PDA

View Full Version : Optimization for multicore cpu's



BigC208
11-06-2006, 10:56 AM
I was wondering if you are working on having multicore cpu's being utilized for BoB. It looks like in the next year or so these are becoming mainstream. I first was hoping physics processors would take some workload of the cpu but it seems that that developement is not going anywhere anytime soon. Multicore cpu's could be the answer for major slowdowns during fierce action with one core handling AI, another aircraft physics and the remaining two the main simulation that is now being done by one cpu. By the time SoW BoB comes out it would be great to buy the latest hardware and actually see some bennefit from it.

Doolittle81
11-06-2006, 03:34 PM
As I understand it, if the developers(Oleg's 1C team) do Not optimize for dual core, there is no reason to buy dual-core (unless you have some other computing need for DC).

Likewise, if Oleg's team is not designing SOW:BofB specifically for Quad-Core, there is no reason to go to the expense of getting Quad-core.

So...it would be VERY helpful if someone from Oleg's team could at Least tell us what they are designing to/with....

The standard answer, "Buy your new Rig after SOW:BofB is released" is not helpful whatsoever for anyone in the situation of having to buy a new Rig, of some sort, between now and Xmas 2007!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<span class="ev_code_Red">Wingmen Productions</span><span class="ev_code_grey">....................</span>View the best FB-PF Movies here (http://www.flightsimmachinima.com/)
http://members.cox.net/doolittle80/SigBlockToughVictor.gif
<span class="ev_code_grey">...........</span><span class="ev_code_Red">"To the Victor"</span><span class="ev_code_grey">..</span>Artwork by James Dietz (http://www.jamesdietz.com/)<span class="ev_code_grey">..</span><span class="ev_code_Red">"Tough Day"</span>

GoToAway
11-06-2006, 03:54 PM
Originally posted by Doolittle81:
As I understand it, if the developers(Oleg's 1C team) do Not optimize for dual core, there is no reason to buy dual-core (unless you have some other computing need for DC).

Likewise, if Oleg's team is not designing SOW:BofB specifically for Quad-Core, there is no reason to go to the expense of getting Quad-core.

So...it would be VERY helpful if someone from Oleg's team could at Least tell us what they are designing to/with....

The standard answer, "Buy your new Rig after SOW:BofB is released" is not helpful whatsoever for anyone in the situation of having to buy a new Rig, of some sort, between now and Xmas 2007! Moore's Law has been heading towards a wall for years. It has all but hit it at this point. Existing fab processes are pretty much stretched to the limit and there needs to be a pretty big manufacturing breakthrough in order to shrink die sizes significantly (of course, this also has its own set of problems. As I recall, you start getting diminishing returns on things like electrical efficiency with processes smaller than 90nm with current manufacturing techniques. or was that 65nm? I forget.)

The only place we have been heading for the past 5 years or so is towards multi-cored dies. That is the only place that is left to head.

I can say with 99.999999% certainty that the BoB engine will be multi-threaded. Why? Because if it isn't, Oleg is mysteriously chosing to ignore the entire computer industry for absolutely no reason.

The only reason that most entertainment software isn't multi-threaded at this point is because multi-threaded code is resource intensive to churn out and because the vast majority of end users do not have SMP systems and would see no benefit from it. However, since end users are now getting SMP systems through the lastest multi-cored processors, it's folly not to cater to them.

BigC208
11-06-2006, 05:02 PM
Yeah, that's why I was asking. Planning on a new computer in January and it would be nice to know if I should get a quad or duo cpu. Probably the duo and than if needed and suported a quad since they use the same cpu socket.

WB_Outlaw
11-06-2006, 06:17 PM
Originally posted by GoToAway:
I can say with 99.999999% certainty that the BoB engine will be multi-threaded. Why? Because if it isn't, Oleg is mysteriously chosing to ignore the entire computer industry for absolutely no reason.

When IL-2 is sitting at the main menu, there are 14 threads running. Multiple CPUs are not required for multi-threading. In fact, running multiple threads in the same application across multiple processors can sometimes cause problems with timing. To get the most benefit from multiple CPUs the application must be coded for it. Hopefully this will be the case.

--Outlaw.

VW-IceFire
11-06-2006, 07:14 PM
Originally posted by BigC208:
Yeah, that's why I was asking. Planning on a new computer in January and it would be nice to know if I should get a quad or duo cpu. Probably the duo and than if needed and suported a quad since they use the same cpu socket.
With the pricing and advantages of a dual core there's really no reason not to go dual core even if the game doesn't specifically support it. The offloading of background tasks alone I think is enough to justify what is now a fairly small cost to go to dual core. Its getting hard these days to find single cores...they have great prices to be sure...but for a little bit more you get a fair bit of extra options with your machine.

And if Windows Vista is the hog it is right now in RC1 then you'll need that extra core just to run the OS http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/icefire-tempestv.jpg
Find my missions at Flying Legends (http://www.flying-legends.net/php/downloads/downloads.php?cat_id=19) and Mission4Today.com (http://www.mission4today.com).

WWSensei
11-07-2006, 06:12 AM
Outlaw is correct. Multi-threaded is not equal to multi-processor. Though multi-processor does mean the app must be multi-threaded. I've written for both. The current IL2 is certainly multi-threaded. Fact is, I don't think you can write something as time critical as a flight sim without being multi-threaded.

Multi-core coding requires good, solid multi-threading programming with special attention to mutex contention between the different processors(cores). It also requires a compiler that supports it. Have to look at my VS2005 to see if it does, but if it doesn't I know Intel will give me a compiler engine that will integrate with VS2005 for free. AMD, on the other hand, wants to charge me for their version.

Now, I don't write gaming software (not professionally anyway) and mostly do business applications but the problems are similar. The DeviceLink library I wrote is thread-safe though not multi-threaded in and of itself. However, if you instantiated one or more of my DeviceLink objects in separate threads they would play nice together because of the MC_Lock and MC_CritSection classes I wrote to handle proper locking of the private variables on read/write access.

**side note: I do the unlock of the thread in the destructor of the MC_Lock object so I don't have to explicitly call it. Once out of scope the lock is released.**

Ooops, sorry, going off on a programming tangent. Long story longer...takes a certain programming know how to do it properly AND takes the right tools. I believe the 1C team has the know how, but I don't know what kind of access they have to the tools.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

--------------------------------------
"A lady came up to me on the street, pointed to my leather flight jacket and said, "Don't you know a cow was murdered for that jacket?" I replied menacingly, "I didn't know I left witnesses. Now, I'll have to kill you too."

Zoom2136
11-07-2006, 08:15 AM
If BoB is not program to benefit from multi-core CPU by the time it is release... (which should be around Q4-07) then it will be obsolete by the time it comes out...

Because Oleg's is planning this series (BoB) to run for a long time (think iL2) then I WILL BE PROGRAM TO BENEFIT FROM MULTICORE CPUs... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

And you can bet you're last dollars that quadcore will probably yield better performance than a duocore...<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"http://www.oacsquad.com/images/sigs/zoom.gif "

Chivas
11-16-2006, 02:00 PM
I can see Oleg utilizing dual-core in BOB but doubt it will utilize quad-core cpus. From what I've been reading game developers are finding it very difficult to coordinate four cores doing different tasks.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.war-clouds.com/sigs/jg27chivas.jpg

WB_Outlaw
11-16-2006, 03:17 PM
From my limited application development experience, the easiest way I can imagine to utilize multiple CPUs for games is to use a client/server setup. When I play offline campaings, I do it in coop mode using one of my spare machines as the host. On the host machine I select the tail end of one of the flights and bail out as soon as the mission starts. This offloads all of the AI from the machine I use to play allowing for some pretty busy missions. Multi CPUs can be used in a similar way with one running as the server and various clients running on the other CPUs. By implementing every in game object as a class and providing a suitable communications interface it seems to me it would be fairly easy to have threads running on different CPUs responsible for different in game objects.

The only issue I see is that there is some overhead with classes and object instances so it might not be efficient enough. Sensei would be the one that could answer that question.

Of course, I don't really know anything so I'll shut-up now.

--Outlaw.

crazyivan1970
11-16-2006, 04:13 PM
Originally posted by Doolittle81:
As I understand it, if the developers(Oleg's 1C team) do Not optimize for dual core, there is no reason to buy dual-core (unless you have some other computing need for DC).

Likewise, if Oleg's team is not designing SOW:BofB specifically for Quad-Core, there is no reason to go to the expense of getting Quad-core.

So...it would be VERY helpful if someone from Oleg's team could at Least tell us what they are designing to/with....

The standard answer, "Buy your new Rig after SOW:BofB is released" is not helpful whatsoever for anyone in the situation of having to buy a new Rig, of some sort, between now and Xmas 2007!

Oleg promised to talk about hardware sometime in August 2007. SoW is "planned" for xmas of 2007, it`s a bit early to talk about hardware and hardware support.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

V!
Regards,

http://blitzpigs.com/forum/images/smiles/smokin.gif

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/band.gif

VFC*Crazyivan aka VFC*HOST

http://i5.tinypic.com/246pdl1.jpg

Kozhedub: In combat potential, the Yak-3, La-7 and La-9 fighters were indisputably superior to the Bf-109s and Fw-190s. But, as they say, no matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down.

Magnum PC (http://www.magnum-pc.com)

RocketRobin__
11-17-2006, 04:05 PM
For most current online games dual core CPUs are already a huge advantage, because you have an extra core to help with sundry tasks (comms, anti-virus, firewall etc, etc, etc). That leaves one core free for your all important app (the game!).
You just have to make sure you have enough system RAM to keep both cores happy. 2-3Gs is a good place to start (Vista 32 only supports 3.25Gs, while Vista 64 isn't backwards compatible with many 32bit games).

The emerging quad core technologies aren't really mature enough to be of advantage to a dedicated gamer. The core technologies are pretty solid (works great in server boards), but existing memory controllers and/or packaging simply isn't optmimised for dedicated gamers (yet).

However, if you're some kind of gamer/power user (i.e. you plan to play online games while rendering porno animations on the same machine) then by all means you MUST ensure your rig is packing Kentsfield, or 4X4. That way, you can game away while your "Shaving Ryans Privates", or other cartoon masterpiece renders seamlessly in the background.

Of course, keep in mind the landscape will change over the next two quarters. By then Intel will open up it's Northbridge, while AMD will debut Barcelona. At that point the performance differential for gamers will be a cr_p-shoot, so if you can afford the extra hardware and would like to try rendering movies (even ones with GP ratings), or stream multi-media, or allow another station to access your media, etc, etc, etc, whilst playing games, then the quad core is a no-brainer.

Personally, I think a quad core rig will be very desirable around next fall. However I'm a bit of a hardware nut, so I expect many folks will be happy with dual core rigs, whilst the unwashed majority will settle for a white steel box with a single core processor and a Playstation 3.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Rocket in my pocket, finger in the socket.

stryka.
11-20-2006, 04:59 AM
Forget it, Oleg won't give any clues yet for obvious reasons, but given the quality of new games and graphics cards BOB will have to do some amazing stuff to survive, and that means maxing out the machine and graphics.
Directx10, quad core cpu, quad graphics cards, Windows 64 bit system and maybe the addiional physics card eh!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Climb like a monkey, turn like the devil!

Te_Vigo
11-25-2006, 10:53 AM
Originally posted by Chivas:
I can see Oleg utilizing dual-core in BOB but doubt it will utilize quad-core cpus. From what I've been reading game developers are finding it very difficult to coordinate four cores doing different tasks.

Correct me if mistaken... but I read somewhere, the Xbox360 is 8 core processor?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v316/onlinephoto/Screen_Shot_JPEG_flip.jpg

Mysticpuma2003
11-26-2006, 05:07 AM
Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
Oleg promised to talk about hardware sometime in August 2007. SoW is "planned" for xmas of 2007, it`s a bit early to talk about hardware and hardware support.

Which is great for me, as at the moment my P4 3.2 runs IL2 perfectly well and that means for a whole year more I don't need to upgrade my PC. Which also means that when I do next year, all the bugs with Quad/Dual core should have been ironed out, along with Quad SLi http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Sounds good to me! Take your time guys, " if you build it...they will come!"

Cheers, MP.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.aqqm31.dsl.pipex.com/Mysticpuma.jpg

Punkfriday
11-29-2006, 06:45 AM
the 360 is a 3 core, and the PS3 is a 9 core. respectively.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img373.imageshack.us/img373/9113/sksm4lq.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

papotex
11-29-2006, 06:03 PM
WB_Outlaw wrote:

From my limited application development experience, the easiest way I can imagine to utilize multiple CPUs for games is to use a client/server setup. When I play offline campaings, I do it in coop mode using one of my spare machines as the host. On the host machine I select the tail end of one of the flights and bail out as soon as the mission starts. This offloads all of the AI from the machine I use to play allowing for some pretty busy missions. Multi CPUs can be used in a similar way with one running as the server and various clients running on the other CPUs. By implementing every in game object as a class and providing a suitable communications interface it seems to me it would be fairly easy to have threads running on different CPUs responsible for different in game objects.

The only issue I see is that there is some overhead with classes and object instances so it might not be efficient enough. Sensei would be the one that could answer that question.

Of course, I don't really know anything so I'll shut-up now.

===============================================

Hmm no dont shut up just yet http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I never meesed around with networking because i never needed it.

I have right now a p4 3.4 extreme edition and 2 gigs of ram and IL2 runs pretty good in fairly bussy missions,although some missions i have downloaded with lots of objects has brought my rig to its knees,makes me wonder what machine some mission authors have.

but generaly most games run fine so im happy with it. EXCEPT for example lOCKON wich runs fine so long as no more than a few AI are active, then I feel im back with my old machine.

that concept you talk about is interesting,
since i have another computer sitting in my garage, a p4 2.8

so, could it be posible that even when BOB comes out I would be able to play that sim smoothly with my two machines. therefore totally eliminating the need to buying yet another machine?

WB_Outlaw
11-29-2006, 06:38 PM
Originally posted by papotex:
so, could it be posible that even when BOB comes out I would be able to play that sim smoothly with my two machines. therefore totally eliminating the need to buying yet another machine?

I wouldn't even hazard a guess yet but keep in mind that using the method I described, BOTH machines need to be able to handle the game. Of course, on the server the graphics settings are at the absolute lowest and the window is minimized during flight so it doesn't require as much HP.

--Outlaw.

papotex
11-29-2006, 08:50 PM
and what do you mean with:

The only issue I see is that there is some overhead with classes and object instances so it might not be efficient enough.

WB_Outlaw
11-29-2006, 08:59 PM
Originally posted by papotex:
and what do you mean with:

The only issue I see is that there is some overhead with classes and object instances so it might not be efficient enough.

As opposed to coding everything old school C style without classes and object instances, which would be C++. The extra oberhead of handling the object instances might make it run slower than if you just wrote code to handle them. I can't say for sure though, that's why I brought up Sensei's name.

--Outlaw.

Gnasha
12-09-2006, 04:05 AM
If I'm not mistaken Oleg said on Mysticpuma's interview that multicore support is dependant on Intel releasing a true SMP compiler so that multicore is properly supported. Don't know what the deal on AMD chips is tho

Mysticpuma2003
12-10-2006, 01:12 AM
You heard right.

I asked if BoB would have dual or Quad Core support.

Ilya translated the question to Oleg, and Oleg said definitely Dual Core, but he didn't mention Quad.

Oleg said he was waiting for Intel to supply him with the compiler, which should come in 2-3 months.

Si Dual Core support is definitely in, no word on Quad though.
Hope that helps. Q&A with Oleg here:

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4731035015<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.aqqm31.dsl.pipex.com/Mysticpuma.jpg

NerdConnected
12-17-2006, 04:22 AM
Originally posted by Mysticpuma2003:
You heard right.

I asked if BoB would have dual or Quad Core support.

Ilya translated the question to Oleg, and Oleg said definitely Dual Core, but he didn't mention Quad.

Oleg said he was waiting for Intel to supply him with the compiler, which should come in 2-3 months.

Si Dual Core support is definitely in, no word on Quad though.
Hope that helps. Q&A with Oleg here:

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4731035015 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23%3CBR%3E110283/m/4731035015)

I don't understand what this means. I always thought all modern compilers (e.g. GNU, ICC) have good support for SMP/multi-threading by now.

Okay, it takes quite some effort and time to code all the threading yourself, but it's possible even today. If it wasn't, we would not have applications today that make use of dual core/MP/SMP.

Guess Oleg want's to use a 'smart compiler' that automatically does as much of the threading and tuning for him ;-)

I think, when Maddox want BoB to stay another 5 years they have no choice but to support dual and quad setups. The game has to be multi threaded right from the start otherwise they would have to rewrite large parts of the BoB code. I don't think they're planning that.

My guess:

- BoB supports DC and QC when released (whereby QC not fully used. I think Bob will be highly CPU dependant just like Il2. My guess, C2D 6600 or X2 5000 will be the minimum. In addition, for better performance SSE3 will probably be used);
- DX9/10 will be used for sound (maybe even OpenAL because of Vista);
- OpenGL 2.x will be used for graphics (fall back wrapper DX9. I believe MG is not a big fan of DX);
- RAM: 2 Gb minimum (better 3 or 4 Gb);
- Video: current line of high end cards (something like NV7800, 7900, 7950, X1900 and of course 8800 and R600; 256 MB required, better 512 MB or more);
- XP32/64 or Vista (Vista will not be required);
- 32 and 64 bits mode optimized executables (otherwise it's a bit hard to address more than 3 Gb of RAM)

(edit: typo's)

Mark

WWSensei
12-17-2006, 04:57 PM
Multi-threading isn't new. Nor is SMP. Multi-Core isn't true SMP and AMD's implemantation is different than Intel's so you need a compiler from either of them to take full advantage. Both will support general SMP/multi-threading but that won't address the full potential of either.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

--------------------------------------
"A lady came up to me on the street, pointed to my leather flight jacket and said, "Don't you know a cow was murdered for that jacket?" I replied menacingly, "I didn't know I left witnesses. Now, I'll have to kill you too."

anarchy52
12-17-2006, 05:14 PM
Originally posted by NerdConnected:
- BoB supports DC and QC when released (whereby QC not fully used. I think Bob will be highly CPU dependant just like Il2. My guess, C2D 6600 or X2 5000 will be the minimum. In addition, for better performance SSE3 will probably be used);
- DX9/10 will be used for sound (maybe even OpenAL because of Vista);
- OpenGL 2.x will be used for graphics (fall back wrapper DX9. I believe MG is not a big fan of DX);
- XP32/64 or Vista (Vista will not be required);


since Vista support in late 2007 will be a must, OpenGL would be a bad choice. the future of OpenGL support in Vista is still questionable. currently, you can't run Il-2 in Vista under OpenGL...slideshow.

NerdConnected
12-18-2006, 12:50 PM
Originally posted by anarchy52:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NerdConnected:
- BoB supports DC and QC when released (whereby QC not fully used. I think Bob will be highly CPU dependant just like Il2. My guess, C2D 6600 or X2 5000 will be the minimum. In addition, for better performance SSE3 will probably be used);
- DX9/10 will be used for sound (maybe even OpenAL because of Vista);
- OpenGL 2.x will be used for graphics (fall back wrapper DX9. I believe MG is not a big fan of DX);
- XP32/64 or Vista (Vista will not be required);


since Vista support in late 2007 will be a must, OpenGL would be a bad choice. the future of OpenGL support in Vista is still questionable. currently, you can't run Il-2 in Vista under OpenGL...slideshow. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nope... I reckon OpenGL 2.x will be fully supported ;-) MS cannot afford to get rid of it, neither can Nvidia or ATI. OpenGL will stay I think ;-)

It's just a matter of time before ATI-AMD and Nvidia release better drivers. Same thing was going on when XP64 was released. DX was pretty good but OpenGL was 10 to 15% slower; now it's even.

DX10 will be nice of course, but then Maddox will ignore the already large user base of XP users that don't have Vista. I don't think they're willing to risk that.

My 2 cents..

Mark<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"The German Army had become so used to having to no air support that they had a simple saying, "If the plane is silver or blue, it's an Allied plane. If it's invisible, it's ours." (EAW manual, The Fall of the Third Reich).

NerdConnected
12-18-2006, 01:05 PM
Originally posted by WWSensei:
Multi-threading isn't new. Nor is SMP. Multi-Core isn't true SMP and AMD's implemantation is different than Intel's so you need a compiler from either of them to take full advantage. Both will support general SMP/multi-threading but that won't address the full potential of either.

WWSensei,

What's the difference between multi-core (dual or quad) and SMP apart from the number of sockets?

I can imagine the way communication between the cores change (faster for dual core), but the principle remains the same. You can also have hybrids like two dual cores in a SMP system.

You mean programming a multi-threaded program requires different logic for a SMP system than for a dual core or quad core?

Just curious ;-)

Mark<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"The German Army had become so used to having to no air support that they had a simple saying, "If the plane is silver or blue, it's an Allied plane. If it's invisible, it's ours." (EAW manual, The Fall of the Third Reich).

GvSAP_Dart
12-18-2006, 09:57 PM
For most current online games dual core CPUs are already a huge advantage, because you have an extra core to help with sundry tasks (comms, anti-virus, firewall etc, etc, etc). That leaves one core free for your all important app (the game!).
You just have to make sure you have enough system RAM to keep both cores happy.

Bingo!

It is very much like having one computer run the sim, and another running TIR, TS, etc., etc....<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

____________________________________
http://www.darts-page.com
for more foolishness

WWSensei
12-19-2006, 07:05 AM
Originally posted by NerdConnected:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWSensei:
Multi-threading isn't new. Nor is SMP. Multi-Core isn't true SMP and AMD's implemantation is different than Intel's so you need a compiler from either of them to take full advantage. Both will support general SMP/multi-threading but that won't address the full potential of either.

WWSensei,

What's the difference between multi-core (dual or quad) and SMP apart from the number of sockets?

I can imagine the way communication between the cores change (faster for dual core), but the principle remains the same. You can also have hybrids like two dual cores in a SMP system.

You mean programming a multi-threaded program requires different logic for a SMP system than for a dual core or quad core?

Just curious ;-)

Mark </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What I mean is that "green threading" for generic SMP has been around for some time and supported by many different compilers including gcc and the Visual Studio series. Starting with Intel's HT technology and now with Dual-Core that generic programming still worked to some extent, but if you wanted to be optimized to take full advantage of the technology you needed a specialized compiler--which Intel used to give away free to developers.

Core-Duo and Dual-Core are similar on the outside but both use low-level proprietary instruction sets to take full advantage of them. Where that can be abstracted is at the OS layer. I doubt XP will natively support both, but there is a good chance Vista will. Haven't dug into the innards of Vista (yet) to know whether it will handle the proprietary stuff (makes it easier for apps developers). However, if 1C is going to code to the bare metal for true multi-core support I'm betting they will support one core over the other.

You can already see where 1C did so for IL2. They optimized for the P4 HT technology
via the il2_coreP4.dll and then generic multi-threading with the il2_core.dll. That's why the README says if you experience crashes on a Pentium to rename the files--you end up using the safer, more generic core driver rather than the one optimized for the P4.

I imagine something similar will happen for various multi-core technologies.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

--------------------------------------
"A lady came up to me on the street, pointed to my leather flight jacket and said, "Don't you know a cow was murdered for that jacket?" I replied menacingly, "I didn't know I left witnesses. Now, I'll have to kill you too."

Zoom2136
12-22-2006, 08:19 AM
Read this

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=152066<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"http://www.oacsquad.com/images/sigs/zoom.gif "

NerdConnected
12-24-2006, 09:14 AM
Zoom2136,

Thanks. Interesting read ;-)

Better AI and also better physics. I'm guessing it's definately gonna support multiple cpu cores http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

Now lets wait and see how many. A maximum of 2 or 4?

I think they're going to support these type of QC setups, but not fully because not many people will have them next year. Still think a ~ DC E6600 or ~ X2 5000 will be the minimum for BoB.

A single cpu (1 core) based system for BoB almost sounds impossible to me when I see what they're aiming for.

****, we still have to wait another year http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif

Mark<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"The German Army had become so used to having to no air support that they had a simple saying, "If the plane is silver or blue, it's an Allied plane. If it's invisible, it's ours." (EAW manual, The Fall of the Third Reich).

TheGozr
12-24-2006, 12:07 PM
Doolittle81 il2 is not optimized for dual but your software running on the background ARE.. so yes it's very hel ful to have dual core on your system..<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.gozr.net/iocl/images/NN/NNserverlogo.jpg http://www.gozr.net/iocl/images/NN/Historiaserverlogo.jpg
NormandieNiemen & HISTORIA available on HL
Stats for both servers http://www.gozr.net/fbdstats

I.O.C.L | International Online Competition League (http://www.gozr.net/iocl/)
Oleg_Maddox:
"In terms of Sexy looking aircraft I like very much Mustang and less Yak-9U post war production. In the last case it doesn't means that I will model Yak-9U to the trials before manufacture speciafications. We model it with all the problems of aircraft of the first series."

WOLFMondo
12-24-2006, 02:04 PM
Originally posted by Doolittle81:
As I understand it, if the developers(Oleg's 1C team) do Not optimize for dual core, there is no reason to buy dual-core (unless you have some other computing need for DC).


Give it a year and dual/quad cores will have uses in games. I bet in the future you'll have games which will require two or more cores.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Cheers!!

NerdConnected
12-25-2006, 04:49 AM
anarchy52,

"since Vista support in late 2007 will be a must, OpenGL would be a bad choice. the future of OpenGL support in Vista is still questionable. currently, you can't run Il-2 in Vista under OpenGL...slideshow."

I'm not very interested in Vista, other than DX10. Since no games use 10 right now and new ones have been delayed, I've no real use for Vista right now. Actually, come to think of it, DX10 will be the only reason for me to buy Vista. Right now, I don't see any other reason.

Yes, I fiddled with the Vista to see what Vista really means, but found my current XP64 configuration so much better and better performing I uninstalled Vista.

I reckon Vista will require much faster and bigger hardware than I have right now, especially ram. By design, Vista will be slower than XP. Extra security and DRM features will just need extra processing power.

I just wait and see what next year will bring. If BoB will use the latest features of DX10 I will buy Vista of course, but I still hope it will use OpenGL ;-)

W.r.t. OpenGL. Manufacturers and MS already have mentioned it will be included in Vista. As always, it was MS FUD. See e.g. http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3760

In case of Vista's new DRM, this will maybe of interest to you: http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.txt (http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/%7Epgut001/pubs/vista_cost.txt)

Mark<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"The German Army had become so used to having to no air support that they had a simple saying, "If the plane is silver or blue, it's an Allied plane. If it's invisible, it's ours." (EAW manual, The Fall of the Third Reich).