PDA

View Full Version : PF optimized for Intel P4?



tmdgm
11-07-2004, 09:14 PM
I remember Oleg saying PF is optimized for an Intel P4. He said Intel does it right, whatever that means. And on another post, someone indicated there is a core.dll file and a coreP4.dll file in the PF directory or something like that.

Anyone know about this 'optimized' thing?

Texas LongHorn
11-07-2004, 09:20 PM
tmdgm, I don't know about being specifically "optimized" but of interest is this part in the readme, the first part lists the minimums as a P3 or AMD 1Ghz or above, but under the recommended it only lists "P4 3 Ghz or above." Take that any way you want but it is kind of interesting they do not list the AMD equivilent. All the best, LongHorn

203Ku_Takasaki
11-07-2004, 09:24 PM
I heard the same thing. However I am an AMD guy and it runs great for me. Most benchmark sites, etc. often say that AMD is the best chip for gaming so I am not sure why Oleg leans towards Intel.

Besides, I live in Austin, the home of AMD. I have to support the locals. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

BuzzU
11-07-2004, 11:40 PM
The P4 stated using hyperthreading from the 3.0 on. FB uses it.

Fliger747
11-08-2004, 12:48 AM
Running it on a 64 bit Athlon, runs pretty well.

killer2359
11-08-2004, 01:20 AM
Yep - me too - I've got a home built A64 3200+ (K8VT800 Mainboard) and 1024 RAM which is only running at 166Mhz and CAS 3.0 till I splash out on a matched pair of modules to get it back up to 200Mhz and CAS 2.0 - and even with that cheapo basement mobo and crippled memory I'm running smooth at 1024 x 768 x 32 with all on excellent except terrain which is on perfect. My Grafix card is FX5900 Ultra 256.

BuzzU
11-08-2004, 01:23 AM
Except the 64 bit wasn't around when the P4 3.0 or FB came out. Try and stay on topic.

killer2359
11-08-2004, 01:34 AM
??? erm... - pardon me but this is the PACIFIC FIGHTERS forum (NOT FB) and the TOPIC says "PF optimised for Intel P4?" - so one assumes that comments regarding how well it runs on non P4 systems actually do bear some relevance.

clint-ruin
11-08-2004, 01:37 AM
There's seperate optimised dlls for P4/HT [core] and SSE [sound]. Unless it's SSE2 it should work wiht everything from the AthlonXP up. Haven't worked out a way to get counters working with PF to see exactly what it does though.

A very long time ago Oleg posted that Intel were very forthcoming with documentation on HT and other optimisation work, whereas he got bugger all from AMD for the same request.

Hopefuly whenever dualcore AMD CPUs are released they will be able to use the features exposed with the HT Dll.

Hunter82
11-08-2004, 04:40 AM
HT optimization if any is very low, if ou run task manager or look at any logging 1 cpu is maxed and the other not used....showing very little or any advantage to a HT CPU.

XyZspineZyX
11-08-2004, 05:45 AM
Both peformance windows come up at about the same usage here, when playing FB/ PF

Tvrdi
11-08-2004, 06:00 AM
ok I`ve got P4 with HT and Im wondering...we have, right now (in main FB/AEP/PF directory) il2coreP4.dll and il2core.dll..so where we must put this il2coreP4.dll file so PF could use him? or PF automatically recognizes which CPU we use?...

clint-ruin
11-08-2004, 06:30 AM
I have some weird memory of

[rts]
;ProcessAffinityMask=1

being the HT switch.

Hunter82
11-08-2004, 06:34 AM
should be in the main folder

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tvrdi:
ok I`ve got P4 with HT and Im wondering...we have, right now (in main FB/AEP/PF directory) il2coreP4.dll and il2core.dll..so where we must put this il2coreP4.dll file so PF could use him? or PF automatically recognizes which CPU we use?... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hunter82
11-08-2004, 06:36 AM
during play or loading? During loading it it shows as 2 processes but in play 1 at 50% the other at 3%... I have never seen a P4 go over 54% usage in FB through PF.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Vagueout:
Both peformance windows come up at about the same usage here, when playing FB/ PF <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hunter82
11-08-2004, 06:37 AM
Should be yes.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by clint-ruin:
I have some weird memory of

[rts]
;ProcessAffinityMask=1

being the HT switch. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

tmdgm
11-08-2004, 06:23 PM
Interesting. Wonder if there's much of a difference here. Seems odd though there's no documentation about this corep4.dll and how to enable HT.

Hunter82
11-08-2004, 07:45 PM
it's enabled by default... the affinity is 2 cpu's if checked.... the service however as I had said earlier does little to increase performance.

My FX 53 gets the same or better performance at stock than my P4 3.0 overclocked to 4.0. Actually it does better than any CPU right now...but I haven't tested the FX 55 yet http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif The P4 Extreme editions do not do as well as the FX series....

in other words the HT implementation may help the game load faster or transfer maps slightly quicker but in game there is no benefit.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tmdgm:
Interesting. Wonder if there's much of a difference here. Seems odd though there's no documentation about this corep4.dll and how to enable HT. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nero111
11-08-2004, 10:40 PM
Aye carumba http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hunter82:
my P4 3.0 overclocked to 4.0. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>