Matrix Games Forums

Thats just the laptop I am using now. My other laptop with a 3050 shows only slightly more usage. I was just trying to show you how to present the GPU. If it insults you that much...good luck.

Here's a laptop using Intel Iris GPU. Running just under 50% on a mid-large scenario running at 5x. I tried at one flame and it had little effect.


Hopefully that meets your approval for troubleshooting.

I'd venture to say anything better than an old GTX 750 Ti should be fine for running CMO, in most cases. Any of AMD's or Intel's new mobile chips will be more than fine, especially the new RDNA 3 equipped APUs. I'd say GTX 1050 (non-Ti) would be the recommended minimum.

thewood1 wrote: Tue Sep 19, 2023 8:30 pm There is definitely something broken in your system when it comes to CMO. I took this pic of my Task Manager with a large scenario running at 15x and you can see the max usage of the GPU is 30%, but seems to sit around 20% or so. See if you can grab a similar pic from the Performance tab in Task Manager.


Screenshot 2023-09-19 162721.jpg

Not sure why you’d think I’d be insulted, but that aside, I appreciate the input. I was merely pointing out that the difference between an RTX 4090 (even in a laptop) and a UHD 770 is epochal to the point of comedy. Comparison is pointless.

I have two identical devices. Just got the second out of its packaging, This time used the OEM Windows install. Updated everything, fresh Steam and C:MO install. Same issue.

While the Iris Xe is in fact much closer, and very useful data, it is more than 50% more performant than the 770.

I think what it seems to come down to is that the system requirements on the store simply didn’t survive the jump to 64 bit and are misleading. The requirements listed are for two different applications at this point.

Maybe in time things will get optimised, but it’s still a little immature for now. I want to love C:MO, but I can’t be relegated to running a legacy version until it’s fixed — IF it’s ever fixed.

Iwata.

Don't know much about Intel GPUs except that I never use them. As the specs on Steam list recommended a 1030 or greater, I checked GPU benchmark of the 770 against the 1030.

https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/N ... vsm1701638

The 1030 has twice the benchmark performance of the 770. So I think you are correct on it not really being capable of running CMO fully.

btw, again, the reason for comparing to my GPUs was just to make sure nothing was wrong overall and GPU usage was a universal thing.

thewood1 wrote: Wed Sep 20, 2023 11:21 am Don't know much about Intel GPUs except that I never use them. As the specs on Steam list recommended a 1030 or greater, I checked GPU benchmark of the 770 against the 1030.

https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/N ... vsm1701638

The 1030 has twice the benchmark performance of the 770. So I think you are correct on it not really being capable of running CMO fully.

btw, again, the reason for comparing to my GPUs was just to make sure nothing was wrong overall and GPU usage was a universal thing.

I agree. I don't think it's suitable for the 64 bit version. Unfortunately Matrix will likely need to update the minimum requirements if they're not going to support or update the 32 bit version. I kind of wish they'd make CMANO available again.

I have other devices I 'could' use, but this is essentially my milsim PC. Uses very little power and is quiet, and I purchsed CMO in the belief - given I can play all manner of complex 3D sims/casual sims/strategy games - like Arma 3, U-Boat, Cold Waters etc. and all the oldies like IL-2, Dangerous Waters, and the Jane's titles - that this would run fine, given the minimum requirements. Heck, I'd even take a software OpenGL version at this point, as it would no doubt run better on the CPU. I actually thought most of the load would be CPU due to the simulation aspects.

I believe that there's a headroom requirement at the moment, that once overcome, it will run on just about anything given it has JUST enough GPU headroom.

I still think there is something wrong with your system. I swapped out from the 4090 to the integrated UHD 770 onboard my cpu. I am running the exact same scenario as above and its around 45% GPU usage.


And thats a very busy time in that scenario for redrawing a large number of missiles.

Just loaded Frist Contact 1986 running at 5x and Intel UHD 770 maxed at 32% fluctuating as low as 18%.

edit: I bet it would help the devs if you posted your Directx log and the GPU performance graph from Task Manager.

Very odd.

First, my 770 doesn’t have that name in Task Manager. Second there’s some weird formatting with the DirectX version in your screenshot which mind also doesn’t show. Lastly when I switch from a 2060 to Intel, C:MO actually displays the Intel device name on the top bar of the UI, whereas yours still shows the 4090 - and in addition to that, when switching to the Intel graphics, GPU usage drops to 2%, whereas yours it as 7%.

I appreciate you having a look, but I can’t replicate it.

Aside from a separate, identical, completely freshly installed device, all up to date, which I’ve just tried, I’m not sure what else I can do. I know you say it’s something on the devices that’s broken, but both of them? Deployed in different manners, one fresh out of the box? When everything else runs fine?

I’ve even tried vendor drivers vs manufacturers drivers, no dice.

Just points to the software not being able to run on this spec rather than the devices themself having issues. I wouldn’t even mind so much if the maps were high resolution, but they’re not. I have GIS software on (yet another) one of these workstations with mapping many MANY times greater resolution with billions of datapoints and they don’t really break a sweats

I’ve got the tools to disassemble the software and see what it’s actually struggling with, but it’ll just add more hours to the playtime and I’m not sure the devs will be particularly bothered about optimising for every hardware config. Also I’m sure Matrix wouldn’t much like me taking it apart. So I won’t.

Really strange.

I didn't even notice the 4090 as still listed. I'll use control panel to force it.

edit...

Interestingly, even forcing it through nVidia CP didn't get CMO to use the UHD. I had to disable the mux and turn off power to the 4090 to get CMO to only use the UHD. I assume this is an issue on the MSI side.

But, as the graph shows, it validates what you are saying with the 770. The only other thing is CMO actually runs a little faster on my benchmark scenario. So even though its maxing the GPU, it isn't really bothering the performance of the game on my machine.


Now its off to find out whats happening with my mux.

That’s interesting. As before, I really appreciate the input.

But that’s pretty much exactly what I see in my GPU readout. Pinned from the second you open the application. I suspect that your extra performance is probably from being a non-small-form-factor machine, better power availability, less thermal throttling etc. Feels very much ‘close, but no cigar’.

It’s really frustrating as the 32 bit version runs so well. I suspect you’ll see identical results to mine - not asking you to try, don’t worry!

I have 6 of these machines, their day job will normally be ‘micro server’ but I’ve commandeered a couple to be media/light gaming machines and they’ve performed admirably so far.

I noticed you said you are playing IL-2 also. That also runs on DX11. For giggles, I tried it on the UHD at lowest settings and 1080. It ran like crap. You might be able to play, but its a chore. And it immediately brought the GPU usage to 90-100% in flight. So they'll have to do some optimizing also.

I’ll grab some screenshots and logs.

thewood1 wrote: Wed Sep 20, 2023 2:41 pm I noticed you said you are playing IL-2 also. That also runs on DX11. For giggles, I tried it on the UHD at lowest settings and 1080. It ran like crap. You might be able to play, but its a chore. And it immediately brought the GPU usage to 90-100% in flight. So they'll have to do some optimizing also.

I should have said 1946, that will run on just about anything. Also another Dx9 title.

I’d imagine the new ones would suck.

Okidokes: here’s my start screen and dxdiag.

I think anything with DX11 is going to bring a 770 or any non-ARC GPU to its max. The funny thing is CMO actually seems to run well on my system, even when maxing out the 770.

just talked to a developer at work. He said Intel has dropped all direct support for DX9. Its all done through software emulation on Iris and ARC using DX12. Its forcing game developers to move to DX11 and the 7XX, 6XX, etc. UHDs just get maxed out as the emulation software is nowhere near as efficient as the direct HW connection.

Quite. It was an incredibly odd choice as an ‘upgrade’ path given how old 11 is.

RegenerationItawa wrote: Wed Sep 20, 2023 4:23 pm Quite. It was an incredibly odd choice as an ‘upgrade’ path given how old 11 is.

Most non-AAA game developers are choosing 11 over 12. 12 is extraordinarily complex and eliminates a lot of "older" GPUs. Typically for Intel, it eliminates anything below ARC. Just look at MSFS. 12 has been in beta for several years. Most players stick with 11 because of older 10X0 cards and overall crashes.

btw, you are lucky they didn't go with 12. Look at some of the rigs shown on this board. A large number of players would be completely eliminated from play.

edit: just tried Steel Beasts. Developed on DX9 years ago. On 770, its a stuttering mess at lowest settings. GPU maxed out between 95 and 100%. I know I played it on old Intel GPUs of the 5 series. So the changes Intel has made in how they process DX11 on UHD chipsets is killing games. I wouldn't wait around too much on any optimizations.

Is there a consensus on what is going on here?

All I can do is compare to other games on Intel GPUs. They all seem to have issues with DX11 and GPU usage.