Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Some thoughts about the new C:MO interface and something

 
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 >> Some thoughts about the new C:MO interface and something Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Some thoughts about the new C:MO interface and something - 11/15/2019 9:22:40 AM   
gennyo

 

Posts: 68
Joined: 4/3/2019
Status: offline 		The most visible change in C:MO compared with C:MANO is the new interface. It's fluid and easier to navigate (mouse scrolling to zoom is much improved and right-click-and-drag for moving around the map is more natural for my mind), but I think some underlying change in technology made some issues for some users.

For me, the first problem is C:MO eats much more CPU than C:MANO, especially idling using like 50% of CPU. My laptop for playing this is behind the mainstream (Thinkpad Yoga 260 with i5-6300U, 2c4t, undervolted to 6W TDP) and the new Direct3D based map drawing really strains the meagre CPU and GPU (if it can be called a GPU for some people) processing resources, making the interface not responsive at times.

As I'm typing this, I use process explorer to suspend C:MO process in background, keeping my CPU and battery happy.

(At 10-12W TDP throttle response improves somewhat but still eats lots of CPU time at idle)

Change in interface is also related with new rendering scheme: font and icon presentation. Some people complains about the new font rendering, but using Direct3D rendering tech these issue is near impossible to fix as I observed (that’s why apps from Microsoft Store looks a little off from ordinary GDI apps). I love GDI rendering but can’t blame the game developers for Microsoft’s fault. For fonts, I’ve like a smaller font size for interface elements, like the old one.

But BLACK COLOR SCHEME! My laptop screen keeps running at 25% brightness (as a somewhat non-normal pathologist, My eyes are used to dimmer environment lighting but needs more contrast than many people) and the new interface looks like light gray texts and icons on darker gray background, IT KILLS MY EYES, make them more sore than a full day working on microscopes looking at lymphocytes. I wish a choice for the “original” C:MANO looks.

And if not asking too much, I would like a transperent text log like old C:MANO…

Last, C:MO is 32-bit with some dotNET stuff, though it runs better than the old one and I'm not running into memory.out exceptions like before yet. I think a 64-bit version may make some processing smoother but I'm not programmer so this is out of my scope.

For some with low-end machines: ngen is your friend, it makes the dotNET JIT runs a little faster.

Just remember the new game looks like always using the "no-pause" and "high-resolutions" simulation timing setting, may we have the old setting back?

< Message edited by gennyo -- 11/15/2019 9:28:40 AM >
Post #: 1
RE: Some thoughts about the new C:MO interface and some... - 11/15/2019 10:47:29 AM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline 		Do you have the 3D window up?

(in reply to gennyo)
Post #: 2
RE: Some thoughts about the new C:MO interface and some... - 11/15/2019 11:01:23 AM   
gennyo

 

Posts: 68
Joined: 4/3/2019
Status: offline 		No Tacview, I can't imagine how my machine handle TWO such program simultaneously.

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 3
RE: Some thoughts about the new C:MO interface and some... - 11/15/2019 11:54:11 AM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline 		I was asking because TacView is one of those programs that will take every resource on your PC for itself. You have something else going on because I have an i7-8750 on a Surface and its using less that 25% of the CPU on fastest acceleration. That's with a scenario with 1000 units.

(in reply to gennyo)
Post #: 4
RE: Some thoughts about the new C:MO interface and some... - 11/15/2019 12:24:28 PM   
gennyo

 

Posts: 68
Joined: 4/3/2019
Status: offline 		Yes I do have something running in Background, an Outlook and some SumatraPDFs.

The point is after I pause the game, CPU usage keeps at about 50% by C:MO. That may be not an deal breaking issue for me as I'm used to workarounds, just being curious about the program behaviour which is different than C:MANO.

p.s. I'm using Throttlestop to cap TDP at 6W for extra battery life, so your CPU is much stronger than mine.

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 5
RE: Some thoughts about the new C:MO interface and some... - 11/15/2019 12:47:17 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline 		The CPU usgae on my surface was 19% to 20% on CMNAO. Its about 25% on CMO for the same scenario. At idle, the CPU is 4-5%. And nnote that the CMO version of the scenario has 200 more units and more lua. The short is that you should some difference in CPU usage on most PCs, but not a lot.

btw, I have run a number of tests on both versions using the nVidia 1050 and Intel 620 GPUs. little difference in CPU utilization.

edit: I would point out that the single thread performance of your i5 might be better than my i7. That is not uncommon.

< Message edited by thewood1 -- 11/15/2019 12:48:21 PM >

(in reply to gennyo)
Post #: 6
RE: Some thoughts about the new C:MO interface and some... - 11/15/2019 1:03:26 PM   
KnightHawk75

 

Posts: 1450
Joined: 11/15/2018
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: gennyo

Yes I do have something running in Background, an Outlook and some SumatraPDFs.

The point is after I pause the game, CPU usage keeps at about 50% by C:MO. That may be not an deal breaking issue for me as I'm used to workarounds, just being curious about the program behaviour which is different than C:MANO.

p.s. I'm using Throttlestop to cap TDP at 6W for extra battery life, so your CPU is much stronger than mine.


I have the same issue, i950 pegged at 25% on menu screen, load a scenario paused and cpu stays pegged at 45-50%. Do the same in CMANO 0-1% cpu. Also can't seem to resize main window at all in windowed mode.


(in reply to gennyo)
Post #: 7
RE: Some thoughts about the new C:MO interface and some... - 11/15/2019 2:55:57 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline 		Ran a test on my Surface Book i7-8750 (power-strapped and thermally challenged), nVidia 1050 mobile, 16Gb RAM, SSD, 1-2% CPU at idle

CMO with Op Bras Drum 800 units
1:1 - Paused 11%, run 11%
1:5 - Paused 11%, run 16%
Fire - Paused 11%, run 26%

CMNAO with Op Brass Drum 600 units
1:1 - Paused 3%, run 7%
1:5 - Paused 5%, run 19%
Fire - Paused 2%, run 27%

I have the nVidia 1050 as the default card for both CMO and CMNAO. It can make a difference. Using the Intel GPU actually can steal cycles away from the main CPU through throttling on a laptop. I also don't use the overlays. My supposition from multiple testing runs is that CMNAO runs better in small and slow scenario plays. CMO runs better in large and fast plays. But nowhere near the issues you guys are seeing. There is something very wrong with your set up if you are see 50% CPU usage paused.

btw, not sure what an i950 is.

(in reply to KnightHawk75)
Post #: 8
RE: Some thoughts about the new C:MO interface and some... - 11/15/2019 3:28:59 PM   
mavfin

 

Posts: 274
Joined: 6/22/2010
Status: offline 		I'm not seeing any issues with a six-core i7@3.2 Ghz (don't remember exact model, at work atm) and a GTX1070 GPU, 32 GB RAM, and an SSD+HD combo, just running on system stuff on the SSD. Not even running CMO from the SSD. Works great, including Tacview running simultaneously.

(and, no, I'm not using the old six-core Xeon I used to have. The UI freezes from CMANO were from OneDrive, I found. Disabled that, it was fine. Old news now, of course.)

Something weird with laptop setup, imo.



(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 9
RE: Some thoughts about the new C:MO interface and some... - 11/15/2019 7:47:46 PM   
KnightHawk75

 

Posts: 1450
Joined: 11/15/2018
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1

btw, not sure what an i950 is.


I forgot the 7.

i7-950 3gig rig (old but stable as hell)

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 10
RE: Some thoughts about the new C:MO interface and some... - 11/15/2019 8:25:39 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline 		It is stable, but the passmark rating is pretty low.

(in reply to KnightHawk75)
Post #: 11
RE: Some thoughts about the new C:MO interface and some... - 11/15/2019 8:43:56 PM   
gennyo

 

Posts: 68
Joined: 4/3/2019
Status: offline 		Using my w530, I found a standalone gpu, even an outdated Quadro K1000m helps a lot in CPU usage and interface responess.

So C:MO may need some more power than Intel GPUs could provide, we have a 3a game in hands now

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 12
RE: Some thoughts about the new C:MO interface and some... - 11/15/2019 8:47:19 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline 		The Intel HD 620 can actually do a decent job. But if you load the 3D window, TacView crushes the 620 on my machine. My recommendation is that if you are using an integrated GPU, limit the 3D window.

(in reply to gennyo)
Post #: 13
RE: Some thoughts about the new C:MO interface and some... - 11/15/2019 8:50:43 PM   
Primarchx


Posts: 3102
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline 		So C:MO is 32 bit? Wow, that's not what I expected.

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 14
RE: Some thoughts about the new C:MO interface and some... - 11/15/2019 9:17:26 PM   
gennyo

 

Posts: 68
Joined: 4/3/2019
Status: offline 		Updated to the newest release, still have backgroud cpu eating problem (acceptable). I would say C:MO runs better overall than C:MANO but the idle performance needs more tuning

And it is 32-bit, but uses memory wisely this time.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to gennyo)
Post #: 15
RE: Some thoughts about the new C:MO interface and some... - 11/16/2019 12:27:42 AM   
Thx11372

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 10/6/2019
Status: offline 		I like the UI, in general. The only bit I really dislike is the map place-names.
They are huge and blurry on both my laptop and desktop.
Place names aren't necessary so it isn't a massive issue though.

(in reply to gennyo)
Post #: 16
RE: Some thoughts about the new C:MO interface and some... - 11/16/2019 2:40:36 AM   
HaughtKarl

 

Posts: 116
Joined: 1/28/2015
Status: offline 		I agree with the place names font as it's hard to read and not all together useful so I just turn it off.

(in reply to Thx11372)
Post #: 17
RE: Some thoughts about the new C:MO interface and some... - 11/16/2019 8:52:50 AM   
LargeDiameterBomb

 

Posts: 80
Joined: 3/3/2019
Status: offline 		I have exact same experience as OP regarding CPU usage when CMO runs in the background.

With CMO, regardless if I have it windowed or runs it in fullscreen, when alt-tabbing out or clicking away from the game (Which is paused running in the background) to for instance use a browser, CPU usage is very, very close to 50 %. That is regardless of playing very large 1000+ unit scenarios (Northern fury 5) or medium/small scenarios (such as the USS Midway vs Cuba - The war that never was).

With CMANO, I could leave the game in the background and it would use at most a very low single digit percentage of the CPU.

I use a stationary computer with a i5-4690K (Overclocked to 4,0 Ghz), an Asus Z97 MB, 16 Gb RAM and a Nvidia GTX 1070 graphics card running windows 10.

There definitely seems like there is something fishy going on here.

(in reply to HaughtKarl)
Post #: 18
RE: Some thoughts about the new C:MO interface and some... - 11/16/2019 10:43:50 AM   
gennyo

 

Posts: 68
Joined: 4/3/2019
Status: offline 		Discovered a deal breaking problem today...
As I'm using laptop all the day, I need to put the system into standby mode at times.C:MO seems doesn't like it.
If I suspend it in background (using process explorer's "suspend" function), it may keep the system awake for some time before allowing it to sleep properly.
If I simply suspend the system, C:MO may not come around when the system resumes, gives a big crossed box instead of the game map interface. Some times it simply refuse to response.

I already have the newest possible display driver for my machine. It seems the game clings to the display device all the time, so it eats CPU all the time, and can't properly handle status changes in standby/resume cycles. (When the game paused, I have a 5~10% GPU usage in process explorer)
Feel sad as I really needs the LOS tool for radar position planning. I will tried to fix this in my side in this weekend (At work as I writing this, thought not doing anything useful, just some mandatory TCM courses), if not finding any workaround, I may have to head back to C:MANO and place all the enemy radar with love and hope

(in reply to LargeDiameterBomb)
Post #: 19
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Some thoughts about the new C:MO interface and something Page: [1]
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

2.328