Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 4 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
#3292221 - 05/11/11 03:28 PM Re: Can't handle much more than 15 planes offline, worried about campaign. [Re: Scoobe]  
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 599
arjisme Offline
Member
arjisme  Offline
Member

Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 599
Plano, TX
Originally Posted By: Scoobe
Im not getting any slow downs in ROF, with max settings and max number of different planes using QMB missions.
Im using an overclocked core i7 860 with 4 gb ram and an overclocked 460 GTX 1gb vram. all setting in ROF are max.
CPU is overclocked to 4ghz and video card overclocked to 900.

Note: I use to get slowdowns with my old 260 VC, once I replaced it with the 460, they went away.

Rob

What resolution are you running?

Inline advert (2nd and 3rd post)

#3292282 - 05/11/11 04:20 PM Re: Can't handle much more than 15 planes offline, worried about campaign. [Re: Feathered_IV]  
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,499
VF-2 John Banks Offline
Member
VF-2 John Banks  Offline
Member

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,499
Berlin, Germany
Thanks KnowBreaks!

I want to try to disable HT just for the heck of it. smile Although i don't really have performance issues with ROF, except in very large furballs, but that seems to be somewhat normal considering all the calculations needed to be done at the same time for all the planes. Show me a sim where you don't get any slowdowns within a large scale battle.


Intel Core I7-4790K @ 4x4GHz (oc'ed to 4x4,5 GHz on air)
be quiet! Dark Rock Pro 3 CPU Cooler (250W TDP)
ASUS Z97-C motherboard
ASUS STRIX-GTX970-DC2OC-4GD5
ASUS ROG Xonar Phoebus Solo Soundcard, PCIe
2 x 4GB GEIL DDR3 Value RAM
ANTEC PSU (750W)
Toshiba 37" LCD TV (1920x1080x32)
Win 7 Home Pro (64bit)
240 GB Corsair SSD (Force Series 3)
TrackIR4 Pro
HOTAS Cougar + "Uber NxT advanced" gimbal mod
SIMPED F-16 Pedals
SAITEK Throttle Quadrant
A2 leather jacket & leather gloves
#3292296 - 05/11/11 04:31 PM Re: Can't handle much more than 15 planes offline, worried about campaign. [Re: Feathered_IV]  
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 788
NattyIced Offline
Member
NattyIced  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 788
Hey John,

You can check out this article here regarding HT for game performance. At the bottom it has the tested performances - HT on and HT off.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i7-975-950_7.html#sect0

#3292344 - 05/11/11 05:20 PM Re: Can't handle much more than 15 planes offline, worried about campaign. [Re: Feathered_IV]  
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 218
KnowBreaks Offline
Member
KnowBreaks  Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 218
julian & NattyIced - So, if I'm following, neither of you cares to accept my legitimate offer to resolve a dispute conclusively, by consulting unbiased experts; still favoring to go on about some question that is pretty much proven immaterial since I posted the requirements of the OS according to it's producer...

And, neither of you have anything to say about your early (and continued) refusal to accept the OP's machine is short on memory, according to the folks who designed the OS.

And no, I'm not "incapable of explaining your divine reasoning". Your question reflects a lack of understanding of the subject matter, and is also irrelevant, given that Windows 7 has a requirement of 2G minimum. I don't mind having an intelligent, informed discussion about things like this, but I have no interest in indulging sheer blather just because you think I should.

The (now proven) fact is, the OP's machine barely meets the minimum requirements for the OS, and it's no small wonder running RoF on top of that might be somewhat "challenged".

NattyIced, yes, you did say early to overclock the CPU - and you'll find no contention from me in this thread on that point. However, you also said to disable HyperThreading, which according to Intel doesn't exist on the OP's CPU (and therefore cannot be 'disabled'):

http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=29765&wapkw=(q6600)

This indicated to me, early on, that there is reason to question your expertise in this area. A question which seems reinforced, BTW, now that we've factually established the OS requirements are in direct conflict with your 'advice' here, since you repeatedly stated the OP should not 'waste money' by adding memory.

And no, julian, you didn't mention your experience at all, which would be why I was referring to you both in the collective, saying neither of you posted "anything in any detail about experience". By most reasonable assessments, saying nothing at all is a lot like not saying anything in any level of detail...but if you must split such hairs in an effort to salvage your technical failings in this thread, by all means.

Interesting. You guys do a fantastic job of (attemting to) evade a point.

For those who have expressed this amounts to some sort of 'personal' contest or what-have-you: Often, the source of information has a lot to do with the validity of that information. I don't desire to go on about most of this stuff; in each case I was careful to point out that I was simply responding to NattyIced's continued questioning of my reasoning. The intent, for me, is to provide valid information that will be helpful to the OP, and anyone else who might seek answers here - and, unfortunately, not everyone who wants to post advice seems to know what they're talking about. So, you might consider it's a service, of sorts, to point out, and clarify as needed, what is valid advice and what should probably be taken with a grain of salt. I've made no effort to force anyone to agree with me, simply posting factual information (with sources) and letting the reader(s) decide for themselves whether anything is valid or not.

I'm sorry if some of you find this troubling, but I should think you'd all be interested in this forum being a place to get *good* advice, based on fact, supported by external references. If that's unwelcome, I can understand. Just trying to help those who may not know how to spot this sort of "bad" advice.

Late update: A lot of discussion about HyperThreading here. Just so it's clear, according to Intel, only three socket 775 multi-core CPU's support HyperThreading technology, a Pentium 840, a 955, and a 965. That means no Core2Duos or Core2Quads support HT. Therefore it's impossible to disable HT in BIOS on any other socket 775 CPU besides those three older P4 chips, because no others support it to begin with.

The link NattyIced provides above includes a comparison to a QX9770 among the tests run on Core i7 CPU's (which *do* support HT, I didn't know that). Granted, I haven't the time to read the entire article, but I'm not sure why an article discussing the effects of disabling HT would include comparison to a CPU that doesn't support it(???)


System Specs:
Intel Core i7-930, OC @ 3.36G
Scythe Grand Kama Cross HS/F
Gigabyte GA-X58-USB3 mainboard
2x Seagate 500G Barracuda (RAID0; C:)
6G OCZ Gold Edition DDR3/10666 Triple Channel
eVGA GTX570 1280M GDDR5 PCIe2.0x16
AMCC/3Ware 9650SE SATA 3G/s RAID controller:
4x OCZ 30G SATA 3G/s Vertex SSD (RAID0; D:)
Corsair TX-750 PSU, CoolerMaster CM-690 case; 4x 120mm fans
TrackIR 5 & TrackClip Pro
Windows7 x64 Home Premium
#3292357 - 05/11/11 05:30 PM Re: Can't handle much more than 15 planes offline, worried about campaign. [Re: Feathered_IV]  
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 788
NattyIced Offline
Member
NattyIced  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 788
Windows has a paging file to shuffle items out of memory that still need to be manipulated but aren't immediately needed and can be cached temporarily. It will use this paging file extensively if the system is out of memory and has new data it needs to manipulate.

Hence, unless the hard drive is being accessed to use the paging file the memory is not running low and therefore more is not needed. Now if there is a lot of caching to the page file, then more memory is needed. More memory only increases performance when there is active caching to the paging file.

No, I do not have a certificate. I have a degree in Network Management.

I'm not going to continue on this, as others have asked it be ended.

#3292410 - 05/11/11 06:05 PM Re: Can't handle much more than 15 planes offline, worried about campaign. [Re: Feathered_IV]  
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,256
Bandy Offline
Member
Bandy  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,256
Wishing I was in the La Cloche
RE: page file (aka virtual memory), put it on a physically different drive, i.e. not just a different partition, a completely different internal drive from the OS and games/programs. Maybe that is as obvious as dirt to some, but if it helps just one person...


4x2.66 GHz Xeons, XFX 4870 1 GB, 11 GB DDR2 RAM, Win7 Pro x64, 120 GB OCZ Vertex2 (MLC, Sandforce)
26" VIZIO 1920x1200, Logitech FF 3D Pro, CH pedals, Track IR4
#3292419 - 05/11/11 06:14 PM Re: Can't handle much more than 15 planes offline, worried about campaign. [Re: arjisme]  
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,939
Scoobe Offline
Senior Member
Scoobe  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,939
Originally Posted By: arjisme
Originally Posted By: Scoobe
Im not getting any slow downs in ROF, with max settings and max number of different planes using QMB missions.
Im using an overclocked core i7 860 with 4 gb ram and an overclocked 460 GTX 1gb vram. all setting in ROF are max.
CPU is overclocked to 4ghz and video card overclocked to 900.

Note: I use to get slowdowns with my old 260 VC, once I replaced it with the 460, they went away.

Rob

What resolution are you running?


Running 1920*1080 (Samsung 27")
Using win 7 64

Rob


Intel Core i7-3770K
GB (4 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 2000 (PC3 16000)
MSI GTX 960 GTX 4GB
#3292495 - 05/11/11 07:36 PM Re: Can't handle much more than 15 planes offline, worried about campaign. [Re: KnowBreaks]  
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,188
Mahoney Offline
Member
Mahoney  Offline
Member

Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,188
Twickenham, London, UK
Originally Posted By: KnowBreaks

However, it appears your mistake was in not noticing three things I actually stated about this (interestingly enough, you quoted one above):

1. I wrote HyperThreading (notice the "title case"). That's Intel's trademark for a certain technology that (if I recall) existed primarily in the late-model P4's, before actual multi-core CPUs.

2. I wrote HyperThreading, proper - meaning CPU's that support the above Intel trademarked technology - opposed to "hyperthreading" that isn't part of the HyperThreading technology.

3. I wrote [sic] "by all means, do stop by the Intel site to confirm this..."


I did; neither wikipedia not intel seem to make the distinction between HyperThreading and hyperthreading / Hyper-Threading that you do.

Intel give a list of processors that support Hyper-Threading (note the hyphen that they prefer):
http://ark.intel.com/MySearch.aspx?HyperThreading=true

You will note it contains both the P4 (towards the bottom) and the i7.

Wikipedia's article draws no distinction and simply states
Quote:
Hyper-threading (officially Hyper-Threading Technology, and abbreviated HT Technology, HTT or HT) is Intel's term for its simultaneous multithreading implementation in its Atom, Core i3, Core i5, Core i7, Itanium, Pentium 4 and Xeon CPUs ... Intel released the Nehalem (Core i7) in November 2008 in which hyper-threading makes a return

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyper-threading

Needless to say I wouldn't have bothered to reference all this (or indeed research it!) were it not that in response to a very mildly worded query you chose to reply with:

Originally Posted By: KnowBreaks
You might take a moment to read more carefully before responding, sir. Maybe do some research, as I encouraged in my statements. ... a lot of folks are just determined to misquote, spread uninformed drivel, and thereby jump on the "You're wrong" bandwagon ... you're only hurting yourselves (and unfortunately, those who listen to you)


and then had the gall to suggest I was one of the

Originally Posted By: KnowBreaks
people [who are] so willing to jump all over me here


It's difficult to see how anyone could do a more comprehensive job of "jumping all over someone" than your post.

#3292562 - 05/11/11 08:52 PM Re: Can't handle much more than 15 planes offline, worried about campaign. [Re: Feathered_IV]  
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 218
KnowBreaks Offline
Member
KnowBreaks  Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 218
Mahoney,

Intel *does* make the distinction quit clearly, in several places, among which is a (very clear) list of CPUs that support HT (proper). As I posted since, only 3 late-model Pentium 4 CPUs for socket 775 support HT. (There's even a filter tool that you can use to find only 775 CPUs that support HT).

I would say that the word "No" appearing next to the CPU in the table under HT support is a pretty clear distinction.

Wikipedia, unfortunately, can be edited by anyone and really cannot be used in the same breath as Intel themselves when discussing authoritative sources on Intel CPUs.

Not to mention that the OPs CPU is NOT among the very few socket 775 CPUs that support HT, therefore HT cannot be disabled - which was the point of the HT discussion. I freely admit I wasn't aware the i7 CPUs apparently do support HT "proper", but again - this has nothing to do with the suggestions that the OP disable HT on his QX6600. He can't, simple as that.

As for my remarks and "jumping all over you" - you do realize you've done exactly the sort of thing I described, misquoting what I actually said by using ellipsis to run several seperate paragraphs/statements together....right?

Bravo, you proved my point rather well - even though you did it by quoting what I said entirely out of context.


System Specs:
Intel Core i7-930, OC @ 3.36G
Scythe Grand Kama Cross HS/F
Gigabyte GA-X58-USB3 mainboard
2x Seagate 500G Barracuda (RAID0; C:)
6G OCZ Gold Edition DDR3/10666 Triple Channel
eVGA GTX570 1280M GDDR5 PCIe2.0x16
AMCC/3Ware 9650SE SATA 3G/s RAID controller:
4x OCZ 30G SATA 3G/s Vertex SSD (RAID0; D:)
Corsair TX-750 PSU, CoolerMaster CM-690 case; 4x 120mm fans
TrackIR 5 & TrackClip Pro
Windows7 x64 Home Premium
#3292575 - 05/11/11 09:17 PM Re: Can't handle much more than 15 planes offline, worried about campaign. [Re: KnowBreaks]  
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,188
Mahoney Offline
Member
Mahoney  Offline
Member

Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,188
Twickenham, London, UK
Originally Posted By: KnowBreaks
Intel *does* make the distinction quit clearly, in several places, among which is a (very clear) list of CPUs that support HT (proper).
...
I would say that the word "No" appearing next to the CPU in the table under HT support is a pretty clear distinction.


The distinction you were making was between hyperthreading and HyperThreading (proper). That table distinguishes between Hyper-Threading and no Hyper-Threading; there is no suggestion of "non-proper" hyperthreading existing. To remind you, you made this distinction when you wrote:

Originally Posted By: KnowBreaks
I wrote HyperThreading, proper - meaning CPU's that support the above Intel trademarked technology - opposed to "hyperthreading" that isn't part of the HyperThreading technology.


Now let's return to the start. To remind you, the entire post that kicked off this ridiculous diatribe was:

Originally Posted By: Mahoney
Originally Posted By: KnowBreaks
I don't think any of the 'real' multi-core CPU's actually even support HyperThreading


Every quad core i7 iMac I work on reports 8 cpus; I was under the impression that was due to hyperthreading.


You then informed us that

Originally Posted By: KnowBreaks
Yes, Mahoney...I actually own an i7 (see sig below), so I'm quite familiar with how they work with regards to threading.


Now you say:

Originally Posted By: KnowBreaks
I freely admit I wasn't aware the i7 CPUs apparently do support HT "proper"


Which was the only thing I suggested in the first place!

Originally Posted By: KnowBreaks

As for my remarks and "jumping all over you" - you do realize you've done exactly the sort of thing I described, misquoting what I actually said by using ellipsis to run several seperate paragraphs/statements together....right?


Ellipses are a perfectly valid way of providing an edited quote, and are only misquoting if they are maliciously used to give a false impression of what the author intended to mean. My conscience is happy I did nothing of the sort. Anyone else can read the original which is all of one page before and form their own conclusions.

Last edited by Mahoney; 05/11/11 09:46 PM.
#3292702 - 05/12/11 12:19 AM Re: Can't handle much more than 15 planes offline, worried about campaign. [Re: Feathered_IV]  
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 218
KnowBreaks Offline
Member
KnowBreaks  Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 218
Mahoney,

I freely admitted my lack of awareness that the i7 CPUs supported HT; I welcome the chance to gain new knowledge, assuming it's valid. I learned something here; better still, from a valid source (the Intel website). I learned this, precisely while looking up facts for my comments, so if earlier comments weren't in agreement with later ones, it's a product of simple ignorance on my part (which I can admit, unlike some other people here, apparently). I think, if I looked back, I actually qualified my earlier comments on the subject of hyperthreading by saying "I don't know for sure" in those comments.

(Edit - Yup, just looked...at least two different "I don't knows" and other remarks I made would indicate to a reasonable reader, that I wasn't speaking as an expert on this point. But, to someone intentionally trying to nitpick everything I said to pieces, even where I said I'm not sure...well, yes, I suppose you can fault me there...but please don't misrepresent what I said, including where I did say I wasn't sure...)


I am (and have been, for quite a while) very aware that the i7 will run multiple 'threads' - as I've witnessed many times while watching 8 'workers' in Prime95 after overclocking the 4-core 930 I have.

The distinction that I have attempted to make is between "hyperthreading" (as in runs more threads than cores), and "HT" (Intel's trademarked HyperThreading Technology) - which is a very clear distinction made on the Intel website. I'm sorry if, for whatever reason, you cannot admit there is a very clear difference between the two - as I provided in evidence, from the Intel website: HT (the 'proper' noun) is NOT SUPPORTED on almost all the socket 775 CPUs (save the three I listed above - which NO ONE in this thread has indicated they own).

Which takes us back to why it was even part of the discussion - a point which you continue to obscure: The OP, as well as other posters, have discussed the idea of disabling HyperThreading in BIOS. You simply cannot *do* that on a machine with a socket 775 CPU that doesn't support HT (proper) in the first place. And that, in spite of your efforts to obscure it, was my point all along.

As for my comments, I am certain I didn't name you anywhere in the paragraphs where I mentioned things like spreading misquotes and uninformed drivel (until your 3292495 post, anyway). You took several separately expressed thoughts, in different paragraphs (you know paragraphs, those groups of text used to *separate* thoughts...) and strung them together, in order to make it seem like those comments were directed at you.

And, while I didn't realize you were a language expert, if that's not an attempt to misrepresent what the author (me) intended to mean, I don't know what is.

But, to be accurate: Since you specify it's about what "the author intended to mean", then let me - as the author - clarify: What you pasted in your post, from my post, is *NOT* what the author (me) intended to mean. I'm sorry if you took it that way, but it wasn't intended that way at the time, and as you have stated - it doesn't give license to misrepresent what "the author intended to mean".


Last edited by KnowBreaks; 05/12/11 12:29 AM. Reason: checked other psot for what I *really* said...

System Specs:
Intel Core i7-930, OC @ 3.36G
Scythe Grand Kama Cross HS/F
Gigabyte GA-X58-USB3 mainboard
2x Seagate 500G Barracuda (RAID0; C:)
6G OCZ Gold Edition DDR3/10666 Triple Channel
eVGA GTX570 1280M GDDR5 PCIe2.0x16
AMCC/3Ware 9650SE SATA 3G/s RAID controller:
4x OCZ 30G SATA 3G/s Vertex SSD (RAID0; D:)
Corsair TX-750 PSU, CoolerMaster CM-690 case; 4x 120mm fans
TrackIR 5 & TrackClip Pro
Windows7 x64 Home Premium
#3292797 - 05/12/11 02:56 AM Re: Can't handle much more than 15 planes offline, worried about campaign. [Re: Feathered_IV]  
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 10
BiggerBoat Offline
Junior Member
BiggerBoat  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 10
To the OP:

I think you will find that upping your RAM to at least 4GB will have a very positive effect on your general use of Windows 7. The OS and applications will generally behave in a snappier fashion. I wouldn't upgrade your RAM just for ROF, though, as it may not have an impact on raw ROF performance.

Probably the best, cheapest thing you could do for performance would be to overclock your CPU to 3ghz. I have a Q6600 and I was able to get it to this speed very easily (and I am an overclocking idiot).

Not sure about the video card. I have an 8800 GTS 512. generally, I feel like the video card is holding me back a bit from high detail settings, but that the CPU holds me back on some of the missions (which can get choppy with lots of objects).

I will be upgrading early next year and look forward to running ROF flat out. For now, I am very impressed with the performance I can get out of a fairly old (3+ years) system. ROF is beautiful looking, and 9 vs 9 dogfights are not a problem at all.

Last edited by BiggerBoat; 05/12/11 02:59 AM.
#3293019 - 05/12/11 11:20 AM Re: Can't handle much more than 15 planes offline, worried about campaign. [Re: NattyIced]  
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 218
KnowBreaks Offline
Member
KnowBreaks  Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 218
Originally Posted By: NattyIced
Hey John,

You can check out this article here regarding HT for game performance. At the bottom it has the tested performances - HT on and HT off.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i7-975-950_7.html#sect0


Further to the discussion on HT, it turns out this article isn't really about HT at all. NattyIced did not state it was about HT, but it was presented as some sort of evidence that disabling HT would be an advantage. There is a small paragraph at the bottom of the one page in the link, which has a chart showing 4 games' "HT disadvantage".

First of all, 4 samples out of (probably) thousands of titles is hardly a rate that would yield a reliable result. The article itself mentions that "Luckily, there are only a few gaming titles where Hyper-Threading causes serious performance drop." So, taken in the context the article actually provides, I (still) doubt disabling HT is a good idea, overall - with what appear to be a *very* small number of exceptions (each probably well-known among the respective games' followers, and therefore easy enough to determine by following each games' web presence).

In fact, the article goes on to say "It is obviously due to Hyper-Threading technology that allows the CPU to process 8 threads at the same time."

Now, as I stated earlier, I wasn't aware the i7 CPU supports HT (proper) until researching for this very thread. I'll definitely be testing, because this article is just another person's written perspective - it seems to imply that, if I were to disable HT on my i7, it would no longer run 8 'threads', but only 4 (equal to the number of cores). This may be true, I don't know - but it sounds a little dubious to me. As I understand it, there is a distinct difference between running mutliple threads, and support of an HT 'instruction set'. But again, so no one misquotes me: I'm not sure, and I'm no expert on this.

Regardless, I don't see anywhere in my BIOS to disable/enable HT; what I do see is an option to dis/enable "multithreading"...maybe that's Gigabyte's way of saying HT, and let's be honest English isn't the 'native tongue' of most BIOS interfaces. I find myself wondering if I disable this 'multithreading', will programs designed to run more threads than cores no longer be able to? WIll they perhaps not work at all?

In any event, I think the idea of disabling HT might apply in a few limited and special cases - but I'd also imagine it's more a factor of code that's not properly written to utilize a feature of the CPU design, than it is any sort of 'flaw' in the CPU's HT implementation. In other words, I would think that properly written code would benefit from utilizing HT, and certainly not from disabling it.

EDIT: First test done - disabling what the Gigabyte BIOS calls "multithreading" does, in fact, cause Prime95 (for example) to only run 4 'worker' threads. Makes sense so far. What isn't so clear, I'm afraid, is whether this setting actually disables HT (the proper HT, not the generic term). I think it probably does.

I also think that, since this is a BIOS setting - and therefore would affect everything globally once Windows boots - that by disabling HT, you'd no doubt affect (potentially) several programs, maybe many, which do actually benefit from it. And it may not benefit this game, or many others, at all. So, I'd certainly recommend taking any advice to disable HT "with a grain of salt"; if you're not willing/able to do the necessary testing, I'd say leave well enough alone unless compelling evidence to do otherwise comes up.

Last edited by KnowBreaks; 05/12/11 11:41 AM.

System Specs:
Intel Core i7-930, OC @ 3.36G
Scythe Grand Kama Cross HS/F
Gigabyte GA-X58-USB3 mainboard
2x Seagate 500G Barracuda (RAID0; C:)
6G OCZ Gold Edition DDR3/10666 Triple Channel
eVGA GTX570 1280M GDDR5 PCIe2.0x16
AMCC/3Ware 9650SE SATA 3G/s RAID controller:
4x OCZ 30G SATA 3G/s Vertex SSD (RAID0; D:)
Corsair TX-750 PSU, CoolerMaster CM-690 case; 4x 120mm fans
TrackIR 5 & TrackClip Pro
Windows7 x64 Home Premium
#3293055 - 05/12/11 12:22 PM Re: Can't handle much more than 15 planes offline, worried about campaign. [Re: Feathered_IV]  
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 839
Laser Offline
Member
Laser  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 839

If this is a thing you're not an expert in (actually your are discovering hot water in public, and having problems with that too), why do you still give advices about the same theme? It's not a coincidence that the thread is about hyperthreading, your post look like octopus thinking threads entangling each other. You don't realize you're the only one which sees other advices/opinions as 'bad' and yourself as an 'expert' is you - authority is not something you can claim by yourself, it has to be confirmed from outside parties somehow. You are here making a heavy monologue because you twist everything other people said and what you previously said and, sorry, you were in turn annoying, funny and now both. I never saw such twisting with needless attacking and auto-defense in the same post for a long time. Look, somebody said it's worth 'trying' to disable HT in the BIOS, because it 'may' have better results. People do this all the time, 'trying' stuff when it's not hurting (and this is a simple test, believe it or not). It wasn't presented as a sort of evidence as you say, you are presenting it like this just to prove your point, which you made it up by yourself. Hyperthreading enables running 2xCORE_NUMBER threads AT THE SAME TIME, not 'sliced' as normally (i.e. one after another, in fractions of CPU time), that's all. Disabled, the CPU's or cores give the number of threads running AT THE SAME TIME. This has nothing to do with having more threads than CPUs or cores. And your last paragraph show clearly your level of expertise: you should know that even in our days, almost no program, except those who need heavy computations, don't use efficiently more than 4 cores, some or most doesn't even use 2 as good as they should. This is why benchmarks (which use all cores) are not so representative even today, when buying an N-core machine.

I'm expecting your next long post, who will probably show us again another of your unbelievable discoveries and brilliant deductive thinking.

#3293370 - 05/12/11 05:30 PM Re: Can't handle much more than 15 planes offline, worried about campaign. [Re: Feathered_IV]  
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 218
KnowBreaks Offline
Member
KnowBreaks  Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 218
Laser,

Nice to see that, once you decide to attack me, you're not going to stop...(well, not really nice...but, whatever).

Thank you for your opinion. Of course it is just that, another opinion.

How's that for a "long post"?


System Specs:
Intel Core i7-930, OC @ 3.36G
Scythe Grand Kama Cross HS/F
Gigabyte GA-X58-USB3 mainboard
2x Seagate 500G Barracuda (RAID0; C:)
6G OCZ Gold Edition DDR3/10666 Triple Channel
eVGA GTX570 1280M GDDR5 PCIe2.0x16
AMCC/3Ware 9650SE SATA 3G/s RAID controller:
4x OCZ 30G SATA 3G/s Vertex SSD (RAID0; D:)
Corsair TX-750 PSU, CoolerMaster CM-690 case; 4x 120mm fans
TrackIR 5 & TrackClip Pro
Windows7 x64 Home Premium
#3293419 - 05/12/11 05:57 PM Re: Can't handle much more than 15 planes offline, worried about campaign. [Re: Graf]  
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,623
Mogster Offline
Hotshot
Mogster  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,623
England
Originally Posted By: Graf
As far as I can tell RoF is mainly CPU dependent. As Tiger did, I upgraded from an Intel Dual Core to the 1055T 6 core with twice the RAM. I gained some noticeable improvements with many AI in a battle but was still experiencing slowdowns in time.

Now when I overclocked my new 1055T from 2.8ghz to 3.7ghz I saw an amazing difference. FPS rarely gets below 35 even during the largest air battles with max settings. smile


I wonder if a quad with higher ghz would trump a lower ghz 6 core?

What GPU was this with? If you don't mind me asking smile


WAS C2D 8500 3.16ghz, 285gtx 1gb, 4gig ram, XP NOW Win7 64, I5 2500K, SSD, 8Gig ram, GTX 570
#3293501 - 05/12/11 07:18 PM Re: Can't handle much more than 15 planes offline, worried about campaign. [Re: KnowBreaks]  
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,188
Mahoney Offline
Member
Mahoney  Offline
Member

Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,188
Twickenham, London, UK
Here's how I think our conversation should have gone:

Originally Posted By: What KnowBreaks might have said
Originally Posted By: Mahoney
Originally Posted By: KnowBreaks
I don't think any of the 'real' multi-core CPU's actually even support HyperThreading


Every quad core i7 iMac I work on reports 8 cpus; I was under the impression that was due to hyperthreading.

OK, just looked - so they do. Not really relevant to the OP though, he's not got an i7 and his processor doesn't support hyperthreading.


I doubt I'd even have bothered replying - my post was purely a friendly query of a bit of info I thought was probably not correct. It was only the utterly barking nature of your subsequent responses that have kept this going. Incidentally I'm amused that you think that having addressed several extremely aggressive comments to me explicitly in that first reply, when you continued to make further highly aggressive comments in the same post (a post which was a direct response to me and me alone) I should have read your mind to understand that those subsequent comments were not aimed at me at all. I suspect an impartial observer would place the blame for any failure to communicate there on the communicator not the communicatee.

Incidentally as far as I can see the generic term for running multiple threads simultaneously on the same core is "Simultaneous multithreading" or SMT for short. Certainly my reference to hyperthreading (mis-spelled) was intended to mean Hyper-Threading, as was your reference to HyperThreading (also mis-spelled). We've both been talking about "HT Proper" as you like to call it throughout.

#3293523 - 05/12/11 07:48 PM Re: Can't handle much more than 15 planes offline, worried about campaign. [Re: Feathered_IV]  
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,118
Brigstock Offline
Senior Member
Brigstock  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,118
London, England
I bet Feathered is glad he asked how he might improve his performance in ROF.

#3293693 - 05/12/11 10:24 PM Re: Can't handle much more than 15 planes offline, worried about campaign. [Re: Feathered_IV]  
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 218
KnowBreaks Offline
Member
KnowBreaks  Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 218
Laser,

I forgot to mention...Of course, you're right; everyone is much better off just guessing and "trying things" that aren't even possible on their computers, than they would be listening to the likes of Intel or Microsoft about the products they produce.

I support about 75 techs in the field, who we also train periodically - new hires, refreshing skills, whatever. I always make sure to teach them to change a bunch of sh*t, completely at random, when troubleshooting a problem. Make sure you spend a bunch of time trying to change something that has no connection to the problem, or looking for something that doesn't even exist on the equipment you're working with.

Ignore the obvious, jump right in to the deepest, most complicated levels of sh*t you don't understand. *Never* do any research about what you're working on, and *never* consult any of the documentation. *Never, ever* go to the manufacturer's website to see what you can learn there. We also specifically tell them to make sure they change more than one thing at a time, and *never* document what you change, either. Guess...guess wildly, and guess a lot.

You're absolutely right. Proven methods there, if there ever were any.

I was wondering if some of the folks in this thread would like jobs as instructors at this "Acadamy of Technical Incompetence"...they certainly have proven their skills here...


System Specs:
Intel Core i7-930, OC @ 3.36G
Scythe Grand Kama Cross HS/F
Gigabyte GA-X58-USB3 mainboard
2x Seagate 500G Barracuda (RAID0; C:)
6G OCZ Gold Edition DDR3/10666 Triple Channel
eVGA GTX570 1280M GDDR5 PCIe2.0x16
AMCC/3Ware 9650SE SATA 3G/s RAID controller:
4x OCZ 30G SATA 3G/s Vertex SSD (RAID0; D:)
Corsair TX-750 PSU, CoolerMaster CM-690 case; 4x 120mm fans
TrackIR 5 & TrackClip Pro
Windows7 x64 Home Premium
#3293705 - 05/12/11 10:36 PM Re: Can't handle much more than 15 planes offline, worried about campaign. [Re: Feathered_IV]  
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 839
Laser Offline
Member
Laser  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 839
Lol, you just made everyone here incompetent ... Actually nobody gave their advice just because they wanted to 'show off', but because they were in similar trouble before and they posted a possible solution. What you don't get is people are not *that* stupid as you think. They didn't just post at random. They were compelled to answer because they felt an affinity, something similar happened to them and they solved it. If they saw someone asking for help and the situation seemed similar, they spent their time answering. People who actually know what Rise of Flight is sensible at, in the particular aspect the OP is asking. Only to meet a 'i know all' expert who jumped on them.

Page 4 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Moderated by  RacerGT, Wklink 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
Carnival Cruise Ship Fire....... Again
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:58 PM
Baltimore Bridge Collapse
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:51 PM
The Oldest WWII Veterans
by F4UDash4. 03/24/24 09:21 PM
They got fired after this.
by Wigean. 03/20/24 08:19 PM
Grown ups joke time
by NoFlyBoy. 03/18/24 10:34 PM
Anyone Heard from Nimits?
by F4UDash4. 03/18/24 10:01 PM
RIP Gemini/Apollo astronaut Tom Stafford
by semmern. 03/18/24 02:14 PM
10 years after 3/8/2014
by NoFlyBoy. 03/17/24 10:25 AM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0