Forged Alliance Forever

Re: CPU Quality Inidicator

2015-05-30T06:35:22+02:00

"If it became compulsory to have your computer benchmarked in order to play on FAF I would simply not play, and I would push for that feature to be removed." That is a quote from Softly in 2013 and I see he is still playing in FAF. You need a 4 Ghz cpu to play Setons for an hour and only go -1.

My upgrade to a i5 2500k cost $300(mb and proc). That was 3 years ago at least. In most Setons I have the best sim speed at 1 hour at 4.4Ghz.

Statistics: Posted by ThinkTank — 30 May 2015, 06:35

Re: CPU Quality Inidicator

2013-03-20T09:31:12+02:00

What if you create a rating system, and just post it in the top corner of their FAF lobby?
That way, only THEY know what score they have.

It doesn't segregate the community, but it would educate.

Statistics: Posted by Culverin — 20 Mar 2013, 09:31

Re: CPU Quality Inidicator

2013-03-20T09:05:49+02:00

The problem is Setons is unplayable for any "average" fast machine. I remember the days people were bragging about their q6600, you were eligible only if you had one...
how naive this seems now. Setons or any other similar map(that is sadly overlooked) has a theoretical unitcap of 8000.

Most "fast" machines will start to crawl( aka negative sim speeds) past the 3000 unit limit, especially if there is mobility of large number of troops, which becomes worse on bigger maps. Now, if you have invested the time and effort to a "Setons" game, it becomes ridiculous to play even at -1 speed past the 30 min mark and probably at worse speeds for the next 30-60 minutes. So, excuse me for my audacity, but when I see a "Setons" game I see masochists, or to put it kindly just dreamers.

As things stand right now you would probably need a haswell clocked to 5 ghz to even have a remote probability your machine won't sweat in a Setons game, that is, no cpu is of enough quality to run such a game and thereby a cpu quality indicator is pointless.

Statistics: Posted by prodromos — 20 Mar 2013, 09:05

Re: CPU Quality Inidicator

2013-03-20T01:41:35+02:00

Maybe generate a playability score that's visible in the lobby based on chip, and clock settings.

with 0 being perfectly playable. positive being more than capable. negative being not as capable.

+2 - Haswell??
+1 - Sandybridge/IvyBridge @ Stock
0 - 1st Gen I3/i5/i7 @ Stock
-1 - Core 2 Extreme (Q9XXX) @ Stock
-2 - Core 2 Quad / Core 2 Duo (Q6600 etc and the E Chips).

Add +1 playability to the score for the overclock to the stock settings of the chips? (+1 per +1ghz on stock??)
no differences between i3 or i5 compared to i7, Hyperthreading is pointless for games (see BF3).

I've played large games on Q9550, I had it clocked to 3.8ghz I believe the sim speed did drop tho I can not remember as it was a while ago. Current [email protected] has zero problems, I can imagine a I5-2500k at stock (3.3ghz I think) would have zero problems in large games also.

Statistics: Posted by Mathew — 20 Mar 2013, 01:41

Re: CPU Quality Inidicator

2013-03-19T23:02:34+02:00

I have played with at least 2 people who after realizing their computer was the issue went out and bought a $600 computer and now are one of the fastest. Knowledge is the solution to allow all of us to enjoy the game even more.

Statistics: Posted by Ionic — 19 Mar 2013, 23:02

Re: CPU Quality Inidicator

2013-03-15T20:11:41+02:00

People with slow CPU's play together, people with fast CPU's play together, everyone happy?

Statistics: Posted by Wakke — 15 Mar 2013, 20:11

Re: CPU Quality Inidicator

2013-03-15T19:34:12+02:00

the reason why the new i5´s arent that much faster in the benchmarks is because they are not running at full cpu clock. in the benchmarks which were posted from sheppard is a xeon server cpu at almost 6 ghz thats why your cpu looks that slow.

an implemented indicator is not to check who has to longest d***, its to pick out laggers. phenoms II´s are quite slow cpus in supcom but i would not say it becomes a pain to play with them. but there are some players out who think that their 4 core athlon, or phenom I, or q6600, or e6750 are fast cpus.

the goal should be to let the other players know that they will have a slow game if they play with players xy and player xy will finnaly get to know that his cpu is slow. not everybody is up to date with hardware.....

Statistics: Posted by ICKEN — 15 Mar 2013, 19:34

Re: CPU Quality Inidicator

2013-03-15T18:35:41+02:00

Just something that I'm a bit confused by regarding this. It was my machine that gave the result on the graph Sheppard posted for the i5-2500k @ 3.3Ghz, and it's third or fourth from the bottom on the list.

But in actual games, I am nearly always the fastest in terms of sim speed, never the slowest and I have never dropped below 0 speed (but I don't play Seton's or Phantom much).

Is it just that people with slow PCs don't come on the forums, or should I run the benchmark again? I did feel like it was using the pagefile rather more than it should have whilst the benchmark was running, but then it was 4000 ASFs on Betrayal Ocean with seven AIs, so I'm not sure what "normal" HDD activity should be in those circumstances.

Statistics: Posted by Eukanuba — 15 Mar 2013, 18:35

Re: CPU Quality Inidicator

2013-03-15T18:15:23+02:00

-_V_- wrote:
When you say "you" is it referring to me, or is it generally speaking ?
Just in case I'm not concerned about me, I've had a i7 for very long now, and I do hate laggy games (especially since they make me play like shit ^^ ), but I would aways be against giving such a benchmark to people.

I've been the victim of discrimination regarding my ping value. And 5 (i think) years later I still see people (With more than 500 games) opening their retarded mouth , pointing finger at me because my ping value is RED. They can't overlook the color and find out exactly who's the culprit in the actual network stats from the console. And honestly I'm 99.999% never the bottleneck, but people....

Bottom line, is even "so called" educated people because of their, let's say, ignorance are being complete pricks because of a color/value.

So let's give another discrimination tool because too many of the players are ignorant/stupid and will discriminate even more.

P.S. : on this thread I can see some people having a slow ass CPU (Regarding of what i5-i7 can provide) and still are in favor of this when they actually make games laggy. This is kinda funny. How about you sweep in front of your own door before pushing for this discrimination tool ?

The whole point of the compromise that I'm supporting is that there can't be discrimination by ignorant community members because there is just the one benchmark set by zep. People can't see other people's benchmark scores or anything. It's handled differently from ping... I was sure that you'd be in favor of it actually.

And, maybe the fact that people with a slow CPU would be in favor of it is a sign that it's fair and makes sense, and that this isn't some idea driven by CPU snobs.

Heck, I don't really care because I've only played 1v1, I just got interested after reading the thread.

Statistics: Posted by sasin — 15 Mar 2013, 18:15

Re: CPU Quality Inidicator

2013-03-15T13:50:07+02:00

sasin wrote:
-_V_- (thanks a lot for picking a weird name, I had to go back and figure out exactly what it was), you wouldn't have to worry about being discriminated against by ignorant community members.

Perhaps you could just use Duck's test he has already done? The option would be there when you create the game or in the lobby or whatever to "restrict to large-map CPUs" (pick whatever adjective you want). If you enable it, then when someone tries to enter the room, Duck's benchmark runs, and only scores of 300 or lower can enter a 20x20 4x4 game. Only scores of 350 or lower can enter a 3v3 game.

When you say "you" is it referring to me, or is it generally speaking ?
Just in case I'm not concerned about me, I've had a i7 for very long now, and I do hate laggy games (especially since they make me play like shit ^^ ), but I would aways be against giving such a benchmark to people.

I've been the victim of discrimination regarding my ping value. And 5 (i think) years later I still see people (With more than 500 games) opening their retarded mouth , pointing finger at me because my ping value is RED. They can't overlook the color and find out exactly who's the culprit in the actual network stats from the console. And honestly I'm 99.999% never the bottleneck, but people....

Bottom line, is even "so called" educated people because of their, let's say, ignorance are being complete pricks because of a color/value.

So let's give another discrimination tool because too many of the players are ignorant/stupid and will discriminate even more.

P.S. : on this thread I can see some people having a slow ass CPU (Regarding of what i5-i7 can provide) and still are in favor of this when they actually make games laggy. This is kinda funny. How about you sweep in front of your own door before pushing for this discrimination tool ?

Statistics: Posted by -_V_- — 15 Mar 2013, 13:50

Re: CPU Quality Inidicator

2013-03-14T20:03:05+02:00

Ionic wrote:
No because the test isn't perfect. As I said earlier I play windowed and must have went to a different screen before the test ran so I scored horribly. Also, I am never less than the 2nd fastest in a Setons game, but my score is generally on the lower end. I think this is from playing windowed, but will test when I get home.

Could you just try to join again without going to a different window so that you pass?

But, you may be right, and obviously the test isn't perfect. Hopefully, we could set the benchmark low enough that even though it docks you for playing windowed, you'd still pass?

Also, I'm not necessarily advocating for this specific test, more for the overall set-up (anonymity, non-mandatory, etc.).

Statistics: Posted by sasin — 14 Mar 2013, 20:03

Re: CPU Quality Inidicator

2013-03-14T19:46:30+02:00

No because the test isn't perfect. As I said earlier I play windowed and must have went to a different screen before the test ran so I scored horribly. Also, I am never less than the 2nd fastest in a Setons game, but my score is generally on the lower end. I think this is from playing windowed, but will test when I get home.

Statistics: Posted by Ionic — 14 Mar 2013, 19:46

Re: CPU Quality Inidicator

2013-03-14T19:31:49+02:00

VoiceofReason wrote:
I suggested something just like that in the "Fixing asf lag/swarm" thread.

Yeah sorry, I should have given credit I just was too lazy to go find where it had been suggested. Not meaning to take credit for it! Just trying to bring back your suggestion and point out that it seems to be a reasonable solution that I think pretty clearly addresses Dilli's concern and meets everyone's needs. I feel like there is room for compromise here. If you could submit to a voluntary, pass/fail thing that you have to pass to play in those seton's games, then isn't everyone happy? No public displays, no discrimination, no misunderstood metrics, fewer laggy seton's games for those that care a lot, right?

I think the obvious followup is who decides what the necessary requirement for the pass/fail is. I think Zep and whoever creates the benchmark could set it, and preferably pick as low a bar as is reasonable. While that obviously could be a point of debate and you could have people whining that the bar is too low etc., I think most of the people advocating for the benchmark would be fine with just setting something to stop the worst of the worst CPUs from playing. And, if not, at least they are no worse off than they are now.

-_V_- (thanks a lot for picking a weird name, I had to go back and figure out exactly what it was), you wouldn't have to worry about being discriminated against by ignorant community members.

Perhaps you could just use Duck's test he has already done? The option would be there when you create the game or in the lobby or whatever to "restrict to large-map CPUs" (pick whatever adjective you want). If you enable it, then when someone tries to enter the room, Duck's benchmark runs, and only scores of 300 or lower can enter a 20x20 4x4 game. Only scores of 350 or lower can enter a 3v3 game.

Regardless of whether or not that actual implementaiton is ideal, isn't this overall a good compromise?

Statistics: Posted by sasin — 14 Mar 2013, 19:31

Re: CPU Quality Inidicator

2013-03-14T01:40:43+02:00

sasin wrote:
DilliDalli wrote:
VoiceofReason wrote:IE, Rant about how great their pc is, and stay in the match after they're dead even when you try your hardest to ask them politely to leave.

So get a mod to kick them from the game.

All that will happen with a CPU indicator is a gradual trend towards intolerance of people with worse PCs. Not bad PCs, but worse PCs. If you want to add another level of segregation to an already pretty chopped up set of players then don't say you weren't warned.

I for one am tired of having to repeat the same things to you all over and over.

Not necessarily advocating for this, but couldn't this be avoided if, rather than having a score, there is just some baseline level that a computer has to pass to be allowed to play in seton's games (if the option is toggled)?

I suggested something just like that in the "Fixing asf lag/swarm" thread.

Statistics: Posted by VoiceofReason — 14 Mar 2013, 01:40

Re: CPU Quality Inidicator

2013-03-13T23:53:02+02:00

DilliDalli wrote:
VoiceofReason wrote:IE, Rant about how great their pc is, and stay in the match after they're dead even when you try your hardest to ask them politely to leave.

So get a mod to kick them from the game.

All that will happen with a CPU indicator is a gradual trend towards intolerance of people with worse PCs. Not bad PCs, but worse PCs. If you want to add another level of segregation to an already pretty chopped up set of players then don't say you weren't warned.

I for one am tired of having to repeat the same things to you all over and over.

Not necessarily advocating for this, but couldn't this be avoided if, rather than having a score, there is just some baseline level that a computer has to pass to be allowed to play in seton's games (if the option is toggled)?

Statistics: Posted by sasin — 13 Mar 2013, 23:53