So, Nehalem is OK?

[Flyby]

Originally Posted by ZaltysZ

To utilize multiple CPUs, the task you are programming must meet requirements for parallelization. Each part of task must be independent from each other and each others results. It sounds simple, until you have to implement it in something like simulator, where most calculation must use not only each other results, but also must be completed in particular order. It is not the problem of laziness; it is problem of science.

P.S.: Falcon 4 uses multiple CPUs not for FM, but for dynamic campaign (units movement and etc.). While you are happily flying in your player bubble, all the AI controlled units outside it play without you alone. In other words, player and these units are independent, until they come into contact.

If what you say is true I guess I can feel pretty good about my interest in combat flight simulators what with their complexity and demanding requirements. On the other hand there is the relentless frustration of knowing there is someone like Oleg out there designing S**t that no one can ever hope to (afford to) totally max out. Life is unfair!
Flyby out

[WTE_Galway]

Flight Sim fans bitching about upcoming games requiring hardware they personally cannot afford is actually a bit odd.

It is a bit like a car enthusiast wanting to ban the next model of Ferrari and trying to force everyone to drive something similar to the second car they just bought on ebay out of some idea of "fairness".

[Flyby]

Originally Posted by WTE_Galway

Flight Sim fans bitching about upcoming games requiring hardware they personally cannot afford is actually a bit odd.

It is a bit like a car enthusiast wanting to ban the next model of Ferrari and trying to force everyone to drive something similar to the second car they just bought on ebay out of some idea of "fairness".

So who's bitching? And who implied in any way that "they personally" cannot afford such a system? It seems regardless of what one can or cannot afford will be a moot point when SoW comes out. There won't be system out that will be able to run it maxed out anyway, at least not right away. That was my main point. No one is trying to force anyone to do anything here. Do I really want to know where you got that? My idea of fairness is to ask that you read the whole thread, and maybe see that people are only talking opinions about, asking questions related to, and sharing knowledge of tech matters. You put too much into only a narrow perspective, imo. Besides, no car enthusiast (or flight sim fan) I ever met would think to ban progress let alone the next model of a Ferrari (or new pc technical stuff). So, well...please.

[alert]

Although Oleg said that SoW will utilize multicore CPU, it's not clear if he meant 2core or quad. It's verz hard to develop sim that will use quadcore at full power. I believe that E8400 will still be enough for very decent siming (+apropriate GF of course). 4x3Ghz CPU seems to me as overkill.

[Flyby]

Originally Posted by alert

Although Oleg said that SoW will utilize multicore CPU, it's not clear if he meant 2core or quad. It's verz hard to develop sim that will use quadcore at full power. I believe that E8400 will still be enough for very decent siming (+apropriate GF of course). 4x3Ghz CPU seems to me as overkill.

Man I'd really like for you to be right about an e8400 being enough for decent simming. Certainly it appears to overclock easily enough to somewhere near 3.6ghz. With all the complex modeling that seems to be going on in SoW_BoB, I speculate that more gigahertz is going to be a necessity. I'm hopeful Sow will be scalable for single core processors too. I saw somewhere that the minimum specs for the WW1 sim Rise of flight will be a dual core processor. That one may be a beast to run too.

[alert]

More gigahertz is going to be a necessity? How much "more", even the best today CPU cant go over 4GHz too much and game that wont run decently on most mid-range machines with vital features on, would be marketing disaster.
Future lies in multicore CPU, that's sure, but SoW develpment was started in sometimes in 2005 and is hard to elieve that Oleg targeted "recomended specs" at CoreI7 Extreme OC to >4Ghz..

[Flyby]

Originally Posted by alert

More gigahertz is going to be a necessity? How much "more", even the best today CPU cant go over 4GHz too much and game that wont run decently on most mid-range machines with vital features on, would be marketing disaster.
Future lies in multicore CPU, that's sure, but SoW develpment was started in sometimes in 2005 and is hard to elieve that Oleg targeted "recomended specs" at CoreI7 Extreme OC to >4Ghz..

Shall I say "as many ghz as you can get"? If, as you imply, Oleg did not target the corei7 at >4ghz I still feel that to run the sim smoothly (with many features turned on) will/may require at least one dedicated core at about 3.6ghz. That's just me thinking out loud. I don't think SOW will be GPU-limited so much. But with all the stuff going on in SoW_world besides flying, I still look at ghz. If we have to turn settings down, well that's to be expected with Oleg's work. But I think in the end we will all try to max everything out, then scale back as little as we can and still affect smooth game play. Sure poor performance with vital features turned on might be a real marketing disaster, but I think most people will want to turn on as many "optional" features as they can. I guess that's the basis of my viewpoint.