|
Hardware specs and what hardware is appropriate for FHSW (m)
|
|
| starking018 | Date: Monday, 2014-12-08, 6:55 AM | Message # 1 |
|
Colonel
Group: Friends
Messages: 395
Status: Offline
| Hardware specs and what hardware is appropriate for FHSW
Discussion about hardware specifications and what hardware is appropriate for FHSW
A couple of times recently we got into a discussion about loading times and hardware and the game chat is not the best time and place for such discussions so I'm starting this thread here.
First of all, for FHSW those are the things that really matter:
For smooth gameplay with high framerate and/or high graphics detail by far the most important part is the GPU. In most cases the CPU shouldn't affect this much, unless it is a really slow one.
For loading times the CPU is the part that matters the most. A fast disk (like a SSD) also reduces loading times to some extent. By the way, the same thing is true for a server, which has to load every map before all the game clients start loading the map (this is the time when the scoreboard is displayed and you see "Loading, please wait").
It is important to note that Battlefield 1942 is an old game and it is not made to utilize more than one CPU thread and therefore it makes no difference how many cores/threads the CPU has. Two cores are more than enough (1 for the game, 1 for all other tasks) and more cores wouldn't make FHSW faster. So what really matters is how fast can it execute one thread and that is affected by: higher maximum frequency and newer CPU architecture (like more cache, etc).
Other things that normally shouldn't matter for FHSW in particular: any RAM size above about 2GB, video memory above 256MB or 512MB (I think).
Nate suggested we discuss our hardware specs, so here's what I have:
CPU: Intel Core i3 540 (3.06GHz, 2 cores/4 threads) running at 4.2GHz (21x200) stable.
GPU: I was using a Geforce 7900GS 256MB for a few months until recently. Now I am back to the GPU integrated with the i3 CPU. 733MHz stock, also overclocked to 966MHz. Good enough for most of the maps most of the time.
CPU cooler: Scythe Mugen, the fan was replaced with a very quiet one. Keeps the overclocked CPU ~34°C when idle, ~50°C when 1 core is under load (e.g. FHSW) and ~86°C under a CPU stress test. I'm thinking of adding more fans now  Edit: those are the temperatures from the sensors in the cores. The motherboard reports a CPU temperature that is 10-11 degrees lower.
RAM: A-Data 2x2GB DDR3-1600 CAS 9
MB: Gigabyte H55M-UD2H
PSU: Chieftec 550W
HDD: 250GB Hitachi + 160GB ExcelStor
Mouse: A4tech XL-750BK
Headset: Creative Fatal1ty
And then some oldies but goodies:
SB: Creative Soundblaster Live 5.1 (SB0100)
Monitor: IBM C220P (previously I've been through a couple of DELL P1130 until they died, but it doesn't matter! They are available used for literally dirt cheap and they are really good for as long as they last )
Keyboard: Ortek mechanical keyboard
Air Troll a.k.a. starking018
Message edited by starking018 - Monday, 2014-12-08, 4:27 PM |
| |
| |
| Stefan1990 | Date: Monday, 2014-12-08, 11:23 AM | Message # 2 |
 General
Group: Admins
Messages: 1428
Status: Offline
| CPU: Intel i5 4670K 4x 3,4 GHZ
GPU: Sapphire Tri-X R9 290 4GB GDDR5 4K
CPU cooler:
RAM: Crucial Ballistix 16GB DDR3
MB: ASUS Z97-A
PSU: Corsair CS650M
HDD: Samsung SSD 250GB 1TB WD HDD
Mouse: Logitec G5
Headset: Razer Baracuda
Monitor: SAMSUNG 22" LED
Keyboard: Logitec G15
|
| |
| |
| RADIOSMERSH | Date: Monday, 2014-12-08, 12:33 PM | Message # 3 |
 FHSW Wikia Co-Admin
Group: Bronze Donator
Messages: 664
Status: Offline
| I'm using Lenovo B590 laptop as primary PC:
CPU: Intel Core i3 (2nd Gen) 2328M / 2.2 GHz
GPU: GeForce 720M
RAM: 2x2 GB DDR3 1600 MHz
HDD: 500GB
Mouse: Logitech B100
Headset: Logitech 960
Monitor: 15,6'' LED (1366x768)
And another PC which I used before (and for playing FHSW too), but now it's a server:
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E7500 (3M Cache, 2.93 GHz, 1066 MHz FSB)
GPU: Zotac NVIDIA 9600GT 512 MB GDDR3
CPU cooler: Some unknown brand
RAM: Samsung 1 GB DDR2 800 MHz (M378T2863QZS-CF7)
MB: Gigabyte P31-S3G
PSU: Apollo VT-350BM
HDD: Seagate Momentus Thin 5400.6 250 GB + some unknown 500 GB HDD, which died this year
Mouse: Genius bla-bla
Headset: Same as for the laptop
Monitor: SAMSUNG 19" LED
Keyboard: Logitech Media Keyboard Elite
SB: Creative X-Fi Xtreme Audio PCI Expres
|
| |
| |
| wewak | Date: Monday, 2014-12-08, 1:28 PM | Message # 4 |
|
Lieutenant Colonel
Group: Friends
Messages: 151
Status: Offline
| Here's what I'm running. FHSW runs great.
CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ 2.4ghz.
GPU: Geforce GTX260
RAM: 2x2GB G-Skill
MB: Gigabyte P35-DS3
HDD: 3x320GB, 1x600GB. My main hd is a Western Digital 'Blue' which I found on the street a few months ago. The other two are IDE and a laptop hdd. FHSW loading times are nothing special (painful).
OS: Windows 7. 4GB is a minimum if you're running this.
Mouse: microsoft comfort 6000 (minus the rubber grip)
KB: Razor Blackwidow
Monitor: Toshiba 40''Smart TV
Sounds: average logitech speakers.
edit - For some reason i had XP compatibility mode on. 1min 45s loading time now for a local game.
Message edited by wewak - Tuesday, 2014-12-09, 5:09 AM |
| |
| |
| slobodan | Date: Monday, 2014-12-08, 1:46 PM | Message # 5 |
 Koń
Group: Friends
Messages: 434
Status: Offline
| CPU: Intel Core i7 2600K 3.4GHz.
GPU: Gigabyte GTX 460 1GB
RAM: Kingston 2x2GB DDR3-1333 CAS 9
MB: Asus P8Z68 -V LE
PSU: ocz stealthxstream 2 500w
HDD: 500GB Samsung HD520HJ + SSD 60GB Intel 520
SB: Sound Blaster Audigy 2 (SB0240)
Monitor: Dell 19'
|
| |
| |
| Pumiasek | Date: Monday, 2014-12-08, 2:17 PM | Message # 6 |
 Lieutenant
Group: Trusted
Messages: 54
Status: Offline
| CPU: Intel Core i5 2400 OC 3,9GHz
GPU: PowerColor HD6870X2
RAM: Kingston 2x4GB DDR3-1600MHz
MB: Gigabyte GA-Z68X-UD7-B3
PSU: OCZ ZS650W
HDD: Seagate 1TB, SATAIII, 7200RPM, 64MB cache
SB: Xonar DG
Monitor: Asus VS197
|
| |
| |
| Mr_J | Date: Monday, 2014-12-08, 4:42 PM | Message # 7 |
 Accessory Admin
Group: Admins
Messages: 635
Status: Offline
| LOL What is the purpose of your postings, guys? Is this a special competition with the best specification winning some kind of mystery prize? Or just to boast of how awesome your computers are? You haven't even mentioned average loading time on your machines or Internet connection type which might be related to disconnection problems in case of some players.
Mine is
CPU: Phenom x16 OC 6,5 GHs (GigaHorses) Super Mega Pro Uber B&W Edition
GPU: GeHorse gtx 1942
RAM: 128GB
MB: Yes
PSU: 4.2 kW (+home power plant driven by 2 pairs of horses)
HDD: 32 Petabytes
Sound: Yes
Monitor: 100"
|
| |
| |
| Endless_Nameless | Date: Monday, 2014-12-08, 6:36 PM | Message # 8 |
 General
Group: Admins
Messages: 1237
Status: Offline
| I agree, without some kind of reference (loading time/fps) just posting your hardware is a bit useless.
Here's some map loading time data:
Game: FHSW+S&T Pack
Map: A Day of Zitadelle (Conquest) Local game
Time was measured from the point I click on "Create Local Game" to when I see the map info screen
I have FHSW installed on two drives: C:\ (SSD) and D:\ (standard HD)
SSD (no compatibility mode): 1min30s
HD (no compatibility mode): 1min30s
HD (Win XP SP3 comp. mode): 2min35s
HD (Win 98/Me comp. mode): 3min36s
As I've said a couple of times on this forum already removing the compatibility mode gives you an extreme speed boost, more than 1 minute for me.
It's important to note that the first map load always takes longer, at least for me. For example it takes me 1min40s to load the map for the first time, second and all subsequent times it's 1min30s. It also appears that the SSD has no effect on the loading time for me.
I don't check my fps very often but it's very map-dependent, on desert maps I'm over 100 on MdS below 10 when both fleets meet.
CPU: AMD Athlon II X3 3.2 GHz
RAM: 8 GB
GPU: ATI Radeon HD 5700 1GB
SSD: 256 GB
HD: 512 GB
OS: Win 7 Ultimate 64bit
Don't know the brands and I'm too lazy to check. :P
My Youtube Channel
aka eYe.ris
|
| |
| |
| starking018 | Date: Monday, 2014-12-08, 9:58 PM | Message # 9 |
|
Colonel
Group: Friends
Messages: 395
Status: Offline
| @wewak: If you get a Core 2 Duo E8600 (3.33GHz), which you can find for about the same price as your CPU, you will get more speed in most applications (e.g. Battlefield) except for a few cases where some applications really utilize all cores fully. FHSW would load much faster.
Also, that's a nice keyboard for gaming you have there, unlike most other keyboards that are advertised as such.
@Mr_J: I have no particular purpose in posting the full specs other than to answer a few questions that Nate was asking while playing on the server.
About loading times:
I have Windows XP, so I don't have to use any compatibility mode. Now that you mentioned it and showed these test times I understand why it takes so long for most players to load.
For some reason if I start a local game the game crashes, so I started A Day of Zitadelle on a dedicated server. I don't have S&T pack.
I have a shortcut on my desktop to join directly to the server, so I measured from clicking this shortcut to the welcome window: 1:21 every time.
I think the issue on Monster des Stahles and other maps with battleships is not directly related to graphics, but to the CPU. I tested it on my dedicated server and it showed that the server CPU utilization goes very high and performance goes very low, and the server doesn't use the GPU. When the server performance goes down it goes down for everyone on the server, so it probably wouldn't help even if you had a faster CPU. It's a bug that needs to be fixed.
Air Troll a.k.a. starking018
|
| |
| |
| Mr_J | Date: Monday, 2014-12-08, 10:21 PM | Message # 10 |
|
Accessory Admin
Group: Admins
Messages: 635
Status: Offline
| Quote For loading times the CPU is the part that matters the most. A fast disk
(like a SSD) also reduces loading times to some extent. By the way, the same thing is true for a server, which has to load every map before all the game clients start loading the map (this is the time when the
scoreboard is displayed and you see "Loading, please wait").
Lately our server hardware has been moved to a machine which includes an Opteron CPU. TBH I was expecting major improvement in terms of loading speed but my measurements indicate the loading time is even greater since the update. Tough thing...
BTW This test made by one of Polish players proves that HDD read speed doesn't really affect the loading speed:
You are fine as long as you don't use a portable game stored on a slow USB flash stick or your HDD data got heavily fragmented.
|
| |
| |
| ArmyDivision | Date: Wednesday, 2014-12-10, 6:57 PM | Message # 11 |
|
Private
Group: Trusted
Messages: 8
Status: Offline
| CPU: Intel Core i7 870 OC 4,2GHz (Stable) 2.9GHz (normal use)
MB: MSI P55-GD80
RAM: Patriot DDR3 8GB (2x4GB) Viper 3 Intel Extreme Masters 1600MHz
GPU: EVGA GTX 670 2GB
PSU: Chieftec BPS-650C 650W Nitro Series Modular
HDD: WD Blue 640GB 7200RPM
SB: Xonar DG
Message edited by ArmyDivision - Wednesday, 2014-12-10, 7:01 PM |
| |
| |
| Mr_J | Date: Wednesday, 2014-12-10, 8:38 PM | Message # 12 |
|
Accessory Admin
Group: Admins
Messages: 635
Status: Offline
| Quote ArmyDivision (  ) CPU: Intel Core i7 870 OC 4,2GHz (Stable) 2.9GHz (normal use)MB: MSI P55-GD80
RAM: Patriot DDR3 8GB (2x4GB) Viper 3 Intel Extreme Masters 1600MHz
GPU: EVGA GTX 670 2GB
PSU: Chieftec BPS-650C 650W Nitro Series Modular
HDD: WD Blue 640GB 7200RPM
SB: Xonar DG
Another sheep
|
| |
| |
| Endless_Nameless | Date: Sunday, 2016-02-28, 10:34 AM | Message # 13 |
|
General
Group: Admins
Messages: 1237
Status: Offline
| I have built a new PC, current specs:
CPU: i7 6700K 4GHz, might do some OC in the future
Cooler: Noctua NH-D15
RAM: 16 GB DDR4
GPU: still my old ATI Radeon HD 5750 1GB, have not decided what to put in there yet
MB: Asus Maximus VIII Ranger
Quote Endless_Nameless ( ) Game: FHSW+S&T Pack Map: A Day of Zitadelle (Conquest) Local game
Time was measured from the point I click on "Create Local Game" to when I see the map info screen
I have FHSW installed on two drives: C:\ (SSD) and D:\ (standard HD)
SSD (no compatibility mode): 1min30s
HD (no compatibility mode): 1min30s
HD (Win XP SP3 comp. mode): 2min35s
HD (Win 98/Me comp. mode): 3min36s
Loading time on this map now:
SSD (no compatibility mode): 40s
FPS: Monster des Stahles/USS Alabama Seat 1/Chase Rear camera
Old: 32 FPS
New: >100 FPS
I used Dxtory to measure FPS.
As suspected by starking the CPU is probably the most limiting factor for FHSW. I think one the reasons is the huge amount of objects that can rotate. For battleships think about how many brownings/oerlikons/bofors are placed on them and every single one can rotate in two directions. There are also invisible objects who rotate to make certain things working like switchable ammo. So there are a lot of calculations going on and I don't think DICE had this in mind when they coded the engine.
My Youtube Channel
aka eYe.ris
|
| |
| |
| waldhurzak | Date: Friday, 2019-03-08, 3:47 AM | Message # 14 |
|
Captain
Group: Trusted
Messages: 87
Status: Offline
| today tested with ssd fhsw0.61 with soundpack
i5 6600k default
HDD - 1min17s
SSD - 55s
Best Bf1942 version for FHSW:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/818jqqez94ka80h/BF1942-HD.rar
rafal
|
| |
| |
| starking018 | Date: Friday, 2019-03-08, 3:54 PM | Message # 15 |
|
Colonel
Group: Friends
Messages: 395
Status: Offline
| Quote waldhurzak (  ) today tested with ssd fhsw0.61 with soundpacki5 6600k default
HDD - 1min17s
SSD - 55s
Nice to post these results here. The loading time is really good. However, if comparing the effects of different storage is desired then you better take caching into consideration. The first time you load a map some of the data goes into caches (in RAM, on the disk itself, etc.) which can speed up loading after that (it's quite noticeable for me). For me, re-loading after a game crash or when changing maps matters more than the first loading. So, if you try loading another FHSW map first, or even the same FHSW map and then (without doing other disk operations in between) load again and measure the time, then I think that the HDD time would be a lot closer to the SSD time.
Air Troll a.k.a. starking018
|
| |
| |
| waldhurzak | Date: Saturday, 2019-03-09, 3:55 AM | Message # 16 |
|
Captain
Group: Trusted
Messages: 87
Status: Offline
| I repeated (another map battle of angaur)
restart and
2nd loads:
HDD - 1min03s
SSD - 50s
Indeed differences can be smaller, next and next loading angaur reduced to 55s for HDD.
Still as before of course, most important is CPU, and his Single Thread efficiency
I'm curious depending on RAM speed, so apparently fast ddr4 might improve cpu efficiency even 15%
I dont know whether it has a influence for Fhsw in this case but possibly.
Best Bf1942 version for FHSW:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/818jqqez94ka80h/BF1942-HD.rar
rafal
|
| |
| |
| starking018 | Date: Saturday, 2019-03-09, 4:03 PM | Message # 17 |
|
Colonel
Group: Friends
Messages: 395
Status: Offline
| Quote waldhurzak ( ) I repeated (another map battle of angaur)restart and
2nd loads:
HDD - 1min03s
SSD - 50s
Indeed differences can be smaller, next and next loading angaur reduced to 55s for HDD.
Nice, so even in the best case for the HDD it was still about 10% slower than the SSD.
Quote waldhurzak ( ) I'm curious depending on RAM speed, so apparently fast ddr4 might improve cpu efficiency even 15%
I dont know whether it has a influence for Fhsw in this case but possibly.
You could test how memory speed influences things if you go into the BIOS/UEFI settings and set a lower DRAM speed while making sure you keep the same timings (you better know what you are doing there). Another, possibly easier way to do it (no need to manually change any BIOS/UEFI settings) is to physically remove one of the RAM modules (assuming you have two in dual-channel mode) so that it goes into single-channel mode, which reduces memory bandwidth in half.
I suspect that the effect would be very small. If halving the RAM speed has a small effect on the time (increase), then a hypothetical doubling of the speed would have an even smaller effect (decrease).
Air Troll a.k.a. starking018
|
| |
| |
