Thoughts:

1) A semicolon in front disables the setting.

2) The number in front of the process affinity "should" correspond to the number of cores you want it to run on. But, it might be out of sync?? I.e., remember it can also be set to 0. So you have to experiment by restarting the game and checking the task manager each time you change the setting. Start with 0 then 1 then 2...etc up to 3 or 4.

3) I am hoping there is a setting for 64 bit in the config.ini??? I think they got a copy of it at SimQ. Will take a look in a bit.

4) Does anyone know if Open G/L is used??? I don't recall anyone mentioning this, but old IL-2 runs way better than directX...so if they really didn't change as much as they said and happen to keep Open g/l...well that might be a godsend.

5)Sound usually is fps killer. Maybe putting them at minimum settings will help and turning chatter off too.

Feuerfalke has just posted a link that clearly states Multicore support was not a high priority during development but that CoD uses 'multi threading'. I don't understand the mechanics of this but I do find the minimum and preferred specs that were released a bit confusing given that performance on Dual core v multicore with identical Ram and GFX seems fairly similar. Best to read the interview linked in another thread byTREE UK.

Yes the Cnfg is posted at simhq no mention of OPenGL.

keep an eye on their thread, they are evaluating CPU control 2.1 as a posssible means to share the load across mutliple cores based on info/results from the Russian forums.

OpenGL was mentioned specifically in an interview with Oleg something like a year ago. He said COD is a DX only sim.

Flyingbullseye

I read the article - multicore and mutlithreading are the exactly the same thing. Simplified - each cpu core has a thread, single core cpus have 1 thread, duals have 2, quads (like i5) have 4. Now i7 have 8 threads but only 4 cores. Each core is dual threaded. So a core can have more than 1 thread, (intel calls it hyperthreading). For a program though there is no distinction as they are all seen as "virtual cores".

@flying - they used to be d9+openGL, they left open gl to do dx10 (which seems to be absent).

Very interesting. I haven't touched the registry entries in my own system but they exist. I wonder if this colud have anything to do with it?

Can't wait till I can download and my copy of COD and do some testing.

Cheers!

+1, it will be very interesting. I'll be surprised if the vast majority can't make it playable with some tweaking, even with the filter.

Actually multi-thread and multi-core are different.

CPUs can have more or elss unlimited threads (till memory/resources run out) - a thread is a small unit of processing block that the OS can schedule.

All threads within the mutli-threaded program must share the same core - unless they are multi-process (utilizing multiple cores).

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multith...rchitecture%29

No your having a tree induced seizure, better put a tree filter on the forum!!

Sorry let me rephrase that - In this case mutlicore and multithreading is used to reach the same end result. (I indicated that this was a simplified explanation.). The wiki article is a bit outdated/strange as was noted at its start and its about the wrong type of "multithreading", completely different as it actually states it there in the first line. You are looking for this : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiprocessing
Or later in the aricle this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulta...multithreading

You are getting your definitions confused. CPU's can have multiple threads, but thats not what we are talking, because in the case of that wiki we are talking about active and innactive threads. So the cpu performs an action on a threads/process, then jumps and does another action on another thread. It is all done in a serial fashion.
When we refer to cores/threads in the context here we are talking about multiple *Simulatnous* threads. Ie its running 2 threads at once. Classically each CPU can run a single thread (which then jumps from process/thread to thread completing tasks, but it happens so quickly you dont notice that it is running everything on the computer by jumping around). Now if a cpu has multiple threads like a i7 hyperthreaded or a upcoming AMD bulldozer which uses hardwarethreading (its actually routed/processed in the core differently as the threads are manufactured, not simulated) it can run 2 tasks simultaneously. For example it can still have hundreds of proccesses but now you have 2 threads/streams doing the work that 1 did previously (the 2 work both at the same time, so before it might of run: game->steam->internet explorer->OS->game->OS. But with 2 threads it might be: 1:->game->game->game->game. 2:->OS->Internet explored->OS->Steam etc. So it allows a sharing of tasks of the ability to divide tasks up in order to "focus" on a process/thread.

I'm in school learning about things like multiprocessing and multithreading right now actually. Heliocon is closest to the truth.

Definition of a thread
Threads are parts of the main process that typically have a much smaller workload than the main process. In single processor systems, programs still benefit from being multi-threaded for various reasons. However as Heliocon said, they are still processed in a serial fashion. On a multi-core system you can actually run these threads simultaneously on the other cores.

Since the Clod team has stated it's multi-threaded to run on multiple cores I'll believe them (maybe there is a bug currently, I don't know why the cpu usage is only showing on 1). What functions can be run on the extra cores is the main point. If only simpler functions can be run on them you'll see only slight gains from multi-core.

I've just really started coding and I can already see that getting the timing of your code and its threads to all match up so you have a smooth experience must be a huge pain. If some functions are always waiting on others you'll just grind to a halt.

If you guys are willing to check out the thread article on wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thread_(computer_science)
you might get a headache but you'll see this is not a simple thing.