..CMAK running a lot slower than CMBB..

[phil stanbridge]

CMAK definitely *appears* to run slower than CMBB, like for like. Is there any specific reason for this? My specs are very high :-

Pentium 4 (3.2C)
Asus P4C800-E deluxe
1024mb PC3500 DDR
Nvidia 5950 Ultra (256mb)

DX9b
53.03

Windows XP SP1 with most of the hotixes applied

I have to use modern display drivers because of the card, and my system is uptodate. It runs everything perfectly well, and CMBB and CMAK run well too, it's just CMAK takes longer to play. ie the blue bar seems slower to me, even if I disable the smoke effects.

[phil stanbridge]

To add, I have Norton Anti-virus installed - could that be an issue?

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by phil stanbridge:
...the blue bar seems slower to me...Which blue bar, the pale blue "Computer Player Thinking" bar or the dark blue crunching-the-turn bar? And how much slower? Seconds? Minutes?

AK does come with somewhat higher rez graphics, but that shouldn't effect either of the two bars. Are you playing a scenario where lots of tanks and guns are shooting at each other? That can slow down the crunching as the computer has to work through the math of all the projectiles fired.

I'll leave it to the PC experts to sort out your system (I'm a Mac guy myself), but those thoughts came to me immediately.

Michael

[TufenHuden]

With a rocket rig like that you should run it like
a champ,got to be a bug.... :eek:

[phil stanbridge]

The 'crunching' bar - the dark blue one I think it is. I think it might have been the scenario I was playing, as it had 4500 (or so) points and lots and lots of calculations to make. I had to wait a good 30-40 seconds per turn - which might sound like a quick turn for the average rig, but I've built this machine purely so I can play larger battles quickly. It was certainly quicker for CMBB, but as you say, it might be because of the slight modification to the graphics et al. It's certainly noticeable in my eyes that this game is slower than CMBB.

[rune]

There are a couple scenarios on the CD that are massive with huge maps. They will tax even that system. However, since there were people who even played the games with 15 minutes to process a turn, didn't want to leave them out.


Rune

[Jack Carr]

Once your machine has figured out what's going to happen and you are watching the turn being "played out", how does your machine handle such things as moving around the battlefield, selecting units, etc.?

A 4500 point battle is a good size battle. Lots of calculations to make every turn with that many points. As long as you can move around pretty quickly once the turn starts I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that there is a problem at all.

By the way, nice machine!

I can't wait until the next generation of Pentiums hit the shelves. I'm hoping the current high end AMD XP's and Pentium 4's drop drastically in price. That's when I'll be upgrading again.

[phil stanbridge]

Once the calculations are done it's superb - no lag at all with the latest official dets - it's just comparing it with a like size battle in CMBB this takes longer to calculate.

Thanks for the comments on my machine. I've just got my hands on a 22" CRT also, and running at 1600x1200 looks sweet, although it's blurred (in 2d) at the moment. I'm getting an ATi XT to test next week. I realise I will loose the fog, but the AF looks better with the Radeon than with the 5950.

[easytarget]

Originally posted by Jack Carr:
I can't wait until the next generation of Pentiums hit the shelves. I'm hoping the current high end AMD XP's and Pentium 4's drop drastically in price. That's when I'll be upgrading again. I'd recommend waiting till PCI Express is included. It's the next thing coming out that will make a real performance difference. And in all liklihood, a big difference.

For more about what this means see: http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=1087