New PC Advice needed.

[vincere]

1. what is the optimal new graphics card for CMx2?

I guess I should avoid the new NVIDIA series like the plague. So what's best?

2. Heard a lot grumble about problems with windows Vista. Should I avoid Vista? Or is this something that will be addressed?

3. What processor. Dual Core or faster single core?

4. If an dual core is advertised like so: "2.66GHz,4MB Cache,1333MHz" does that mean you get two 2.66GHz processors?

5. Is it worth getting two hard drives so I can run games off just one to keep it fast?

[handihoc]

Don't know about the 8000 series Nvidia cards, other than what I've heard, which is that there are still alot of problems.

Vista - I have it but have not installed, stayed with XP. Again, so many people have incompatibility problems with Vista, even now, a year on.

I bought an E6600 Core 2 Duo (2 x 2.4 gig processors) system with 2 Gig Ram last year, in large part for games like SF and ToW, and to be honest, I'm not that impressed. It's definitely a heavy duty system, but I still get slowdowns and/or graphics degradation in big scenarios that really shouldn't be happening. Can't quite fathom the reason. On paper it can eat these games for breakfast, but there's something in the architecture vs coding (my assumption) that doesn't quite gel.

So my advice would be, take the time to research the matter very carefully before purchasing. There are some really powerful rigs around at pretty good prices, but finding the right one that is fully compatible with your needs can be difficult.

[Lethaface]

1. Dont know. My Nvidia 7800GS (AGP) runs it quite ok.

2. No idea

3. Go for Dual Core. More speed for your $

4. Not physically 2procs ofc, but you have two cores running at 2.66 Ghz both having 2MB cache. Without gettin into tech stuff, you almost have the equivalent of the two processors. The 1333Mhz is important, thats the BUS speed.

5. For faster loading times 100%. Games get loaded into your RAM, so FPS wise you wont notice a lot of difference.

[dpabrams]

As soon as the 750W power supply and new tower gets here I am building this:

EVGA nForce 650iUltra (T1 Version) Motherboard

Intel Pentium E2180 Processor 2.0GHz

GeForce 8600 GT Super Video Card - 1GB DDR2

2048MB PC6400 DDR2 Memory

Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 400GB Hard Drive

It is the first PC I have ever built. All told after rebates 715 bucks.

[vincere]

Mmmm, thanks for your input guys. It's very much appreciated! I guess I'm gonna have to take pen to paper and research each aspect.

It's crucial to know if CMSF officially has problems with Vista?

I recall discussions about CMSF using dual core, but can't remember whether CMx2 specifically uses them?

What's the best alternative to NVIDIA. Am I right in thinking Radeon?

[DzrtFox]

I don't know how CM:SF runs with Vista, but I can tell you from first-hand experience to avoid Vista like the plague if at all possible. I do IT Support work and run into clients every day who can't get this or that to run properly and it almost always turns out to be some sort of issue with Vista. Even simple things like getting printers installed can be a nightmare. It also seems to be a massive resource hog that will trudge your computer along slower than it would with XP.

Biggest problem is it's hard to find a system these days without Vista unless you build it yourself. I believe Dell offers certain models with XP as an option, but I would either build a machine yourself or if you aren't comfortable doing that, have someone you know who is do it.

[dpabrams]

That's right mine will be built with XP, after all I have heard about Vista.

[hoolaman]

Unless I'm mistaken VISTA is still not an officially supported OS for CMSF.

[vincere]

Ok guys, Vista is ditched unless I hear of marked improvements.

I considered self build but thought thought that it wouldn't work out that much cheaper. Have to look at it again. If not I guess a local small PC shop would do.

Wonder if I can put my old copy of XP on a new rig?

[Steiner14]

I'm extremely happy with my Quad6600. Even after months it's always again very impressive to start application after application without any slowdown.

I can highly recommend to get a Quad-Core.

What kind of Windoof do you have?

[c3k]

Quad core here. Vista 64-bit allows me to use all 8 gigs of ram. The only issue left is I'm not able to play CMx1 on this machine. Otherwise, it's fine.

Ken

[Paper Tiger]

I've never had any problems running CMSF with Vista that I'm aware of. I get reasonable frames on large maps with all the graphics settings maxxed out. I can't play CMx1 games on Vista though but I'm not missing it anymore. Single processor, 64 bit Pentium 3Ghz with a GeForce 8600GT graphics card and only 1Gb of RAM. I am considering upgrading the processor if I get a significant performance hit from 1.06.

I guess Vista isn't the platform of choice for games but then, neither was XP when it first came out. In spite of it's teeathing problems (1 year on) Vista is probably the future though. I really like it and find the XP system on my laptop and the computers at the office look very flat and dull by comparison.

[Pandur]

my dual core is fooling me(CoreDue 6400 2,13x2 Ghz). when i multitask the task manager "over/into" CMSF in order to see the CPU load while having the game play in the background, i see a CPU load of no more than 48-52%, also while gameplay is super slugish and it should use up more resources.

funny thing is the game uses both CPU´s but both to 25% or one to 40% and the other one to 10%, its constantly changeing.

means i never use more than 1 core in total, wich is 2,13Ghz.

i cant play maps like Tiger is playing while having "more" processor power but utilize less than he have for example.

i play the game in "Balanced" settings, not maxed out, and get still slughish frames in big battles, and i guess its becouse it just use 50% of my processor power instead of 99% or 100%.

i dont know what do do about it, it pisses me off actually.

Tiger stay with your Single coure

[Letsbe Ave.]

Originally posted by Paper Tiger:

... only 1Gb of RAM. I am considering upgrading the processor if I get a significant performance hit from 1.06.

I would heartily recommend getting to 2 GB of memory before upgrading your processor. It's very cheap these days, and your setup would certainly benefit from it...

[Pzman]

I noted a few people talking about not noticing improvements in CM games with Dual Core, so I thought I'd address this. CMx1 and CMx2 games are only use a single core, so no you wont see a huge improvement, unless you change the affinity of your apps. By setting your game to uses its own core, while background apps use the other, you will see an improvement.

When task manager says 25% in regrades to a dual core system, that means, its using 25% of the total output of both cores. Still not great, since its only using 50% of one core, which seems odd to me, because when I play any CM games on my 2.16Ghz Core 2 Duo system, one Core always maxs out. You wont see full CPU load if you exit the game to the task manager though, because it will set CM as a background task.

[Pandur]

...while background apps use the other, you will see an improvement.

what background apps!? there shouldnt be any major ones when playing, at least i handle it that way.

When task manager says 25% in regrades to a dual core system, that means, its using 25% of the total output of both cores.

i wasnt totaly clear befor, in the task manager i get the total load of both cores in a % "number".

AND i see 2 quadratic windows wich graphicaly show the load of both cores independently.

now what i meant above was that the "number" allways displays between 48% to 52% load on both cores combined. "important"; just when its really heavily loaded -> super slugish gameplay. it can be less when everything runs normal!

and this average load of 50% is "allways" splited on both cores. once core 1 has more to do wich reduces resources for core 2. than suddenly load is uped for core 2 and core 1 load sinks...while that happens the % nubmer showes a load of 48% to 52%.

its like both cores have to share 50% of their total combined power. said different, its not possible to have both cores at 100%.

i hope its clear now, if not i go and make a screenshot how this looks in the task manager.

[Other Means]

Originally posted by Pzman:

I noted a few people talking about not noticing improvements in CM games with Dual Core, so I thought I'd address this. CMx1 and CMx2 games are only use a single core, so no you wont see a huge improvement, unless you change the affinity of your apps. By setting your game to uses its own core, while background apps use the other, you will see an improvement.

When task manager says 25% in regrades to a dual core system, that means, its using 25% of the total output of both cores. Still not great, since its only using 50% of one core, which seems odd to me, because when I play any CM games on my 2.16Ghz Core 2 Duo system, one Core always maxs out. You wont see full CPU load if you exit the game to the task manager though, because it will set CM as a background task.

Since ~1.03 SF has been multi-core.

[handihoc]

[Paper Tiger]

OMG! This is very disappointing to hear as I'm in the process of ordering a new Quad core processor. I posted a couple of weeks ago in the Tech forum about this and got told that the game really runs super smooth with Vista 64 and quad core processors.

Perhaps it would be helpful if we had a test scenario and posted our kit specs and our fps with the opening screen. Perhaps 'Allah's fist'?

[Other Means]

AIUI, no game works with Quad core, in fact very few applications do. It will make a difference in creating video or some specialised applications but nothing more than that.

[bodkin]

Originally posted by Other Means:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Pzman:

I noted a few people talking about not noticing improvements in CM games with Dual Core, so I thought I'd address this. CMx1 and CMx2 games are only use a single core, so no you wont see a huge improvement, unless you change the affinity of your apps. By setting your game to uses its own core, while background apps use the other, you will see an improvement.

When task manager says 25% in regrades to a dual core system, that means, its using 25% of the total output of both cores. Still not great, since its only using 50% of one core, which seems odd to me, because when I play any CM games on my 2.16Ghz Core 2 Duo system, one Core always maxs out. You wont see full CPU load if you exit the game to the task manager though, because it will set CM as a background task.

Since ~1.03 SF has been multi-core. </font>

[bodkin]

:confused:

[ February 03, 2008, 04:26 AM: Message edited by: bodkin ]

[Paper Tiger]

I expect there will be a lively debate about this very shortly after the new patch arrives. Without a system upgrade, the new ELOS has to reduce the game's performance on anybody's computer. I'm currently pushing my system to the limit with some of the scenarios I'm designing and it's a safe bet that they'll perform worse with 1.06.

I've not been worrying about that too much as I am able to upgrade my system but if I do that and I don't see any improvement, then I'm going to be pretty depressed about that.

I'm actually glad that I'm a Paradox customer and I'll have to wait another couple of days before I can get 1.06. If there are lots of people complaining about the performance hit, I might not bother for a while.

[Other Means]

Originally posted by bodkin:

{snip}

Are you sure? I thought all 1.03 did was automatically set the affinity to one core so people wouldn't have to ctrl-alt-del and do it themselves. [/QB]

Positive:

[Paper Tiger]

Other Means:

-AIUI, no game works with Quad core, in fact very few applications do. It will make a difference in creating video or some specialised applications but nothing more than that.-

yup, that's what my computer 'man' tells me too. He thinks I'd be better with a dual core. But I read on Amazon (I think) that it's only a matter of time before new games take advantage of the new technology. And some of the guys with quads appear to be very happy with them. At the very least, a quad core can't perform worse than a dual core?