Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Performance

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Tech Support >> RE: Performance Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Performance - 9/27/2013 11:39:47 AM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline 		Yes, every terrain cell is read from disk initially and then cached into RAM. This is a serious part of speed optimizations, and also the reason why you may see a large scenario start with humongous pulse-times the first few sim-seconds (ie. terrain is read from the disk) and then steadily accelerate (terrain is re-used from RAM cache). However there is a limit to how much we can cache in RAM (at least until we migrate to exclusive 64-bit mode) so periodically part of the cache is flushed and any subsequent requests have to be re-read from disk. And for the time being we definitely cannot pre-load the entire terrain set in memory to avoid disk access during play.

(There is also of course the option, if you have enough RAM, of putting the entire Command directory on a disk-backed RAM-drive, thus effectively pre-caching the entire terrain to RAM.)

< Message edited by Sunburn -- 9/27/2013 11:51:12 AM >

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to Quellist)
Post #: 121
RE: Performance - 9/27/2013 11:40:19 AM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline 		I agree, I have only 8Gb, yet Command only seems to use small amount of it, even on large scenarios.

Sorry, I was replying to the RAM comment.

(in reply to Quellist)
Post #: 122
RE: Performance - 9/27/2013 3:24:16 PM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428
I had 4.5 and 9.0c on my PC in Win7 before installing the game. I followed the advice given here and left the boxes checked anyway. This appears to have borked NET framework. As after installing and rebooting Windows informed me that NET Framework 4.0 needed to be repaired or uninstalled. I opted to repair. This removed 4.5. I have since re-installed 4.5 and the game runs much better. Still a little sluggish. Clicking on the plus sign when looking at aircraft at a base takes a second to work. Zoom could be a little better. Game saves now go where as they're supposed to in Win 7 and I can save and load without any problems now.


Interesting. That's not how it is supposed to work. The .NET installers are Microsoft official installers and they are supposed to work together harmoniously. .NET 4.5 basically replaces .NET 4.0 and if you have 4.0 or 4.5 installed already, you'll see the "repair or remove" options, instead of just an automatic install. Repair _should_ not bork 4.5, at least we haven't seen that on any previous installer, but we'll double-check that here as well. Sometimes Microsoft throws us a curveball.

Seeing these 4.5 reports, I can say that we know from other games that 4.5 has better memory management, so it may be worth a try going to 4.5 if you are at 4.0 and experiencing poor performance while we continue to investigate.

Regards,

- Erik



_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC



For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to mjk428)
Post #: 123
RE: Performance - 9/27/2013 3:53:28 PM   
2ndACR


Posts: 5665
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline 		I know when I was installing the game, when it got to the NET part, it never asked me about repair or remove, it said something like "rollback failed" or some such. I just shrugged at the time and re-installed 4.5 back on my machine.

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 124
RE: Performance - 9/27/2013 4:01:54 PM   
mjk428

 

Posts: 1944
Joined: 6/15/2002
From: Western USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

Interesting. Thanks a lot for this information!

We are currently testing an update with better zoom/pan performance, and combined with these actions they should be able to resolve this issue. We may have to put together a small FAQ or checklist for folks facing this problem.

(Just to clarify something, zoom/pan actions are always performed in discrete 'steps'; we never intended to replicate GE's 30-FPS rotation/zoom animation. GE can afford to devote all PC resources to this stuff because that's all it needs to do; we have to hold back for the actual game )



Just to make sure I was on the right track this morning I installed 4.5 on my secondary Win 7 PC (i3-3225,HD4000)and once again the worst of the problems were resolved for me. Just like on my main PC when I initially installed the game on the i3, and then let Windows repair NET Framework, it rolled 4.5 back to 4.0.

Unlike on my game machine I first uninstalled 4.0 and CMANO. This exactly what I did on the second PC:

Uninstalled 4.0 & rebooted.
Uninstalled CMANO
Installed 4.5 & rebooted
Manually deleted the 63k(1.87 GB)of files that CMANO left behind after being "uninstalled"
Installed CMANO & rebooted

Performance much improved once again. Also the difference between the i7 w/SSD and i3 w/HDD can now be appreciated. It does run OK on the i3 w/ HD4000 graphics. In fact I'd be surprised if an external graphics card matters much with this game above a certain point. Fast CPU, more cores/threads, and a SSD all make a greater impact IMO.

_____________________________


(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 125
RE: Performance - 9/27/2013 4:04:16 PM   
NefariousKoel


Posts: 2930
Joined: 7/23/2002
From: Murderous Missouri Scum
Status: offline 		I installed .NET 4.5 on my desktop and didn't see any difference regarding the performance issues.



_____________________________


(in reply to mjk428)
Post #: 126
RE: Performance - 9/27/2013 4:10:48 PM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428
In fact I'd be surprised if an external graphics card matters much with this game above a certain point. Fast CPU, more cores/threads, and a SSD all make a greater impact IMO.


All correct. Command generally loves multiple cores * and low I/O-latency storage.

* It slightly prefers fewer cores with stronger per-core performance, ie. usually Intel series, rather than more cores with less per-core throughput e.g. most of AMD's offerings, but the difference is not great.


_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to mjk428)
Post #: 127
RE: Performance - 9/27/2013 4:32:21 PM   
latosusi

 

Posts: 327
Joined: 6/2/2004
From: London/Kuopio
Status: offline 		I got lag like 50000 ms...if that what it means

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 128
RE: Performance - 9/27/2013 4:37:03 PM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline 		The "PulseTime XXXms" diagnostic refers to how much it takes for the sim engine to process each pulse. The primary problem discussed here (and actively under investigation ATM) is the excessive lag/delay in the UI map map/zoom operations.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to latosusi)
Post #: 129
RE: Performance - 9/27/2013 4:46:19 PM   
latosusi

 

Posts: 327
Joined: 6/2/2004
From: London/Kuopio
Status: offline 		I see

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 130
RE: Performance - 9/27/2013 4:54:49 PM   
NefariousKoel


Posts: 2930
Joined: 7/23/2002
From: Murderous Missouri Scum
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

The "PulseTime XXXms" diagnostic refers to how much it takes for the sim engine to process each pulse. The primary problem discussed here (and actively under investigation ATM) is the excessive lag/delay in the UI map map/zoom operations.


Dunno if this makes any sense, but my pulse times are rather spastic in 1:1 time compression, but smooths out at anything higher than that.

At 1:1, I see it regularly jumping up into the 50s and back. Nothing big but when compared to the smooth & steady 1-5ms I see at 1:5 and 1:15, it seems a bit odd that 1:1 time jumps so much more.

_____________________________


(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 131
RE: Performance - 9/27/2013 5:02:52 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline 		That is exactly what I am seeing...my core test aligned with that as well.

(in reply to NefariousKoel)
Post #: 132
RE: Performance - 9/27/2013 6:11:26 PM   
juanchopancho

 

Posts: 52
Joined: 3/18/2009
Status: offline 		I have 16gb RAM, services max out usually around 1.5gb. Is Command able to use available RAM or is there an artificial hard limit like 4gb RAM?


(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 133
RE: Performance - 9/27/2013 11:47:05 PM   
mcoyote

 

Posts: 12
Joined: 9/1/2006
Status: offline 		FWIW, when I installed the .NET installer ran "Repair" to completion, since I already had it installed. Today I tried a 4.5 installation (with reboot) and the issues remain. They're not deal-breakers, but they make it hard to play for any length of time.

Issues:
- Unit detail sash panels on the right get cut off and don't get redrawn when the map section is resized (left half-drawn)
- Zooming is roughly a second per step with the mouse wheel
- Black datablock following the mouse leaves trails
- General map functions (unit selection, etc.) is what I would term sluggish -- ~1sec from click to highlight, etc.

System
- i7, 2GHz, 12GB, nVidia GT540M, lots of free disk space
- Windows 7, recently re-installed, virus-checked, defrag'ed, etc.

I note my system is a laptop with the nVidia "Optimus" jazz, basically a dual-card system where desktop apps can run with either a lackluster, low-power Intel or the nVidia unit. I use the nVidia unit by default and, by all appearances, CMANO is, also.

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 134
RE: Performance - 9/28/2013 12:34:41 AM   
JiminyJickers


Posts: 290
Joined: 10/4/2011
From: New Zealand
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mcoyote

...

- i7, 2GHz, 12GB, nVidia GT540M, lots of free disk space
- Windows 7, recently re-installed, virus-checked, defrag'ed, etc.

I note my system is a laptop with the nVidia "Optimus" jazz, basically a dual-card system where desktop apps can run with either a lackluster, low-power Intel or the nVidia unit. I use the nVidia unit by default and, by all appearances, CMANO is, also.



I have the same video card as you and a similar system and experiencing a bit of lag too. Not a killer but would be nice if it could go away.

The NVidia graphics card is definitely being used, you can enable a NVidia control panel feature which shows what is using the video card.

Lets hope the hotfix they are working on will make things better. Still having a blast with the game though.

(in reply to mcoyote)
Post #: 135
RE: Performance - 9/28/2013 1:50:47 AM   
adek670


Posts: 281
Joined: 9/21/2010
From: Twickenham
Status: offline 		Hi

What feature in control panel allows you to see what is using the card??

(in reply to JiminyJickers)
Post #: 136
RE: Performance - 9/28/2013 5:39:32 AM   
NefariousKoel


Posts: 2930
Joined: 7/23/2002
From: Murderous Missouri Scum
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Reaper

Hi

What feature in control panel allows you to see what is using the card??


There is a System Tray Icon/Program that looks like a green processor chip with multi-colored pins in the middle. If you click once on that systray icon, it will show a small pop-up listing which programs your Nvidia GPU is currently running, in a little box with a black background behind the running program's icon.

< Message edited by NefariousKoel -- 9/28/2013 5:40:08 AM >

_____________________________


(in reply to adek670)
Post #: 137
RE: Performance - 9/28/2013 11:52:11 AM   
adek670


Posts: 281
Joined: 9/21/2010
From: Twickenham
Status: offline 		Hi thanks for the response,

I don't have the capability on my gfx card.

System details are:
Win 7 ultimate 64-bit,Q6600, Direct X runtime version: 11.0, 2 x GeForce GTX 260, , 8 Gig Ram
Geforce driver 327.23. res: 1920 x 1080, 60Hz

For what its worth, I have found that combining range rings and hiding enemy range rings improves performance considerably.

Only this way can I get 1:1 at 1sec with a lot going on screen.

I thought my PC was well up to the task of running this game. Some observations and questions if I may:

1. Does CMANO support my 260s in SLI ? if so, the SLI monitor doesn't kick in at all - would running in full screen correct this? The speed isn't noticeably different with SLI disabled.

2. The Nvidia gfx card monitor doesn't show any demand on the GPU - it sits at 2- 3 % at best. Full screen games such as Combat Mission Normandy show 70-80%

3. Has anyone found any sweet settings that work with the Nvidia control panel. I rolled back my driver to 320.49 (from 327.23) and it seemed to feel a little slicker - maybe unfounded!

4. Overall, CMANO's stutter displays like the CPU rendering in on of the 3d max graphics card benchmark tests that I used in the past. This suggests to me that the CPU is bearing all of the load and the GPUs aren't being taxed at all - is there anything that can be done to address this?

Overall, I am a little disappointed with the game - Paid top £s for this and my rig meets the recommended specs.

Ade

(in reply to NefariousKoel)
Post #: 138
RE: Performance - 9/28/2013 12:59:32 PM   
JiminyJickers


Posts: 290
Joined: 10/4/2011
From: New Zealand
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Reaper

Hi thanks for the response,

I don't have the capability on my gfx card.

System details are:
Win 7 ultimate 64-bit,Q6600, Direct X runtime version: 11.0, 2 x GeForce GTX 260, , 8 Gig Ram
Geforce driver 327.23. res: 1920 x 1080, 60Hz

...



It looks like you have a desktop. That feature is only for Optimus NVidia laptop graphics cards. (At least I hope they don't they don't ever use it on desktops. It causes more issues that it solves.)

In any case, the game isn't taxing on video cards at all. It is more to do with the processor and hard drive, I believe.

(in reply to adek670)
Post #: 139
RE: Performance - 9/28/2013 6:00:06 PM   
JRyan


Posts: 555
Joined: 3/29/2005
Status: offline 		I have decided to use my NVidia G650M 2GB instead of the Intel4000. I have an i7 and to be honest I don't see a difference, a noticeable one at least. It does not tax the 650M at all and I find that strange. I have 16GB of ram and at most use 4GB. I would like to be able to dedicate 12GB to the game but I can not expect that to be easy to implement.

(in reply to JiminyJickers)
Post #: 140
RE: Performance - 9/28/2013 6:20:57 PM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline 		Hi Ethan,

If you can spare 12GB of RAM it may not be a bad idea to make a RAM-drive with that memory, copy the Command folder there and run it from there. You should see a noticeable performance bump at heavy scenarios.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to JRyan)
Post #: 141
RE: Performance - 9/28/2013 11:02:32 PM   
bgeery

 

Posts: 25
Joined: 9/27/2013
Status: offline 		Why does the RAM usage change so dramatically? One second it's using 500 MB and the very next it's at 12 MB! I've never seen such rapid fluctuation of RAM usage in a program. Even with a scenario of thousands of units, I've never seen a peak of over about 800MB or so. It seems like it keeps dumping it's Ram cache and reloading it over and over.

Win8, quad core i5, 16GB Ram w/ 13GB free, 256GB SSD drive, two AMD Radeon HD 7750's, three 1080P monitors.

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 142
RE: Performance - 9/28/2013 11:20:39 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline 		I too saw wild fluctuations, not just in RAM, but in CPU usage.

(in reply to bgeery)
Post #: 143
RE: Performance - 9/29/2013 7:26:21 AM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline 		Hi all,

We have now provided instructions to everyone on this thread who has reported UI perofrmance issues, to download and try a candidate build for v1.01. Please give it a go and report your findings here.

Thanks!

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 144
RE: Performance - 9/29/2013 8:35:01 AM   
montanaza

 

Posts: 42
Joined: 1/6/2013
Status: offline 		Great thanks Sunburn! Will try out now and revert asap

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 145
RE: Performance - 9/29/2013 9:49:14 AM   
K 19

 

Posts: 131
Joined: 9/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

Hi all,

We have now provided instructions to everyone on this thread who has reported UI perofrmance issues, to download and try a candidate build for v1.01. Please give it a go and report your findings here.

Thanks!


I would like to participate in the beta test. Have been having a lot of lag problems. Thank you.

< Message edited by K 19 -- 9/29/2013 10:15:02 AM >

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 146
RE: Performance - 9/29/2013 10:02:25 AM   
MaB1708

 

Posts: 336
Joined: 8/13/2006
From: Freiburg(Germany)
Status: offline 		If this patch is also supposed to handle some of the game freezes I would like to be included in its test.
Cheers,
M

(in reply to K 19)
Post #: 147
RE: Performance - 9/29/2013 10:23:12 AM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline 		Guys, check your e-mail inbox & forum PMs.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to MaB1708)
Post #: 148
RE: Performance - 9/29/2013 10:42:42 AM   
deagu

 

Posts: 25
Joined: 8/4/2006
Status: offline 		I would Like to test the patch.
Thanks and congratulations for this great simulation.

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 149
RE: Performance - 9/29/2013 11:47:43 AM   
jubriqueno

 

Posts: 9
Joined: 9/7/2013
Status: offline 		I would kike to test the patch too.

thanks

(in reply to deagu)
Post #: 150
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Tech Support >> RE: Performance Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.188