CPU requirement
danhunt80254
London Join Date: 2014-01-17 Member: 193214Members
London Join Date: 2014-01-17 Member: 193214Members
Comments
I would say it is highly unlikely it would be playable for you, as you would likely be around the 20-40fps mark, and that is really unplayable.
I see you asked about cpu performance before in your thread here. Soul_Rider is correct I believe in his assessment of what performance you could expect with that cpu and nezz is also correct in that you need 3.0 ghz dual core C2D at the very least. This will just give you to the minimum requirements though.
To get optimal performance you will need something more modern such as an intel lga1155 cpu or better. The cheapest modern set up I can think of would be an intel celeron g1620 2.7ghz which is $60 new here in the USA with the cheapest lga1155 motherboard. I am not saying you should upgrade to that but that it is the most minimal modern set up I know of. I happen to have a g1620 that I have played ns2 on and I get about 100fps with everything low with a amd 7870 gpu. I does have sever drops down to 50fps though during firefights.
@Nexus:
So you have a processor which is at least 2 generations newer, doing approximately 59% more work per cycle than his processor in single threaded tasks and about 79% faster in multi-threaded tasks. So if you want to compare, your processor would be the equivalent of him running at almost 4Ghz, lol, there is 0% chance of that chip reaching that level of work.
I think you need to understand the differences in processor generations before you try and judge purely by clockspeed:
http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/411/Intel_Core_2_Quad_Q6600_vs_Intel_Core_i7_Mobile_i7-2630QM.html
Pros and Cons summary:
Core i7-2630QM
General recommendations:
Performs significantly better in all kinds of programs,
Features SSE4.1 / SSE4.2 / AVX instructions,
Integrates HD 3000 graphics,
Needs less power
Drawbacks:
None
Core 2 Quad Q6600
General recommendations:
None
Drawbacks:
Performs considerably worse in all program types,
Lacks some instructions,
Comes without integrated graphics,
Significantly higher power,
The socket is obsolete
My old gaming laptop has a
Core 2 Quad Q9650 @3.0
Dual 9800m gtx gpus in sli
I can get around 60fps on low settings 720p res.
Well, crap. @Soul_Rider, I guess I misread or misunderstood what he said in his OP. I mistook it for a new-ish quad core CPU rather than an older Q6600 or similar. I know the difference between clock speed, work per cycle, single vs multi-threaded tasks, etc. Just a derp interpretation by me.
@danhun80254 OC it for what it can and still maintain stability and hope for the best. Otherwise, consider upgrading.
And that is an old one? That must have cost a fair penny :P
In general these CPU's are old though, they will run NS2, but at minimum performance. Hence they are the absolute minimum requirement for this game.
I'd say take a holistic view of upgrading, note that there are some console commands you can use [help for link/cli commands plz, elite people] to see if you Gfx is being bogged down.
Certainly, 5 years on the forums suggest an i5 @ 3.4Ghz or higher will do you well as an upgrade.
Textures high + high anisotropy, DX11, everything else is off most of the time.
It's playable for me now.
Also, my native resolution is 1366x768, but I play in 1280x600, because firstly, it improves FPS, and then in stretches marines (actually, everything) so they are more human-sized and not midgets (I feel that in most of the games, except for few titles).
Why does this sound like you think growing the player base by 1-2 people is a big favour? Lol, just wait 2 more weeks. Once the NS2WC is over there's a new build coming out and a very high chance of a Steam Sale or Humble Bundle event.
this game has higher requirements than Battlefield 4 and Crysis 3. /lmfao
BF3/4 has the worst netcode. NS2s is actually spot on and was always good even at release when people were not used to such tight hitboxes and small targets.
and what does that have to do with CPU performance? Check out the CPU requirement for hosting ns2 servers, you need like 4.5ghz to host a 20+ player server. You can host a 64p BF4 server easy with that kind of ghz. It's funny how people are so quick to look past the facts and just sh!t on my post with disagree, spam, abuse.
I disagreed with both you and gohstthree because it is not that bad. I used to play on a server that was a 3.8ghz phenom 965. That server had 20p and never lagged. Yes I know and recognize lag. I have incidentally also played on a phenom 965 @ 3.9ghz and it played just fine. Performance was obviously less than my 2500k but was far from unplayable like some make it out to be.
I am running 4.5GHz and it isnt enough for smooth gameplay
The game will never play smoothly unless they change how the view portals for loading new map sections work. You could have the most bad ass computer on earth and even then the manual geometry portals for occlussion will bring your computer to a screeching halt when you round a corner.
I am not sure how this performance problem has been in the game for so long. It manifests on every computer you play the game on.
The dreaded "WaitingOnBufferedFrames" hitching..
No bug i hate more than this one, currently.
(this is for people who want like 160fps~)
Or maybe it is because of my i7-4930K @3.40GHz and GTX770?