help with system specs for supreme commander and upgrading

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for lugsey2k4
lugsey2k4

120

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 lugsey2k4
Member since 2004 • 120 Posts

hello i recnetly purchased supreme commander and was thinking about upgrading my pc to handle the game properly

at the moment its a slidshow when a battle starts

my curret spec is

Radeon 9800 PRO 128mb ddr

intel pentium 4 2.53ghz

with 512mb ram

what would be wise things to upgrade to allow me to play on low-medium settings on a 4 player map at least. and what are good replacement parts as im not too (knolegdable?) about cpus and graphics cards.

thanks for any help

Avatar image for Ultimate-Playa
Ultimate-Playa

701

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#2 Ultimate-Playa
Member since 2005 • 701 Posts

More RAM defintely.

Upgrade your RAM to have at last 1gb or 2gb.

Edit: Your processor sucks too, buy a new one.

Avatar image for Indestructible2
Indestructible2

5935

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 Indestructible2
Member since 2007 • 5935 Posts
You're better off witha new rig or forgetting todays demanding games...
Avatar image for lugsey2k4
lugsey2k4

120

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 lugsey2k4
Member since 2004 • 120 Posts

ok any sujestions as i say not too sure on it all and new to upgrading my pc.

was shocked at how bad it was on Supcom as it runs smooth on c+c 3 on high

on sujestions on cpu and price range?and hows graphics card it ok?

Avatar image for NamelessPlayer
NamelessPlayer

7729

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 NamelessPlayer
Member since 2004 • 7729 Posts
You need an ENTIRELY NEW SYSTEM. Preferably with a Core 2 Quad, 2 or even 4 GB of RAM, and at least a GeForce 8800 GTS 320 MB. From what I've read, due to its massive scale, Supreme Commander demands so much that it brings even the best PCs of today to their knees. Then again, if you only want low-to-medium settings, that might help lessen the hardware load and allow you to be content with cheaper equipment...
Avatar image for lugsey2k4
lugsey2k4

120

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 lugsey2k4
Member since 2004 • 120 Posts

ok

what are core 2 dues like they are more in my price range at the moment? around2.2ghz ish

Avatar image for DieselCat18
DieselCat18

3008

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#7 DieselCat18
Member since 2002 • 3008 Posts

You'll need to know what type of CPU socket will match up with the motherboard you have so you can determin what CPU's will work with it.

This is a list for CPU socket type LGA 775 which is very commonly used. If you do go wiith this type socket you may have to upgrade your motherboardif it doesn't match up.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010340343+1050722265+1051707842+1050922263&name=Conroe

If you are able to replace you CPU and are in the 200.00 price range look into the Intel Core 2 duo E6750, if your not able to spend that much there are plenty of others that will still give you enough performance for your needs and keep you in a comfortable price range.

Aside from that you will need to look into more memory ( to run SupCom well, 2G are really needed ) and thoughI have a very fond place in my heart for the ATI 9800Pro ( still have the 256mb version running in wife's computer ) you will most likely need to upgrade your GPU. Now after all this you want to make sure you have a good power supply unit which is really important along with good cooling for you case and components.

So I guess money will be an issue because I don't believe just upgrading your processor with be enough.

Avatar image for codezer0
codezer0

15898

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

#8 codezer0
Member since 2004 • 15898 Posts
Throw that thing the hell away and start new. Time to line up that second mortgage if you haven't already, because that's the only way you'll be able to afford a machine for SupCom. You'll need a quad-core, and even if you don't SLi, you will want to get a pair of 8800 GTX's (or Ultras), one each to drive a separate display to be able to run two monitors for the game (and run with high settings for each). If you can, go with 4GB of system RAM.
Avatar image for codezer0
codezer0

15898

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

#9 codezer0
Member since 2004 • 15898 Posts

You'll need to know what type of CPU socket will match up with the motherboard you have so you can determin what CPU's will work with it.

DieselCat18
It's a 533MHz FSB P4. It wouldn't even be LGA775, much less on a motherboard that can physically accept a Core 2 Duo with all the revisions intel does to screw with compatibility (thanks, intel! :evil: ). SupCom will laugh at his system altogether. The 9800 Pro is nowhere near enough, and 512MB of RAM I think is below even the minimum requirements for the game.
Avatar image for lugsey2k4
lugsey2k4

120

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 lugsey2k4
Member since 2004 • 120 Posts

the game plays but is slow but was enough for me to decided i like ti enough to upgrade my pc.

by the sounds of it it looks like a crimbo jobbie. can any 1 give me a price rang on a decent full coputer tp handel it?

sorry about all the questions but im new to this. been looking myself up bit confusing with processors etc

i was thinking maby £600-£700. for the lot. only thing i dont need is speakers but they will prob come with most packs anyways wont they?

thanks for all the help guys

Avatar image for DieselCat18
DieselCat18

3008

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#11 DieselCat18
Member since 2002 • 3008 Posts

Throw that thing the hell away and start new. Time to line up that second mortgage if you haven't already, because that's the only way you'll be able to afford a machine for SupCom. You'll need a quad-core, and even if you don't SLi, you will want to get a pair of 8800 GTX's (or Ultras), one each to drive a separate display to be able to run two monitors for the game (and run with high settings for each). If you can, go with 4GB of system RAM.codezer0

Those upgrade specs are extreme for anyone that wants to justplay SupCom well....it's a dream setup but nearly not necessary to play this game. Quad-cores are nice but not needed, a good duel-core will run it just fine. And 8800 GTX or ULTRAS running duel monitors ? ....I didn't get the impression that's where he can afford to be.

I'm running it on all med to high settings with a C2D E6600 (stock 2.4Ghz), 2G DDR2 800 PC2-6400 memory and an eVGA 7900GTX with no problems at all....The only lags I experience are when there are more than 4 players in a match. Other than that it runs very well and graphics look great (1680 x 1050 ) on a 20.1 wide-screen.

So I think he will definitely need to think about an upgrade from is current system, but should be able to do it without breaking the bank to run this game well.

Avatar image for dayaccus007
dayaccus007

4349

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 dayaccus007
Member since 2007 • 4349 Posts

For 600-700 pounds you can get:

E6550

X1950XT

2GbRAM

andaP35mobo

Avatar image for lugsey2k4
lugsey2k4

120

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13 lugsey2k4
Member since 2004 • 120 Posts

chears diesel that seems a bit more like it as my moutinabike takes up most of my pay packet at the moment.

just looking at some machines on dell. but does any 1 knowa site where u can builda computer to my own specs that u ppl have sujested. some pcs iv seen have 500gb hard drives but i would only need 150gb max ( only using 40 now) so could spend the money elsewere on the machine.

core 2 dueo seem more sensible over the quad which seem a little extream.

p.s evey impressed with this forum and how active it is

Avatar image for codezer0
codezer0

15898

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

#14 codezer0
Member since 2004 • 15898 Posts
Uh, it is needed. Supcom plays much better on a quad core than it does on a dual-core, and is impossible to play on a single-core. And SupCom supports dual-monitors, but no one graphics card on its own will be able to drive both monitors on high and play fludily. And you pretty much have to buy an 8800 anyway to run it on a single monitor with high graphics. But for dual monitor mode, might as well get a second and instead of running in SLi, run one 8800 to each monitor so that you can have dual monitors and fluid play. SupCom is a system-raping game, pure and simple. And if he wants to upgrade to play it, then do it right - don't do it half-assed.
Avatar image for Indestructible2
Indestructible2

5935

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15 Indestructible2
Member since 2007 • 5935 Posts
Uh, it is needed. Supcom plays much better on a quad core than it does on a dual-core, and is impossible to play on a single-core. And SupCom supports dual-monitors, but no one graphics card on its own will be able to drive both monitors on high and play fludily. And you pretty much have to buy an 8800 anyway to run it on a single monitor with high graphics. But for dual monitor mode, might as well get a second and instead of running in SLi, run one 8800 to each monitor so that you can have dual monitors and fluid play. SupCom is a system-raping game, pure and simple. And if he wants to upgrade to play it, then do it right - don't do it half-assed.codezer0
He wants to play at LOW-MEDIUM SETTINGS,NOT ULTRA MAXED @ 2560x1600,a decent dual core (Something likea X2 5600+ or E6550) 1GB RAM and a HD 2600Pro or 8600GT is more than enough for low-medium settings @ 12x10...
Avatar image for dayaccus007
dayaccus007

4349

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16 dayaccus007
Member since 2007 • 4349 Posts

[QUOTE="codezer0"]Uh, it is needed. Supcom plays much better on a quad core than it does on a dual-core, and is impossible to play on a single-core. And SupCom supports dual-monitors, but no one graphics card on its own will be able to drive both monitors on high and play fludily. And you pretty much have to buy an 8800 anyway to run it on a single monitor with high graphics. But for dual monitor mode, might as well get a second and instead of running in SLi, run one 8800 to each monitor so that you can have dual monitors and fluid play. SupCom is a system-raping game, pure and simple. And if he wants to upgrade to play it, then do it right - don't do it half-assed.Indestructible2
He wants to play at LOW-MEDIUM SETTINGS,NOT ULTRA MAXED @ 2560x1600,a decent dual core (Something likea X2 5600+ or E6550) 1GB RAM and a HD 2600Pro or 8600GT is more than enough for low-medium settings @ 12x10...

I agree with that

Avatar image for codezer0
codezer0

15898

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

#17 codezer0
Member since 2004 • 15898 Posts
He wants to play at LOW-MEDIUM SETTINGS,NOT ULTRA MAXED @ 2560x1600,a decent dual core (Something likea X2 5600+ or E6550) 1GB RAM and a HD 2600Pro or 8600GT is more than enough for low-medium settings @ 12x10...Indestructible2
Did I even mention 2560x1600 anywhere in my post? Nope. Hell, you'd need an 8800 SLi just to drive ONE monitor for SupCom in that resolution, and even then it's no guarantee of being able to run with high graphics settings. And running on low? then why bother buy SupCom anyway? Get Total Annihilation if all you were intending on running SupCom is on low-medium settings.
Avatar image for Indestructible2
Indestructible2

5935

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18 Indestructible2
Member since 2007 • 5935 Posts

[QUOTE="Indestructible2"]He wants to play at LOW-MEDIUM SETTINGS,NOT ULTRA MAXED @ 2560x1600,a decent dual core (Something likea X2 5600+ or E6550) 1GB RAM and a HD 2600Pro or 8600GT is more than enough for low-medium settings @ 12x10...codezer0
Did I even mention 2560x1600 anywhere in my post? Nope. Hell, you'd need an 8800 SLi just to drive ONE monitor for SupCom in that resolution, and even then it's no guarantee of being able to run with high graphics settings. And running on low? then why bother buy SupCom anyway? Get Total Annihilation if all you were intending on running SupCom is on low-medium settings.

Did he say ANYTHING about Dual Monitors?

And even on lowest settings SupCom grafx MURDER TA grafx maxed out,not everyone needs ULTRA MAXED OUT with 16xAA and 16xAF you know...

Avatar image for codezer0
codezer0

15898

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

#19 codezer0
Member since 2004 • 15898 Posts
And not everyone apparently reads the product box. Don't believe me? click and read for yourself
Dual Core and Performance - Supreme Commander will utilize your dual and quad core processor natively and automatically. Running a dual or quad core processor is one of the best ways to improve performance in Supreme Commander.Supreme Commander readme file
This isn't me saying it. It's being written by the people that made the **** game. If they say you need quad core, then you better **** get a quad core. Performance difference between single, dual, and quad can be seen right here. Notice the rather significant jump in performance settings that are enabled to be played by going multicore in this game. I take it back... to run even 1600x1200 with high settings requires an 8800GTX SLi and quad core CPU, and Windows XP. With Vista, even with that SLi, you'd have to dial back down some settings to Low.
Avatar image for Indestructible2
Indestructible2

5935

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#20 Indestructible2
Member since 2007 • 5935 Posts

God damn,FOR THE LAST **** TIME,HE'S NOT GONNA BE RUNNING EVERYTHING MAXED OUT!!!!!! and unless you can find me proof that a X2 5600+ 8600GT and 1GB RAM struggles with SupCom Low-Med settings,STFU.

Avatar image for lugsey2k4
lugsey2k4

120

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21 lugsey2k4
Member since 2004 • 120 Posts

steady there!

medium settings will do. i think i high end core 2 dueo and and2 manby 4gb ram. and 8600 graphics card seem ok just pricing it up now.

came up with this on dell.

PROCESSORIntel® ViivTM technology - Intel® CoreTM 2 Duo E6750 processor (2.66GHz)editOPERATING SYSTEMGenuine Windows Vista® Home Premium - EnglisheditMONITORDellTM 19" Silver Wide Flat Panel (SE198WFP) - UK/IrisheditMEMORY4096MB 667MHz Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM [4x1024]editHARD DRIVE500GB Dual Hard Drive Non RAID (2x250GB - 7200rpm)editGRAPHICS CARD256MB nVidiaTM GeForce 8600GT graphics cardeditOPTICAL DRIVE16x DVD +/- RW DriveeditKEYBOARDDellTM Entry Quietkey USB Keyboard - UK/Irish (QWERTY)editMOUSEDell 2 Button USB Scroll Optical Mouse - Black

Avatar image for lugsey2k4
lugsey2k4

120

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22 lugsey2k4
Member since 2004 • 120 Posts
sorry all that came to £810
Avatar image for Indestructible2
Indestructible2

5935

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#23 Indestructible2
Member since 2007 • 5935 Posts
If you can use your current monitor,do that,that'll save you a good deal of cash.
Avatar image for lugsey2k4
lugsey2k4

120

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24 lugsey2k4
Member since 2004 • 120 Posts
i have an old crt monitor so realy could do with changing other wise i would. plus it doesnt let you remove it from the list only ungraded it. but apart from that does that seem ok for gaming, im also gonna get the new c+c kanes wrath when i comes out as i loved c+c 3:)
Avatar image for codezer0
codezer0

15898

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

#25 codezer0
Member since 2004 • 15898 Posts

God damn,FOR THE LAST **** TIME,HE'S NOT GONNA BE RUNNING EVERYTHING MAXED OUT!!!!!! and unless you can find me proof that a X2 5600+ 8600GT and 1GB RAM struggles with SupCom Low-Med settings,STFU.

Indestructible2
See the numbers for yourself. They used a QX6700 for their testing in the links I provided above. Gamespot even provides its own comparo between various processors. in there, an FX-60 @ 2.6GHz is only pulling 20fps @ 1600x1200. And according to these numbers, the game only starts to really fly with an 8800gts, and more with a GTX. Here are some more numbers from ExtremeTech, xbit labs, and Anandtech. You can argue with me and piss and moan, but the numbers are right there.
Avatar image for DieselCat18
DieselCat18

3008

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#26 DieselCat18
Member since 2002 • 3008 Posts

And not everyone apparently reads the product box. Don't believe me? click and read for yourself [quote="Supreme Commander readme file"]Dual Core and Performance - Supreme Commander will utilize your dual and quad core processor natively and automatically. Running a dual or quad core processor is one of the best ways to improve performance in Supreme Commander.codezer0
This isn't me saying it. It's being written by the people that made the **** game. If they say you need quad core, then you better **** get a quad core. Performance difference between single, dual, and quad can be seen right here. Notice the rather significant jump in performance settings that are enabled to be played by going multicore in this game. I take it back... to run even 1600x1200 with high settings requires an 8800GTX SLi and quad core CPU, and Windows XP. With Vista, even with that SLi, you'd have to dial back down some settings to Low.

You are entirely off base ! Please stop giving out mis-information..... from your comments, I don't believe you have ever played this game. As I mentioned earlier, I run SupCom on Medium and mostly High settings on my system specswhich were mentioned above and are not nearly what you are suggesting neededwith no problems at all at 1680x1050 on a 20.1 widescreen.

The hardware your suggesting is a totally high end system (which is very nice) but again is not needed to run this game well.

Avatar image for codezer0
codezer0

15898

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

#27 codezer0
Member since 2004 • 15898 Posts
HOW is it mis-information when the numbers are right there (and I'm even providing links) to prove what I've been saying? :?
Avatar image for lugsey2k4
lugsey2k4

120

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#28 lugsey2k4
Member since 2004 • 120 Posts

hi dunno if this is just me not knowing much but this seems a bit of a bargin on pc world

Intel Core 2 Quad Processor Q66002.4GHz, 1066MHz FSB, 8MB CacheGenuine Windows Vista (R) Home Premium2048MB RAM Memory320GB Hard DriveDVD Re-Writer Drive256MB NVidia GeForce 8300 GS7-In-1 Media Card Reader6 USB Connections

for £419 its refurbished but has 12 month warrente plus i would get 10% for working for dixons

add £100 for new monitor or soand seems ok

Avatar image for codezer0
codezer0

15898

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

#29 codezer0
Member since 2004 • 15898 Posts

hi dunno if this is just me not knowing much but this seems a bit of a bargin on pc world

Intel Core 2 Quad Processor Q66002.4GHz, 1066MHz FSB, 8MB CacheGenuine Windows Vista (R) Home Premium2048MB RAM Memory320GB Hard DriveDVD Re-Writer Drive256MB NVidia GeForce 8300 GS7-In-1 Media Card Reader6 USB Connections

for £419 its refurbished but has 12 month warrente plus i would get 10% for working for dixons

add £100 for new monitor or soand seems ok

lugsey2k4
That's actually not a bad deal. Upgrade the GPU to an 8800 or HD 2900 if possible and you'd have something that could really smoke in SupCom.
Avatar image for lugsey2k4
lugsey2k4

120

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#30 lugsey2k4
Member since 2004 • 120 Posts
coderz my computer plays the game fine on lowest specs 1v1 for about 10 mins but still plays well enough to finish a game on 1v1 on a small map. and i certainly wont be buying the kind of system your talking about. sorry. and i dont think my system is as bad as u think it is terrible for supcom but plays c+c on high settings fine.
Avatar image for lugsey2k4
lugsey2k4

120

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31 lugsey2k4
Member since 2004 • 120 Posts

i just googled the 8800 gtx and i came up with prices like £300 at 700mb

thats way past my budget so the 8600 would have to do

Avatar image for codezer0
codezer0

15898

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

#32 codezer0
Member since 2004 • 15898 Posts
At least with a Q6600 and 2GB's of RAM, you have a solid base for SupCom performance, since the game is more CPU bound to start with. Given the option of the above system, it would actually be not a bad idea to start with that as a base, then just swap out the 8300GS in there for something better. Might even be worth looking at an HD 2900 Pro, since the last rumors I've read about were that it would be running at the price of as low as about £170, IIRC.
Avatar image for DieselCat18
DieselCat18

3008

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#33 DieselCat18
Member since 2002 • 3008 Posts

coderz my computer plays the game fine on lowest specs 1v1 for about 10 mins but still plays well enough to finish a game on 1v1 on a small map. and i certainly wont be buying the kind of system your talking about. sorry. and i dont think my system is as bad as u think it is terrible for supcom but plays c+c on high settings fine.lugsey2k4

Don't worry aboutwhat this guy is telling you.....he is way off base ! The system you have ( which meets or is just about at the minimum system requirements ) will run SupCom on the low end settings on 1v1 on smaller maps as you say. The problem you run into is mainly not enough processing power combined to a lesser extent with your GPU and memory to be able to run smoothly on larger maps such as 10x10m, 20x20, 40x40....etc and in 1v1,1v1v1, team2v2, 3v3 and team 4v4. To run run at any higher settings, even on 1v1 on 5x5m maps, you would need hardware upgrades...but no where near what that other guy is suggesting.

If your in the US....check out hardware components at www.newegg.com....there you will find every thing needed to upgraed at very good prices and very good service.....if you are even considering any kind of upgrade.

Again Quad-cores, top end GPU's in SLI and duel monitors, not to mention the monster power supply you'll need to run it all, are really nice (wish I had that kind of setup) but certainly not needed to play this game well and have fun doing it.

Hope you get things worked out.....and from your last several posts I see you not in US but the UK.....still check out prices on your end within you budget...you'll be able to put together a system that will run this game well.

Also since SupCom was released back in March.....the numerous patches that GPGnet has released solved many issues including better optimizing the game to run well on systems that are not high-end.

Avatar image for codezer0
codezer0

15898

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

#34 codezer0
Member since 2004 • 15898 Posts
How am I way off base, when the very people who made the game are telling you you need a quad-core system? Clearly you're the one that's wrong here, when I have the data to prove that you can't run a game like SupCom on something that weak. If that Q6600-based system listed above can indeed be had for £410, and it leaves you money over so that you can update the GPU, then that would be a great setup so that you could do a little more than just 1-on-1 gaming. I'm the only one on this whole thread that's providing any concrete numbers to prove just how the game runs on various spreads of systems. I'm the only one in this thread that is actually showing just how much of a difference there is between different GPU's and CPU's in running SupCom, and basing my recommendations on the data that is clearly and evidently available for all to see. And I'm the one that's "off base?" :roll: That's kinda like saying, "oh, there are all these reports saying that the majority of people in Africa have the aids. But so what? I'm going to go have unprotected sex with the next tribes woman I see, and see what happens!" It is just so obviouslynot smart to ignore the statistics (or in this case, the numbers) when they are clearly telling you what I've been reiterating in this thread. If you want to do SupCom right, you're going to want a quad-core with a lot of RAM first, then as high-end a GPU as possible to be able to have better than medium graphics settings on. Seriously, why build a whole new machine to aim for running a game on low settings? That's like getting the money to assemble your own car company and then only putting out 2-cyl. pintos. It does not make any **** sense.
Avatar image for kodex1717
kodex1717

5925

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35 kodex1717
Member since 2005 • 5925 Posts

There are benchies out there showing SupCom doing 15% better on a E6750 vs. a Q6600. I'm not trying to start a debate here, but it's obvious that the impact of Clock Speed > Number of Cores.

EDIT: Whoops, I'm retarded. It seems that the benchmark says that you get a 10.7% increase in SupCom with a E6850 vs a Q6600. So, if SupCom is what you want, and you can afford a E6850, I'd go for it.

Avatar image for DieselCat18
DieselCat18

3008

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#36 DieselCat18
Member since 2002 • 3008 Posts

How am I way off base, when the very people who made the game are telling you you need a quad-core system? Clearly you're the one that's wrong here, when I have the data to prove that you can't run a game like SupCom on something that weak. If that Q6600-based system listed above can indeed be had for £410, and it leaves you money over so that you can update the GPU, then that would be a great setup so that you could do a little more than just 1-on-1 gaming.codezer0

Youy have no clue what your suggesting here because you obviously don't even have the game and most likely haven't played it since I doubt your system bares any resemblance to the one your describing SupCom needs to be played on.

I have played this since BETA and have had it since it's release back in March...AND AGAIN I'll tell you it runs extremely well on my system specs, (which is no where near what your saying is needed to run this game well) and just for you I'll repeat itagain.......C2D E6600 (2.4 GHz), eVGA 7900GTX 512MB, 2G Corsair XSM2 DDR2 800 PC2-6400 Twin PRO, ASUS P5W DH Deluxe, 700W GameXtreme PSU Zalman 9500, WD Raptor 150G SATA 10K HHD, LG 20.1 LCD Wide-screen @ 1680x1050, Chenming ATX Full Tower Case, Windows XP HOME Edition.

Supreme Commander MINIMUM SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS : MS WIN. XP SP2 or VISTA, 1.8GHz CPU, 512 MB RAM, 8BG available HD space, 128MB video RAM or greater, with DX9 vertex shader / Pixel Shader 2.0 support, sound card, speaker or headphones, 56.6 Kbps Internet connection required. (which the OP is at or comes close to with his current system)

Supreme Commander RECOMMENDED SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS : 3.0 GHz Intel or equivalent AMD CPU or better, 1GB Ram or better, 8 GB available HD space, 256MB video RAM, with DX9 Vertex Shader / Pixel Shader 2.0 support (PLEASE READ.. Nvidia 6800 or better), and Internet connection with Cable /DSL speeds.

All above specs are direct quotes off the game box which I own a copy of sitting right in from of me.

No where on the system requirements doese it say, and I'm quoting you ;

How am I way off base, when the very people who made the game are telling you you need a quad-core system?

A Quad-Core will improve performance, but mainly on the much larges maps such as 40x40m & 81x81m with more people playing at one time. Other than that they are not really necessary and nowhere does it say by GPG that they are needed to run it.

Avatar image for shanelevy
shanelevy

1316

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#37 shanelevy
Member since 2004 • 1316 Posts

And not everyone apparently reads the product box. Don't believe me? click and read for yourself [quote="Supreme Commander readme file"]Dual Core and Performance - Supreme Commander will utilize your dual and quad core processor natively and automatically. Running a dual or quad core processor is one of the best ways to improve performance in Supreme Commander.codezer0
This isn't me saying it. It's being written by the people that made the **** game. If they say you need quad core, then you better **** get a quad core. Performance difference between single, dual, and quad can be seen right here. Notice the rather significant jump in performance settings that are enabled to be played by going multicore in this game. I take it back... to run even 1600x1200 with high settings requires an 8800GTX SLi and quad core CPU, and Windows XP. With Vista, even with that SLi, you'd have to dial back down some settings to Low.

Hmm...are you out of your mind? You contradicted your OWN quote. The quote says dual OR quad core processors will help performance.

I then looked at a benchmark that you linked to in another post from anandtech and the E6750 scored better than the q6600.

And yet, right below your quote, you scream that "It's being written by the people that made the **** game. If they say you need quad core, then you better **** get a quad core."

A DUAL CORE WORKS FINE. PERIOD. THEY SAID THAT IN YOUR QUOTE. Hey look, I can act authoritative and exasperated on the internet too!

Also, dual monitors? Man wake the *** up. How many copies do you think Sup-com would have sold if it required Dual monitors, 8800 GTXs in SLI, and a quad core?

Avatar image for DieselCat18
DieselCat18

3008

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#38 DieselCat18
Member since 2002 • 3008 Posts

[QUOTE="codezer0"]And not everyone apparently reads the product box. Don't believe me? click and read for yourself [quote="Supreme Commander readme file"]Dual Core and Performance - Supreme Commander will utilize your dual and quad core processor natively and automatically. Running a dual or quad core processor is one of the best ways to improve performance in Supreme Commander.shanelevy

This isn't me saying it. It's being written by the people that made the **** game. If they say you need quad core, then you better **** get a quad core. Performance difference between single, dual, and quad can be seen right here. Notice the rather significant jump in performance settings that are enabled to be played by going multicore in this game. I take it back... to run even 1600x1200 with high settings requires an 8800GTX SLi and quad core CPU, and Windows XP. With Vista, even with that SLi, you'd have to dial back down some settings to Low.

Hmm...are you out of your mind? You contradicted your OWN quote. The quote says dual OR quad core processors will help performance.

I then looked at a benchmark that you linked to in another post from anandtech and the E6750 scored better than the q6600.

And yet, right below your quote, you scream that "It's being written by the people that made the **** game. If they say you need quad core, then you better **** get a quad core."

A DUAL CORE WORKS FINE. PERIOD. THEY SAID THAT IN YOUR QUOTE. Hey look, I can act authoritative and exasperated on the internet too!

Also, dual monitors? Man wake the *** up. How many copies do you think Sup-com would have sold if it required Dual monitors, 8800 GTXs in SLI, and a quad core?

Don't even waste your breath on this guy....he is offering no help to the OP with bad information. Like I said earlier, I'm sure he doen't even own a copy, much less played it.

I want to apologize to the OP of this thread, this arguing has gotten away from what your asking about....the last guy above me mirrors my thoughts and is dead on about the sys req.

Again as for your situation...your current system is probably running SupCom on the low setting on the 5x5m maps only and you most likely won't do any better unles you upgrade....If you do decide you want to upgrade, figure what the total amount of money is you are able to spend, then research those parts needed. SupCom is a demanding game...but not what some people are making it out to be....I hope you get it running to where you can really enjoy it...it's a great game......8)

And if you really want to get some good answers to SupCom questions...go to community then link onto Forums at www.supremecommander.com There are a lot of really helpful people there that can answer any of your questions.

Avatar image for codezer0
codezer0

15898

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

#39 codezer0
Member since 2004 • 15898 Posts

A Quad-Core will improve performance, but mainly on the much larges maps such as 40x40m & 81x81m with more people playing at one time. Other than that they are not really necessary and nowhere does it say by GPG that they are needed to run it.

DieselCat18
And now you are contradicting yourself. Why would I want to play the game in a limited mode? Why would I only want to play a game like this in 1v1 or whatever it's called when getting a quad over a dual core would allow me to play a much larger map? It's just like when battlefield 2 came out. 2GB's of RAM helped keep framerates more consistent, but at the same time, that memory allowed for being able to play a fully loaded server on the larger maps the game had to offer. And with the relative cost of going 2GB's of RAM over 1, it was pretty silly to consider not going for 2GB's when you were making a system with Battlefield 2 in mind. I know if I was making a system with SupCom in mind, I would want to go with the Quad Core because I want to be able to scale up my game as much as it is capable of. And with price differences for quad-cores at the base (Q6600) and high-end (QX6800) being very small compared to the equivalent-price dual-core model (E6600 or X6800), why not go quad? And just because you continue to insist, I went ahead and downloaded/installed the SupCom demo just to see how well it's going to run on this machine, and if it's even going to be possible for me to play fluidly here. I'll post back when I get the chance to try it out.
Avatar image for Indestructible2
Indestructible2

5935

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#40 Indestructible2
Member since 2007 • 5935 Posts
Whats your CPU clocked at and what resolution you playing at? even though i don't care for this game,i really wanna see if SupCom is as much of a system hog as you say it is...
Avatar image for -Grits_N_Gravy-
-Grits_N_Gravy-

77

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#41 -Grits_N_Gravy-
Member since 2007 • 77 Posts

i run sup commander with around 25fps average with mid to low settings till teh heat turns up then i gets me a nice below 10fps slideshow :D ....... :cry:

Avatar image for Random__Guy
Random__Guy

1047

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#42 Random__Guy
Member since 2007 • 1047 Posts

I tried playing on my old sempron 1.8Ghz, 2gb ram, x1600pro. @1024x768 medium/high settings w/shadows off.

It was a 4 player game (Ian's cross map 20x20, 500unit cap) and i'm surprised it actually ran good even with tons of units. But the nukes made it choppy.

1024x768(60) / Fidelity - High / Shadows - Off / AA - Off / Texture Detail - Med / Level of Detail - High / Vsync - On / XPDX9

I don't know the exact fps but it was smooth and playable through out the whole game, even when we were all at max units.

Avatar image for lugsey2k4
lugsey2k4

120

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#43 lugsey2k4
Member since 2004 • 120 Posts

i bleive codezer is right in the fact a quad core would allow me to get the full potential from the game but at a stupidly high cost. and thats where your way off your not relating what your saying to my needs and abilities ie money!

as long as it has decent graphics its the game play im more concerned about. so im going to do some research on my budgets etc. then get my computer technician friend to build it for me when i get paid in a month or so. so exspect to see some more posts from me asking for your help again:)

thanks for all the help even if some of it was a little off target:0

p.s supreme commander is a stunningly good game> get it!

Avatar image for blacktorn
blacktorn

8299

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#44 blacktorn
Member since 2004 • 8299 Posts

You're better off witha new rig or forgetting todays demanding games...Indestructible2

Agree,TC it's time to build a new rig from scratch.

Avatar image for codezer0
codezer0

15898

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

#45 codezer0
Member since 2004 • 15898 Posts
Whats your CPU clocked at and what resolution you playing at? even though i don't care for this game,i really wanna see if SupCom is as much of a system hog as you say it is...Indestructible2
Summary of my (new) system specs are in my sig. Everything's at stock, because as hot as my room is, it's an exercise in futility to attempt to overclock on air. Not to mention it would turn my room into a furnace, which would jack up the electricity bill here for sure.  Settings I ran for the game. Upon first starting the mission, it hovers around 40fps according to FRAPS. Once the map area has expanded a couple of times though, the thing starts to slow down into the 30s.

i bleive codezer is right in the fact a quad core would allow me to get the full potential from the game but at a stupidly high cost. and thats where your way off your not relating what your saying to my needs and abilities ie money!

lugsey2k4
Stupidly high? What about that Q6600-based system that was supposed to be £417? I thought you'd said that you had about £700-800 to spend? On newegg, a Q6600 goes for $266 USD... which roughly translates to about £133 (unless the price is drastically different). a quad-core at that price, with 2GB's of RAM is really not bad at all.
Avatar image for DieselCat18
DieselCat18

3008

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#46 DieselCat18
Member since 2002 • 3008 Posts
[QUOTE="DieselCat18"]

A Quad-Core will improve performance, but mainly on the much larges maps such as 40x40m & 81x81m with more people playing at one time. Other than that they are not really necessary and nowhere does it say by GPG that they are needed to run it.

codezer0

And now you are contradicting yourself. Why would I want to play the game in a limited mode? Why would I only want to play a game like this in 1v1 or whatever it's called when getting a quad over a dual core would allow me to play a much larger map? It's just like when battlefield 2 came out. 2GB's of RAM helped keep framerates more consistent, but at the same time, that memory allowed for being able to play a fully loaded server on the larger maps the game had to offer. And with the relative cost of going 2GB's of RAM over 1, it was pretty silly to consider not going for 2GB's when you were making a system with Battlefield 2 in mind. I know if I was making a system with SupCom in mind, I would want to go with the Quad Core because I want to be able to scale up my game as much as it is capable of. And with price differences for quad-cores at the base (Q6600) and high-end (QX6800) being very small compared to the equivalent-price dual-core model (E6600 or X6800), why not go quad? And just because you continue to insist, I went ahead and downloaded/installed the SupCom demo just to see how well it's going to run on this machine, and if it's even going to be possible for me to play fluidly here. I'll post back when I get the chance to try it out.

A total NooB vs.a Newb.....do you know the difference ? You should....YOU DON"T EVEN OWN THE GAME ! ...YOU DON'T EVEN PLAY IT ! ...This is an embarrassment with your ridiculous opinions which are based in pure fantasy. This is no longer any kind of rational debate, conversation or argument about this subject.

I'm quoting you......"Why would I only want to play a game like this in 1v1 or whatever it's called when getting a quad over a dual core would allow me to play a much larger map? "

"And just because you continue to insist, I went ahead and downloaded/installed the SupCom demo just to see how well it's going to run on this machine, and if it's even going to be possible for me to play fluidly here. I'll post back when I get the chance to try it out."

You must be joking me ! .... You have NO CLUE to what this game is even about...much less know how it plays and your going to give me your big video game review after you download the DEMO and play it on your machine after you have been going on and on how you know all about what kind of system it takes to run this.

First off, most matches are played on maps no larger than 20x20km in ranked 1v1. which means that the map sizes most often used are 5x5, 10x10 and 20x20....same goes for custom matches, though in custom games people do play the larger maps. But playing in custom games do not count in the rankings / ratings of a player as in ranked game. We are talking ON-LINE game play...not the single player campaign. So using a Quad core is not even an issue with people in the Supreme commander community.....but how would you know ?....Oh thats right ..your going to take up the challenge by downloading the DEMO so you can finally play it to find out what you've been babbling about.

You don't even know how this game runs when playing on line with one or more people...do you ? One can have the latest and greatest computer build in the freakin world and the speed of the game will run to the level of the least powerful system in that match. Doesn't matter what kind of super computer you have.....but I'll tell you again...to play this game smooth with good graphics a person does not need a quad core processor or a pair of 8800GTX's or Ultras in SLi (ROFL). On top of that, the game has been patched several times which has helped to better optimize it, which means they (GPG) fixed it to be able to play better on machines that are not so high end.