PDA

View Full Version : Battle of Britain and Dual-core CPU's



Fliegeroffizier
04-20-2005, 03:26 PM
It is my understanding that to take advantage of the new dual-core cpu's(to be released by AMD and Intlel sometime in the coming months), software must be specifically written to do so.

Question for OLEG: IS Battle of Britain being designed with dual-core technology/capabilities in mind?? If so, I will delay buying/building my new Rig until the dual-core cpu's are available.

Similarly, is there any specific aspect of SLI technology being considered in the design of BofB??

Thanks to Oleg/1C for ANY information about these aspects of technology/design.

Fliegeroffizier
04-20-2005, 03:26 PM
It is my understanding that to take advantage of the new dual-core cpu's(to be released by AMD and Intlel sometime in the coming months), software must be specifically written to do so.

Question for OLEG: IS Battle of Britain being designed with dual-core technology/capabilities in mind?? If so, I will delay buying/building my new Rig until the dual-core cpu's are available.

Similarly, is there any specific aspect of SLI technology being considered in the design of BofB??

Thanks to Oleg/1C for ANY information about these aspects of technology/design.

VW-IceFire
04-20-2005, 03:33 PM
Probably on both accounts...Forgotten Battles uses HyperThreading...Oleg usually jumps on these things fairly quickly.

BuzzU
04-20-2005, 07:33 PM
I think you can count on it. DC CPU will be pretty common by the time we get BOB. I'm not upgrading until one week before BOB release.

Charos
04-20-2005, 07:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BuzzU:
I think you can count on it. DC CPU will be pretty common by the time we get BOB. I'm not upgrading until one week before BOB release. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Your a Brave man BuzzU - always better to update a Week AFTER release. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Chivas
04-20-2005, 11:37 PM
How will you know when its a week away, when everyone knows it will be atleast two weeks. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

BuzzU
04-20-2005, 11:54 PM
Same way I knew PF was a week away.

marcocomparato
04-22-2005, 12:24 PM
a few things on this -

retro-fitting code requires little more than recompiling the source using a new intel compiler that they issue. but you have to rewrite the bits that dont compute right and the compiler tells you where the errors are.

Oleg is an Intel fanboy. he has said so in off-the-record interview (there was one posted after translation from english , just prior to the 4.0patch announcment) where he expressed that he felt Intel was always the one pushing the technology edge, doing the R&D and that AMD just takes that lead then adds more horsepower for gamers. and this isnt far from the case (same can be said about ATI/NVIDIA as well on some fronts)

I recently installed a 4000+ after an Intel 3ghz P4 and i have to say that although clocked at only 2.5ghz , the AMD chip brings so much overlooked speed and smoothness to games that Intel doesnt focus on at all. Intel focuses on stability and compatibility - they are the better brains - but theyre not concerned with gamers and AMD/Nvidia (both on the same street practically in Sunnyvale, California) are and that makes all the difference.

Obi_Kwiet
04-22-2005, 05:17 PM
Right now it's just impossible to say that AMD isn't owning Intel for games. Even a lowly 3200+ can beat anything Intel can put out in most games.

OldMan____
04-23-2005, 07:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by marcocomparato:
a few things on this -

retro-fitting code requires little more than recompiling the source using a new intel compiler that they issue. but you have to rewrite the bits that dont compute right and the compiler tells you where the errors are.

Oleg is an Intel fanboy. he has said so in off-the-record interview (there was one posted after translation from english , just prior to the 4.0patch announcment) where he expressed that he felt Intel was always the one pushing the technology edge, doing the R&D and that AMD just takes that lead then adds more horsepower for gamers. and this isnt far from the case (same can be said about ATI/NVIDIA as well on some fronts)

I recently installed a 4000+ after an Intel 3ghz P4 and i have to say that although clocked at only 2.5ghz , the AMD chip brings so much overlooked speed and smoothness to games that Intel doesnt focus on at all. Intel focuses on stability and compatibility - they are the better brains - but theyre not concerned with gamers and AMD/Nvidia (both on the same street practically in Sunnyvale, California) are and that makes all the difference. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

in fact.. speaking from the point of view of ex-hardware architect... AMD processor architecture is MUCH more advanced tha Intel ones. Intel is the one using brute force in the last year and a half.


I have a AMD 64 3000 at home.. and a P4 3600 HT at work. The P4 cannot even start to compare itself with the AMD I have home.



That said.. you wont need speacial coding, just a multithreaded software will be enough to start using dual core. A well balanced thread control would be required to use fully both processors... but this is only an extra