Dual v Quad

[Tim1981]

Hi, I am currently downloading Cliffs Of Dover and wanted to get some advice on my system:

E8500 (dual 3.16)
ATI HD 5770 (1gig)
4 gig ddr3 (mushkin)
XP Pro sp3

What sort of settings am I likely to acheive with this limited rig?

Would there be much of a boost upgrading to a quad core cpu?

Any help, much appreciated.

[z0ttel]

Hi Tim,

in my case, the best upgrade so far (w.r.t. COD) was to go from Windows XP to Windows 7 - seriously

Before waisting tons of money in a new system I would wait for the patches which will arrive in the next weeks and then decide what to upgrade first. To get a feeling what the limiting factors are you can use perfmon.exe and gpu-z to monitor CPU-, RAM-, GPU- and VRAM-consumption while playing the game. The component which reaches the 100% limit, needs to be replaced.

On my system, the game runs between 30 and 50fps smoothly (not over London).

[kingpinda]

At the moment its better to have a fast dualcore than a slightly slower quadcore. since the game is not optimized (yet) for multi-cores.

I myself have the e8400. If you find you lack cpu speed simply buy a better cooler for 20 dollars and OC your cpu. our cpus should be able to run 4ghz fine on air with maybe a slight voltage increase. I have it at stock now though. cpu is not the bottleneck in this case. The game is.

[Peril]

Originally Posted by kingpinda

At the moment its better to have a fast dualcore than a slightly slower quadcore. since the game is not optimized (yet) for multi-cores.

I myself have the e8400. If you find you lack cpu speed simply buy a better cooler for 20 dollars and OC your cpu. our cpus should be able to run 4ghz fine on air with maybe a slight voltage increase. I have it at stock now though. cpu is not the bottleneck in this case. The game is.

Having just upgraded from a Core 2 Duo to an i5 I can vouch for this bit. I think my Core 2 Duo was actually better/faster/smoother in CoD.

[Ataros]

Overclock your cpu and try my settings (in sig). Try these mods if you are not happy with performance http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=21048

Video card is more important in this game if you run more then 1280 resolution.

[Rattlehead]

I'm not totally convinced a fast CPU makes any real difference in this game or indeed in any other graphically intensive game, especially at higher resolutions like 1900x1080. At that point, in my experience, the game becomes GPU bound.

For games optimized for mutlicore CPUs it's nice to have a quad core though, but until this game is optimized for that a dual core is fine.

I'm running a dual core myself and am enjoying smooth framerates (40+ at 1000m or higher) over land with all settings on high or medium. But then again I think my graphics card is taking most of the load anyway. (5870)

Put it this way, I'd rather have a fast graphics card than a fast Cpu for this game if you plan on running at high resolutions.

[Tim1981]

Thanks for the help, I only tried playing for a bit last night and my frame rates are terrible over land.

I think I might need to try those mods to make it playable.I have every thing on low apart from a couple that are on medium.

[hockeywarrior]

Originally Posted by z0ttel

Hi Tim,

in my case, the best upgrade so far (w.r.t. COD) was to go from Windows XP to Windows 7 - seriously

Before waisting tons of money in a new system I would wait for the patches which will arrive in the next weeks and then decide what to upgrade first. To get a feeling what the limiting factors are you can use perfmon.exe and gpu-z to monitor CPU-, RAM-, GPU- and VRAM-consumption while playing the game. The component which reaches the 100% limit, needs to be replaced.

On my system, the game runs between 30 and 50fps smoothly (not over London).

What settings are you running? I have an i7 930 2.8 ghz (stock clock), GTX 260 896 MB graphics card, 6 gigs of DDR3 RAM, and Winds 7 and am getting awful performance, even though I should be doing better than you lol.

[335th_GRAthos]

In all honesty,

1.) True, it is too eraly to tell because some more patches are needed for this game to run well.

2.) As a matter of principle and common logic, following things you will have to do anyway:
- Install Win7 64bit - No point discussing WinXP performance with this game as it is definitively running better in DX10 (and not in DX9 which is WinXP limited to).

- Upgrade to Quad-core if you find a cheap CPU fitting in your existing motherboad, because new graphics drivers are able to handle multiple CPUs and the CoD game will be able to handle more than one CPU (within limits) therefore better having four cores than only two (besides Win7 has real core management, unlilke WinXP)

3.) Download the MOD that is available which give a tremendous improvement on the frame rate FPS by removing some "unecessary" (for the current state of pain and misery most users experience) graphics thus making the game playable in every PC.


I did points 1 and 2 myself, point 3 I can not comment upon as it was not necessary for me.

Happy Flying !

[Ivan Fooker]

I made the following tests:

Running an I7 920 on 2.67GHz leads to 28FPS max.
Overclocking it to 3.01GHz leads to 32max.
Overclocking to 3.4Ghz leads to 44max.
Running it on max possible overclocked with that cooler at 3.84 leads to 59Fps.

Running the game on a C2D @ 4.8Ghz leads to 80Fps max.

As my HD5870VaporX (clocked 1200mhz) is running in idle mode while running CoD at 400mhz, i suppose the gpu power in general is not the bottleneck atm. for users.

So i come to the conclusion that ,similar to Il2-Sturmovik ,a high Dual Core has a better performance on CoD than a Quad Core atm, which is less clocked.

Means atm the GPu isnt a bottleneck, as the game doesnt seem to be correct adressed to it.ThePU keeps hanging in idle mode.