Regarding Performance.... Dual Core Optimization

I dont think the sales will be better just because they put in multi core systems.
Well it might for those who got multi core systems.

Well im on a quad and the game runs really great, on only one core, and its only running at 2.66ghz.

Seconded, my core2duo has some trouble with the late game as well. that might be the duallcore issue, might be optimisation trouble. (it's 6650 at 2.3)

No issues to date with my dual core system running at 2.5 Ghz per core...

How many ships do you guys have late game?!?!?

I've been over 50 with two battles going on when it becomes a slide show.

then id say its a driver problem somewhere. or maybe some compatible issues.
Cause i was able to have over a 100ships on my side. With my old single core P4 3.5ghz 3gb ram. geforce 7800gs+ 512mb agp, with frams around 40

I'm on a quad so I'm all for multicore optimization.

Make sure you guys have that AMD dual core optimization driver installed... That really improved my performance back when Company of Heroes was released.

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/TechnicalResources/0,,30_182_871_13118,00.html



If you have Intel Dual Core... I am not sure what they have out for their CPUs. Sorry!

if they can have the cake and eat it to, fine. but I've had enough of convincing this obvious multi-core majority that not having access to the second core is probably going to be good for the game.
the truth is, if the Devs had that capacity to work with, chances are they will peddle towards that dual core capacity and alienate their mainstream buyers.

Usually I tend toward agreeing with Schem, champion of the low-powered computer users that he is, but here I really fail to see how optimization, once we've uncovered the lion's share of the bugs in the final beta, is a bad thing. Though, from my understanding--I've never had to optimize anything for multiple cores--there is a little bit specific to running on several cores, in the end it's much the same as optimizing on a single-core CPU: making your threads so that ones that require input from others don't have to wait.

That can't do anything but improve performance. I think.

I agree that the game should be optimized towards dual cores. I understand the technology is relativly new in the consumer market, but relativly soon (within the next year to 18 months) a dual (or more) core setup will become relativly commonplace. I am currently running an Athalon FX-55, and am developing a plan to upgrade to a dual core (or quad core, dep. on money) setup within the next three to six months. This is not so much a major overhaul of my system, but a spot fix to allow me to "keep up" with the computing market. Amongst my circle of friends, this is a common trend as well.

I would imagine the biggest question (from the devs perspective) is really where do they see their target market at release, and what are their goals for game longevity. If there is a desire to see the game progress (ie expansions) in functionality and scope in its life, then there is a justification in optimizing for dual cores.

My 2c

I have to disagree with Schem. Simply put, optimization does not mean alienation by any stretch of the imagination. In a worse case scenario, I would equate it with incentivization.

Blair's already stated that Ironclad is investigating supporting dual-cores.  It will depend on time, budget, and if it really will add significant improvements to the game.

Its silly to say, but when I was installing company of heroes the first time and it popped up that it detected and was optimized for dual core cpus it made me feel all warm and fuzzy inside...

Yes I did notice that thread when I started this one.

Though as you can see- there is support for the idea.

I'm just trying to move things along by pointing out the interest of those already playing the beta.

You guys are doing a great job...

I've got a dual core and I can't tell if it makes the game run any better.

Although, I like to play the game in a window and I watch a video on my computer either dvd, avi/mpg, or something online, and whenever I do that the game sometimes crawls to a halt.

In full screen the game runs fine, but sometimes in windows mode it just comes to a complete halt. Sometimes when zoomed in on a little combat or zoomed out with nothing going on the frame rate drops.

I'd like to think that if the game was dual core optimized it might run better when I want to perform two tasks at once, which would at least be cool but not crucial.

What would be the other benefits of dual core optimization?

There are many benefits of multicore optimization. First and foremost in my mind is a more complex AI. Then there are the physics and graphic enhancements to round of the top three areas.

Just regarding the OP, it is more likely that your (compatability?) issues may lay with your SLI rather than the dual-core chip. Have you tried disabling one of your cards and running the game? I dont really see how your Athlon X 64 could be that taxed from the size of battles you suggest. I would look for problems elsewhere, but if I have learned anything from testing other games, the problem could be anything including your soundcard or MB. But, my money is on the SLI compatability as the likeliest of culprits.

Cheers and good luck .

For the broader topic, more and more chips are becoming multicore, it'll be standard in another year to find only multicore in new systems and on racks. Might be a good idea to optimize while it is still possible. I throw my hat into this ring.

Phew, and a while back I thought I'm the only one that like Multicore - Supported.

dude, im on quad, so im all in for that optimization
But if it doesnt help that game, i dont see a reason to use alot of manpower for that.

that is also true, so i agree!

Athlon 64 3200+, 1.25 GB Ram, Mobility Radeon 9600 64mb
(1024*768, Highest Textures, 2 Sample)

My game runs fine all the time so I expect there's a problem in your machine somewhere...