[mocha989]

So i found this interesting.

CPU LOAD:

Core 0 to core 2: 10% to 15%

then core 3: is 40% to 50%.

why arent my first 3 cores loaded as much my the 4th?

 

[mocha989]

does it work to force multi core or whatever in the nvidia control panel?

 

[bluebunny]

the game is not multi-threaded i believe. you can try to force it but it would go against its coding

 

[ACHILEE5]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mocha989 So i found this interesting. CPU LOAD: Core 0 to core 2: 10% to 15% then core 3: is 40% to 50%. why aren't my first 3 cores loaded as much my the 4th?

How loaded is you 4th core

Mine sits @ 100%

And I'm thinking that the bods who coded the game were a bit lazy in putting so much on one core

 

[andynolife]

The game is multi-threaded, it's just badly coded and the engine does not like to utilize all the cores.
But again, the game runs considerably worse in dual cores.
However, these are not the main issue for this game, becasue this game has TONS of bugs and flaws. A really fun game but is the closest thing I ever played that runs worse than a beta.
(random crash to desktop with no error messages, cannot connect to service, connection drop, memory dumps-fixed, you name it)

 

[mocha989]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ACHILEE5 How loaded is you 4th core Mine sits @ 100% And I'm thinking that the bods who coded the game were a bit lazy in putting so much on one core

core 3 = 4th core in coretemp

it goes core 0 through 3 so if you can core 0 as 1 then core 1 is the 2nd core core 2 is the 2rd and core 3 is the 4th

 

[mocha989]

Quote:

Originally Posted by andynolife The game is multi-threaded, it's just badly coded and the engine does not like to utilize all the cores. But again, the game runs considerably worse in dual cores. However, these are not the main issue for this game, becasue this game has TONS of bugs and flaws. A really fun game but is the closest thing I ever played that runs worse than a beta. (random crash to desktop with no error messages, cannot connect to service, connection drop, memory dumps-fixed, you name it)

they are going to work on it i think.

 

[frickfrock999]

Quote:

Originally Posted by andynolife The game is multi-threaded, it's just badly coded and the engine does not like to utilize all the cores. But again, the game runs considerably worse in dual cores. However, these are not the main issue for this game, becasue this game has TONS of bugs and flaws. A really fun game but is the closest thing I ever played that runs worse than a beta. (random crash to desktop with no error messages, cannot connect to service, connection drop, memory dumps-fixed, you name it)

Not true, I get better fps with my e6750 than my buddy's quad.

 

[mocha989]

Quote:

Originally Posted by frickfrock99 Not true, I get better fps with my e6750 than my buddy's quad.

whats your friends quad? my i7 would rip your E6750 up

 

[andynolife]

Quote:

Originally Posted by frickfrock99 Not true, I get better fps with my e6750 than my buddy's quad.

Well, that is what I have read so far in the EA BC2 forum.
A couple of people with C2D were complaining.
What's ur buddy's spec? you are running a 5850 dude, a game is still largely depended on video card.

 

[frickfrock999]

Quote:

Originally Posted by andynolife Well, that is what I have read so far in the EA BC2 forum. A couple people with C2D were complaining. What's ur buddy's spec? you are running a 5850 dude, a game is still largely depended on video card.

Maybe it has to do with their overclocks, with mine being at stock, I don't really that that issue.
Is BC2 more GPU intensive? Thought it would have been more CPU with the frostbite physics, could be wrong though.

 

[andynolife]

Quote:

Originally Posted by frickfrock99 Maybe it has to do with their overclocks, with mine being at stock, I don't really that that issue. Is BC2 more GPU intensive? Thought it would have been more CPU with the frostbite physics, could be wrong though.

A game is always more GPU intensive.
A friend of mine with a 4Ghz i7 and 5890 sees a drop in fsp from 160 to 80 when he hits the smoke button on a tank.

This game is just not optimized AT ALL.
The graphic quality cannot justify the sytstem requiement.

The physics are not that intensive for a good quad. I do see all my 4 cores in actions, but they do not being stressed at all, 1/3~less than 50% load.

And I just realized, you are playing on a 19" mate. That maybe explains.

 

[mocha989]

Quote:

Originally Posted by andynolife A game is always more GPU intensive. A friend of mine with a 4Ghz i7 and 5890 sees a drop in fsp from 160 to 80 when he hits the smoke button on a tank. This game is just not optimized AT ALL. The graphic quality cannot justify the sytstem requiement. The physics are not that intensive for a good quad. I do see all my 4 cores in actions, but they do not being stressed at all, 1/3~less than 50% load. And I just realized, you are playing on a 19" mate. That maybe explains.

troll. theres no such card out called the 5890.

 

[andynolife]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mocha989 troll. theres no such card out called the 5890.

Opps, my bad I mean 5970. Got really tired after 20 hours stright of testing and gaming. My apology

 

[sotorious]

Same thing happens to me i get an average of 120 to 80 frames and i dip down to the low 40s and high 30s when i go into smoke or run through some thick smoke. If they could optimize the smoke a little better that would be wonderful. I might turn DX11 off and bloom and see if that stops it from dipping so hard.

 

[calavera]

my quad's no where near 100% load either. I'd say 25% load on all cores during game play. I cant say for sure but my full load temps are ~80, and during BC2 game play temps are 50~60ish.

what annoys me more is that sometimes during first load out, I get 15fps and grey screen. but once I play the load out menu is fine.

 

[andynolife]

I doubt turn to DX10 is that much helpful, this game is really really buggy
Myself had tons of errors in DX10 till recently, and if I have to play in DX9, I will go back to MW2.