Matrix Games Forums

artao5 wrote: Sat Mar 25, 2023 4:12 am I figured I'd throw in some old hardware here. Do I win the "Slowest System" award. LOL
Incidentally, I have 16 gigs of DDR3 1333 RAM. Not sure what's up with the 0 RAM thing.

Yes


You win....damn that is slow. I forced my Intel graphics to take it and Tacview did not like it.


Looks like I need to buy that. Eye Candy. We all wanted it and now it is there.

Dimitris wrote: Sat Mar 25, 2023 2:05 pm

13th gen, yeah it makes a difference.....

5900x running 64bit beta, 64 GB ram @ 2666

Did the benchmark against the latest beta. Someone stated that the newer versions were a little slower than older versions. Not seeing that in the benchmark.

Here is 1307.11


Here is a repost from 1307.3 on the same PC.

codextero wrote: Wed Mar 29, 2023 4:55 am 5900x running 64bit beta, 64 GB ram @ 2666

add to spreadsheet https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

My rig with 13015.1. Noticeably slower than the 32-bit version.

Finally got around to doing a first round of undervolting all CPUa and cache voltage. Am still looking for max performance. Not sure I'll do much better than this.

The devs have made good progress optimizing the 64-bit version in the new 1319.1 beta. Its now equivalent to the 32-bit in the benchmarking test.


edit: An issue in the 1319.1 keeps most missiles from firing in missions. I suspect it impacts the benchmark using this version. Will re-run as soon as fixed.

Using my travel ASUS Flow Z13 tablet/laptop.

I have to say, it really feels like the only missing thing here are AMD's X3D CPUs. So far, the 12th and 13th gen Intel CPUs are topping the results here. I really wonder if CMO would benefit from the additional cache or is still dependent on just the usual CPU attributes like the frequency/IPC/core count.

My experience is its not necessarily more cache, but faster cache. Undervolting cache on a laptop is a big boost, with some risk. My son OCed cache just a little and also saw a big boost in non-CMO benchmarks.

Little better this time.

Hello all,

Just curious, can you advise which average number (pulse times) should we get for running most of the scenarios without any issues?

My current laptop gives me more than 11000 ms of average, it´s possible to run large scenarios? I want to know if I need to buy a new laptop right away

Thank you in advance and sorry for the english, not my native language.

Pulse time impact is very dependent on the size of the scenario, the complexity (lots of missiles), and your own tolerance for slower time acceleration. In scenarios with 1000+ units and periods of heavy missile firing, even top of the line machines are lucky to go faster than 5:1 in heavy combat. In 3000+ scenarios in modern warfare, you'll be luck to do better than 1:1 ratio.

Here is a Ryzen 9 7900X3D, Ram at DDR6200

Zanthra wrote: Wed Apr 19, 2023 7:29 pm Here is a Ryzen 9 7900X3D, Ram at DDR6200

Neat! We finally have a our first X3D benchmark.

Are you using it with both CCDs or only the one with the V-Cache?

It has no specific affinity, although I did set the processor to expose the two CCD as separate NUMA nodes.