SneakyPete Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Edit:- Title should read 'CMBN Demo Frame Rates/Performance' Really enjoyed playing through the tutorial (got my butt kicked!) My rig is as follows:- Q9550@3.8 Nvidia GTX480 4GB ram Windows 7 64 bit I'm running with details on high at 1680x1050 Should I be getting as low as 12-14fps during the tutorial? My graphics card is hardly getting warm even though I have 'prefer maximum performance' set in Nvidia CP. Although I would think CMBN is more reliant on CPU power I'm a little surprised that it has brought my system to its knees! Any thoughts/ideas/advice appreciated. Pete. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mastiff Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 its CPU intensive, they have not updated this engine yet. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mastiff Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 I get the same FPS 16 to 20 on CM Afghanistan and CMx2 NATO, Marines, Britain And in my sig is what I'm driving lately. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroCat Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Let's try this angle. Please tell me what system I would need to run the game with all in game settings max at 1920x1200 with 8xAF 2xAA Vysnc on and keep fps 30 or higher, preferably 60 fps? I'd bail on the AA and Vsync if I had to because in reality in-game those don't make that big of a difference for me, as far as FPS go. Because I have: Q9650 @3.6Ghz EVGA 580 gtx SSC (270.61 drivers - latest) 4GB DDR2 Vista64 ...and I'm getting into the teens at time during playback with: no AA, 8x AF, no Vsync, Best models, Improved LOD, High Priority. Shadows seem to be the biggest killer often taking over 20fps by turning them on. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G B Scurlock Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 How are you reading your frame rates? Is it in game somewhere? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroCat Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Using FRAPS. http://www.fraps.com/ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SneakyPete Posted May 12, 2011 Author Share Posted May 12, 2011 How are you reading your frame rates? Is it in game somewhere? Using FRAPS here. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
para Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Edit:- Title should read 'CMBN Demo Frame Rates/Performance' Really enjoyed playing through the tutorial (got my butt kicked!) My rig is as follows:- Q9550@3.8 Nvidia GTX480 4GB ram Windows 7 64 bit I'm running with details on high at 1680x1050 Should I be getting as low as 12-14fps during the tutorial? My graphics card is hardly getting warm even though I have 'prefer maximum performance' set in Nvidia CP. Although I would think CMBN is more reliant on CPU power I'm a little surprised that it has brought my system to its knees! Any thoughts/ideas/advice appreciated. Pete. how do you get 1920x1080? thast what my display is running at. can i get that ingame? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroCat Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 1920x1200 is my default desktop so it goes to that by default in-game. You can change your res. in one the config files in the game folder. CHANGING GAME RESOLUTION: By default, the first time the game is launched, the games internal resolution and refresh rate are set to whatever your desktop display is currently set to. We have added two ways to make adjustments to this settings. From inside the game, go to the Main Menu, then select the Options panel. From there you can select the game to run at the following resolutions: Desktop = (the game will run at whatever resolution your desktop is set to) 1024x768 1152x864 1280x960 If you want to run the game in a resolution and refresh rate not listed, you can manually configure these settings by editing the "display size.txt" file located in your game directory. Simply change the numbers that you see there with the width (in pixels) and height (in pixels) and refresh rate (in Hertz) you wish to run the game. Example: For 1440x900 at 75Hz refresh rate, you would delete the numbers in that file and replace with "1440 900 75" (without quotes). If you put in all zeroes example: 0 0 0, the game will revert to using your desktop resolution and refresh rate. Exercise caution and only use a resolution and refresh rate supported by your monitor as damage to your monitor or display adaptor could occur, especially if you use too high a setting. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParaBellum Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 I have a core i5-2500k @4GHz, 8 Gig RAM, GTX 470, Win7 64 bit and the training scenario runs at maxed settings @1920x1080 at 30-40 FPS. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroCat Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 I will see perhaps an average of 30-40 but often times it gets rather sluggish in really low fps down in the 20s and teens. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Unfortunately there are a LOT of factors that determine what framerates people get. We move a lot of data around and if you have a slower subsystem somewhere, then it can throttle down the speed because your system can only go as fast as its slowest component. Having at least 4GB of RAM (and not choked up with other applications) and a 512MB video card is probably the most important things to have for optimal, consistent speed. Processor is not so important. We personally don't necessarily consider 20 fps range "sluggish" for our type of game for some systems under some conditions. The original CMBO would often be lower than that, for example, even in the best of times when the game was first released. We would, of course, like to see 30+ across the board everywhere all the time. So we will keep looking for ways to reduce bottlenecks. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroCat Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 From my experiences with CMSF I am sure the fps I am seeing are "right" and nothing wrong is happening. Just wishing I could get the 40+ silky smooth gameplay with all the bells and whistles. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broadsword56 Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 I'm running the demo and at the closest groundlevel view, I'm seeing a constant flickering over surface of the soldier models (only the troops, not vehicles or terrain or objects). It's as if they are slightly radiocative or have electricity running through them. Maybe it's something funny with the shadows effects? I'm playing with my graphics options to see if turning them down or turning off antialiasing might affect this -- but is anyone else experiencing this? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LemoN Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Got ~5-30 FPS in CM:SF, get 20-50 FPS in CM:BN. System: AMD 64 X2 5200+ nvidia 8800 GTS (640mb) 4gb DDR2 ram Win7 64bit 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asmodeus Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Got 22-35 frames depending on what direction I'm looking in-game, Training mission - The Road to Berlin. Graphic settings I have both set to Balanced, AA off, but if your asking me I'd rather take with this rig here below Maxed out settings and same frame rates as I'm having now. Wondering, where's the choke point of my rig then.. Windows 7, 64-bit, Service Pack 1 installed AMD Phenom II x4 955 Black edition processor 8Gb RAM ATI Radeon HD 5770 x2 (Crossfire) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Springelkamp Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 I have a very low spec machine: - Intel Core 2 CPU 6300 @1.86 GHz, 2GB RAM, ATI 5500 1GB DDR2 But CM:BN runs perfectly fine in Best/Best, AA on, resolution. Only in mega-huge CMSF/CMA scenarios (more than a regiment) I have had an occasional out of memory error. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParaBellum Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Just tried the "Closing the Pocket" scenario and got FPS as low as 12 on my system, grafics maxed @1920x1080. I do expect better performance on a system like mine, to be honest. Core i5-2500k @4GHz, 8 Gig RAM, GTX 470, Win7 64 bit. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SneakyPete Posted May 12, 2011 Author Share Posted May 12, 2011 Astrocat is correct, shadows on seem to be quite a performance hit. I'm seeing 10-20fps improvement with shadows off. I'm getting 20-60fps with 'best settings' and AA on now so much improved. I've managed to beat the training scenario twice now on veteran difficulty so will ramp up the difficulty now 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroCat Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Game is great. Performance is a bit frustrating... For me I need another 20fps on average to be where I'd like to be... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noxnoctum Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Keep in mind FRAPS slows the game down somewhat. I use Teamspeak 2 overlay personally, I think it slows down the game far less... I seem to be getting better performance in this than CMSF, which is strange considering there's more foliage. I'm wondering though... since it doesn't take multi-core CPUs into account, what would be the most effective thing to upgrade to get better performance? As it is I usually hover between 25-40 FPS. I'd like to consistently have 40+ FPS at least... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Springelkamp Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 I seem to be getting better performance in this than CMSF, which is strange considering there's more foliage. But they made tree rendering much more efficient in CM:BN (by using a simpler representation, that still looks very good, at least in moderate woods) A CMSF tree was a more complex 3D object. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noxnoctum Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Well good to know it wasn't all in my head then. Still, anyone got suggestions on boosting performance? I'd really like to never drop below 40 FPS if possible. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scheer Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Well good to know it wasn't all in my head then. Still, anyone got suggestions on boosting performance? I'd really like to never drop below 40 FPS if possible. AFAIK ,CMBN is cpu bound. So changing your processor to sumthing faster might help ( not very astonishing ). Or you could overclock your current system. Or turn down the graphical goodness ... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Springelkamp Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Still, anyone got suggestions on boosting performance? I'd really like to never drop below 40 FPS if possible. The best thing to do then is stop measuring frame rates. :-) 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.