krill Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 Yeah, so, I dug up the ol' specs thread so shoot me. I'm currently orientating on hardware to buy a new gaming rig in time for the year's end flush of new games. Also, if BFC repeats their magic somewhere in 2006, I want my new baby to give the best CMx2 performance possible. So I wonder if CMx2 is going to be just as CPU-intensive as the CM1 engines? I remember a hefty Athlon did wonders for CM:BO back in the day. Will the ranking of CM important PC-components still be as followed?; 1-CPU (hefty FPU work) 2-CPU (gosh, please make the turn go faster ...) 3-CPU (bloody huge Rune scenario's :mad: ) 4-Graphics power 5-RAM size 6-HD space (gazillion mods alert) 7-Number of buttercup holders Or will graphics power be more important this time as Charles is working on bump-map support for shiny lobster armor? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 I'd like to know this too. Based on the bones thrown so far, my guess is that a video card with a high triange rate will be the most desirable component for people who want to play large games. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 T72's got a high polygon count, deformable terrain, weather, etc. etc. I've been assuming (perhaps mistakenly) that whatever system requirements are posted for T72 would be applicable for CMx2 as well. Logical, anyway. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pzman Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 MikeyD, you still don't seem to get the BFC did not design or make T-72. T-72: Balkans on Fire! is a groundbreaking new tank simulation by Russian game developers IDDK/Crazy House and published by Battlefront.com. In any case I don't think a PIII 1Ghz PC will do it for CMx2. I'd stick by Steve comments of needed a computer made in the last year that is on the higher end of the spec charts. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Drago Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 www.pricewatch.com Most of you probably know this website already, but for those who do not, it is one of the best sources for computer parts and other electronics. You have to know a bit about brand-names and basic hardware requierments, but other then that it's my #1 spot for 'puter upgrades. Anyone have similar links for those of us who will be upgrading soon? I know I'm getting an all new system just to enjoy CMx2 and the HistWar: Les Grognards game 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dschugaschwili Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 Will CMX2 benefit from dual-core processors or will it run faster on a higher clocked single-core CPU? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mies Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 Will CMX2 benefit from dual-core processors or will it run faster on a higher clocked single-core CPU? After the first threat in this CMx2 forum was opened I started looking for a nice replacement PC for my old work horse. I found that dual core processors do not do much in the performance increase depertment because of the fact that the software doesn't make good use of it. Can't speak for anyone else but I'll go with an AMD 64 something processor. I'll wait with the descission untill a release date for Cmx2 is mentioned. I want to be able to run the game with all extra's turned on. Mies 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 I would be exceedingly surprised if CMx2 takes specific advantage of dual-core processors. That type of programing is difficult and very time consuming. I think it would be of dubious value for a turn-based game anyway. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 I agree I suspect it would only shorten the crunch time by % 5 to %15 which is not all that much because the length of the time to crunch (wait time for the computer) is dependant on your CPU speed, (and maybe RAM size). There may be no real incentive to write the game code to take advantage of dual processors IMO. Faster computers for this game really one offer one advantage, FASTER crunch times. As you may have noticed the movie plays out at the same time (1 Minute) on EVERY computer because no matter what speed it is because it is "just" a movie. But the crunch time to "script" the movie (wait time between turns) will VARY considerably based on computer CPU processing power (speed). Other than that you need a GOOD video card with LOTS of VRAM. -tom w [ September 20, 2005, 07:40 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 Originally posted by aka_tom_w: Other than that you need a GOOD video card with LOTS of VRAM.You may need more than that. I got a top of the line card with 128MB VRAM just so I could play CMBB and still had mediocre images. What's more, once there are more than about a company of troops on the map, everything gets really jerky as my frame rate goes down to about 3 FPS. I never did figure out what that problem was. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrold Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 Of the top of my head and not knowing the rest of your specs, I would suggest that processor speed and system RAM were the culprits. I have a laptop with a 2.8gHz processor, 1GB RAM, and 128MB VRAM and CMBB speeds along quite nicely. BDH 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baneman Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 Those of us who fly IL2/AEP/PF are stuck on a constantly moving treadmill of upgrading, trying to squeeze a few extra fps or eye-candy out of it. And the new Battle of Britain will be out in a year or so and we'll all need new PC's for THAT ! Therefore I am quietly confident that a machine that can run the top flight sim ( realtime ) will handle the top wargame ( turn based ). Now I just have to save some money... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pzman Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 Originally posted by Michael Emrys: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by aka_tom_w: Other than that you need a GOOD video card with LOTS of VRAM.You may need more than that. I got a top of the line card with 128MB VRAM just so I could play CMBB and still had mediocre images. Michael </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kellysheroes Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 Well if you compare to RTW and all the little men running around on those battlemaps up to 38,400 I don't think CMX2 will be a drop in the bucket compared to what you can get on the screen in RTW. Hell who would want to play a turn based game and move 38,400 men each turn anyway? lol Usually what suks up the graphics card and processor with all these graphic candy adds is textures, seeing every blade of grass does not make a good game. When you turn all that chit off most games will easily run on minimum specs or less very well. But, for the eye candy kiddies I guess you'll need your new computer/graphics card fix, fine by me, I like most of my money sitting in the bank making more money than sitting on my desk depreciating as fast as I can type. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pzman Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 Thats about it isn't it. I've played some games on my computer which are below min specs, maybe not with all the extra stuff, but its better than buying a new system every year just to play a new game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abbott Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 Originally posted by Kellysheroes: I like most of my money sitting in the bank making more money Does it sing and dance to? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Immacolata Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 Originally posted by Jack Carr: [QB] I'm hoping my current rig will be sufficient to run CMx2 with all of its bells and whistles. Nvidia GeForce Ti4600 128mb 4XAGP (I'm already setting aside cash to get a GeForce 6800 Ultra 256mb 8XAGPWith a 2 ghz+ cpu, 1 gig of memory and a 6800 GT card I'd say you would be able to run several current generation fps games very well. Don't bother with the Ultra, its too expensive compared to the miniscule extra oomph it gives you. You could also see what ATI has up its sleeves coming next month. Or just wait for 2006 when CMx2 has shipped 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Carr Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 Originally posted by Immacolata: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Jack Carr: [QB] I'm hoping my current rig will be sufficient to run CMx2 with all of its bells and whistles. Nvidia GeForce Ti4600 128mb 4XAGP (I'm already setting aside cash to get a GeForce 6800 Ultra 256mb 8XAGPWith a 2 ghz+ cpu, 1 gig of memory and a 6800 GT card I'd say you would be able to run several current generation fps games very well. Don't bother with the Ultra, its too expensive compared to the miniscule extra oomph it gives you. You could also see what ATI has up its sleeves coming next month. Or just wait for 2006 when CMx2 has shipped </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 Just out of curiousity, if the data for, say, CMAK were to be stored on cassette tape, how many tapes would it take? Cause that's how we stored data on my very first computer. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Ruddy Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 You too eh? I remember running my poor (unexpanded) vic20 out of memory writing stupid adventure games in CBM Basic.... Those were the days... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GAGA Extrem Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 Will there be a chance to reduce the detail level? I doubt it will run smooth on a 1,4 athlon / 512mb ram / atlantis 9k machine - will it? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 Originally posted by J Ruddy: You too eh? I remember running my poor (unexpanded) vic20 out of memory writing stupid adventure games in CBM Basic.... Those were the days... I think I wrote a text game about commanding a Panther tank, with armour penetration values laughingly taken from squad Leader, all in basic. And I think I did a working copy of Up Front, the Squad Leader card game, again in Basic. I kind of miss simple (verrrry simple) programming but think it would be a nightmare to try and get back into it after so many years. I bought a book on C++ and a sample program but didn't get past the first chapter. Maybe an evening class sometimes... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 "MikeyD, you still don't seem to get the BFC did not design or make T-72." BUT they've both got high polygon count vehicles, deformable terrain, large maps, ballistics math to perform. If T72s environment was radicallly different from CM's I'd hesitate to compare them. But we aren't exactly comparing apples and oranges (Tetris to Doom) here but Macintoshes and Cortlands! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kellysheroes Posted September 23, 2005 Share Posted September 23, 2005 MAC? What's that? Oh now I remember isn't it some hamburger from McDonalds? hehe 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pzman Posted September 24, 2005 Share Posted September 24, 2005 Originally posted by MikeyD: "MikeyD, you still don't seem to get the BFC did not design or make T-72." BUT they've both got high polygon count vehicles, deformable terrain, large maps, ballistics math to perform. If T72s environment was radicallly different from CM's I'd hesitate to compare them. But we aren't exactly comparing apples and oranges (Tetris to Doom) here but Macintoshes and Cortlands! In some ways yes it is, and in many other ways not. T72 is a real time action game, vs turn based CM. I'm sure PIIIs are enough for CMx1, but who knows what kind of specs will be needed for CMx2. I'm just hoping that it will run on my old machine since buying a new one isn't likely till late next year. Again I don't think a G4 Mac will run CMx2, but I'd love to be wrong. 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.