Page 9 of 9
Re: Benchmarking CPU's in Command Modern Operations
Posted: Sun May 18, 2025 11:47 pm
by TempestII
I still find 1662 to be a quick build by default:
- 20250518 - CMO 1662 RDR Benchmark 1.jpg (46.27 KiB) Viewed 2694 times
There is a notably but explainable speed drop off when more features are ticked:
- 20250518 - CMO 1662 RDR Benchmark 2.jpg (104.15 KiB) Viewed 2694 times
Re: Benchmarking CPU's in Command Modern Operations
Posted: Fri May 30, 2025 2:23 pm
by Nikel
The last is the slowest build (in the last beta series) in my laptop in the benchmark scenario, and back above 1000 ms.
- CMO Benchmark 1674.png (18.01 KiB) Viewed 2495 times
For comparison:
Build 1645: 987 ms
Build 1662: 974 ms
Re: Benchmarking CPU's in Command Modern Operations
Posted: Fri Jul 04, 2025 8:18 pm
by Nikel
Waiting for the next patch with the high CPU/GPU usage fixed
- 1676.png (17.76 KiB) Viewed 2098 times
Re: Benchmarking CPU's in Command Modern Operations
Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2025 7:23 am
by Nikel
Build 1706 improved in the benchmark scenario, but still not as good as 1645 and 1662 were (below 1000 ms here).
- B1706.png (18.12 KiB) Viewed 2004 times
Re: Benchmarking CPU's in Command Modern Operations
Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2025 7:19 am
by Nikel
- B1728.png (18 KiB) Viewed 1323 times
Re: Benchmarking CPU's in Command Modern Operations
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2025 11:54 am
by Nikel
Test, adding this line in Command.ini
HighSimSpeedTimeSync = True
ADDED: Added HighSimSpeedTimeSync setting in Command.ini (Optional; Allows throttling of flame and double-flame sim speeds to stay in sync with clock time while running in the GUI, making them equivalent to 30x and 150x respectively)
- B1728H.png (20.66 KiB) Viewed 1286 times
No idea what it means, slower (better) result, but the simulation is slower.
Compared with the standard test (ms increase with time), the ms remain very stable along the test.
Re: Benchmarking CPU's in Command Modern Operations
Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2025 6:25 pm
by Dimitris
Nikel wrote: Fri Sep 19, 2025 11:54 am
Test, adding this line in Command.ini
HighSimSpeedTimeSync = True
ADDED: Added HighSimSpeedTimeSync setting in Command.ini (Optional; Allows throttling of flame and double-flame sim speeds to stay in sync with clock time while running in the GUI, making them equivalent to 30x and 150x respectively)
B1728H.png
No idea what it means, slower (better) result, but the simulation is slower.
Compared with the standard test (ms increase with time), the ms remain very stable along the test.
This goes hand-in-hand with this change, as described in the B1728.2 release notes:
TWEAK: Tweaked the logic of sim-loop execution in order to more precisely match elapsed sim-time and wall-time when running in realtime (1x). This fixes a reported problem where e.g. a 1-minute of sim time could take 1m6sec of wall-time while running in real-time mode.
This is almost exclusively a "for pros" feature, it does not concern commercial players.
Re: Benchmarking CPU's in Command Modern Operations
Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2025 7:09 pm
by Nikel
OK, thanks for the explanation.
Re: Benchmarking CPU's in Command Modern Operations
Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2025 8:19 pm
by Knightpawn
Nikel wrote: Fri Sep 19, 2025 11:54 am
HighSimSpeedTimeSync = True
ADDED: Added HighSimSpeedTimeSync setting in Command.ini (Optional; Allows throttling of flame and double-flame sim speeds to stay in sync with clock time while running in the GUI, making them equivalent to 30x and 150x respectively)
No idea what it means, slower (better) result, but the simulation is slower.
Compared with the standard test (ms increase with time), the ms remain very stable along the test.
I included it in the ini file and essentially there is no acceleration at all when flame or double flame is pressed.
Re: Benchmarking CPU's in Command Modern Operations
Posted: Sun Nov 23, 2025 8:07 am
by Nikel
The last build is slower here.
May anyone confirm?
- B1774.png (17.8 KiB) Viewed 756 times
Summary of results:
B1645: 987 ms
B1662: 974 ms
B1674: 1133 ms
B1676: 1194 ms
B1706: 1100 ms
B1728: 1160 ms
B1774: 1457 ms
Re: Benchmarking CPU's in Command Modern Operations
Posted: Mon Dec 01, 2025 11:33 am
by Kyyla
Looks rather sameish here.
- bench.png (17.63 KiB) Viewed 675 times
- bench2.png (17.3 KiB) Viewed 675 times
Re: Benchmarking CPU's in Command Modern Operations
Posted: Mon Dec 01, 2025 12:14 pm
by Nikel
Kyyla wrote: Mon Dec 01, 2025 11:33 am
Looks rather sameish here.
bench.png
bench2.png
May you test B1776?
Re: Benchmarking CPU's in Command Modern Operations
Posted: Mon Dec 01, 2025 8:30 pm
by Kyyla
Oops I just assumed the beta branch from Steam would give me the latest.
Where can I get B1776?
Re: Benchmarking CPU's in Command Modern Operations
Posted: Mon Dec 01, 2025 8:44 pm
by Parel803
Re: Benchmarking CPU's in Command Modern Operations
Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2025 4:43 pm
by Kyyla
Indeed 1776 is a bit slower.
- Nimetön.png (20.43 KiB) Viewed 610 times
Re: Benchmarking CPU's in Command Modern Operations
Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2025 5:04 pm
by Nikel
That is a 26% slower. 1776 vs 1728
Similar to my test.
And 1776 is around 50% slower than my best result, 1662.
Re: Benchmarking CPU's in Command Modern Operations
Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2025 5:35 am
by nocacounsel
Late to the party, but adding my results.