------------ Before battle, my digital soldiers turn to me and say, Ave, Caesar! Morituri te salutamus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlin Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 Seti@home ------------------ I pity the fool, thug, or soul who tries to take over the world, then goes cryin' home to his momma. --Mr. T Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fangorn Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 One thing that came up today with a chat between myself, Matt and Charles is the speed the AMD Thunderbirds seem to have in Combat Missions calculations. From what I have read the Thunderbirds appear to have very good floating calculation capabilities, and this becomes very noticable in CM when calculating turn resolution. When I first set up my system, I did some benchmarking between it (AMD Thunderbird 900mhz) and a P3 clocked at the same speed. The result was that the AMD was calculating the same turn between 2 to 3 times as fast as the Intel processor! Now one thing to note, the down side of the AMD processors is that I have found they do run hot, very hot. In fact I had to install two extra fans in my system to keep it stable on hot days. Its been running well ever since though KwazyDog I think this adds a lot in the AMD/Intel value debate. The Thunderbird has a very strong FPU engine, allowing the quicker turn resolution. I wonder how the P4 would perform in CM, as it has a much weaker FPU engine. Why to oc a 1.2 ghz Thunderbird you ask? Because it can be done, of course! Just be sure to keep the CPU temps above 60ºC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Napoleon1944 Posted March 5, 2001 Share Posted March 5, 2001 For all you MEGA MACHINE people, I have a massive scenario that needs playtesting. I have a Tbird 850 (overclocked to 935) so I set up large battles. This particular one is maxed out on points for the allies and I need some playtesters with the horsepower to run it. Any help would be appreciated. ------------------ The only enemy I fear is nature. -Napoleon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GriffinCheng+ Posted March 6, 2001 Author Share Posted March 6, 2001 I am sorry that this has degenerated into AMD vs Intel discussions. Thanks for the line to SETI@Home. But how do I check the frame rate for Q3A demos? Griffin. ------------------ "When you find your PBEM opportents too hard to beat, there is always the AI." "Can't get enough Tank?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts