BF2 optimization may be worst then we thought
Originally posted by eastcoasthandle
It's no worse than Intel's compilers favoring Intel CPUs.
-
It's no worse than Intel's compilers favoring Intel CPUs.
-
BF2 optimization may be worst then we thought
If I may, I like to try to explain this thread. For the most part BF2 is not optimized...no news there. However, per the linked content it's considers BF2 to be G coded or blended. MS no longer offer codes for older cpu's, that part makes sense. They wanted programmers, dev's to use G7 coding however, they refused to use it because some of them are AMD Fan Boys who could care less for Intel customers. They know that AMD is better able to handle blending of code (non optimized coding) then Intel. Even though some of the newer Intel CPU's offer SSE2, SSE3 and hyperthreading and, AMD CPU's offer hypertransport none of them are optimized in the game so you can obtain the best performance possible from what I understand from the linked article below. Thus, verifying a much greater potential in both AMD and Intel which hasn't been seen yet. Download the 1.05 patch from ID for Quake 4, I have an Intel and noticed 21 FPS increase alone.
http://www.amdzone.com/modules.php?o...ticle&sid=4476
Lets just assume that you need a CPU with the lastest technology SSE2, SSE3, Hyperthreading, Hypertransport or muti-core in particular. We know that BF2 requires a beast of a system to run, basically a top of the line CPU with no less then 2 gigs of ram for smooth operation along with a pretty decent video card to boot. With that said how come they still need a Celeron D, P4 or Athlon XP to run a game optimized for a P2, P3, K series? Well it's simple, even though MS no longer provides code for old cpu’s (current coding is in G7 for both Intel and AMD) gaming developers, programmers found a way to use the old code by blending it so it's compatible with the newer CPU's. Stripping all the special features newer technology from your current CPU so you have an equivalent P2, P3, k7 on steroids. All you have is just the core doing all the work. That's how BF2 is using your CPU. None of the special features of your CPU are being used thus, your CPU is not used to it's full potentional only the core is. When all it takes is a simple optimization update, end results would be a new executable for AMD lets call it BF2HT with hypertransport and one for Intel lets name it BF2HTSSE3 hyperthreading with SSE3. Or having them both in just 1 file BF2.exe.
So in a nut shell this will benefit all of us Intel/AMD however, in the link I believe I read something to the effect that using G7 coding used with AMD may yield lower results then Intel. IMO this is one the main reasons why they refuse to use it. But what you must understand is that G7 coding may not increase AMD performance at all. IMO Intel simply beat AMD in some aspects while AMD showed no increases at all, that's it.
As far as I am concerned I no longer believe any gaming benchmarks unless they are fully optimized for both AMD & Intel, that industry is dead in my eyes because of what I found out. Unethical doesn't even scratch the surface to this level of arrogance.
Here is the link for the article that started this.
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1895906,00.asp
Here is the follow up to the 1st article, please read them both
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1900190,00.asp.
Side Note
Please understand that all though the Intel is discussed its more important to realize that it's not particularly the cpu that's important but the special features enabled in BF2 with SSE2, SSE3, Hyperthreading, Hypertransport, multi-core cpu's in mind. Also note this is my opinion based on what I have read and understood so far. -
Re: BF2 optimization may be worst then we thought
That's why you never buy Intel. I just happened to have the misfortune of being stuck with an intel since my old AMD puter was stolen. The insurance forced me to get my current one. IT was free though...
Anyway, NEVAR EVAR buy intels and you won't have to worry about slowness or games!Comment
-
Re: BF2 optimization may be worst then we thought
Originally posted by SuperTyphoon
Yea, I hear you on that and it makes sense to avoid all the headaches. But it ticks me off when I read an article like that and developers clearly admit favoritism of one CPU over another and justify coding it for that cpu do to personal feelings, that's just unethical.Comment
-
Re: BF2 optimization may be worst then we thought
They are intel's complilers aren't they? All I ask as a paying customer is that the game be optimized for AMD and Intel so AMD is optimized for hypertransport or multi core and Intel is optimized for SSE2 or SSE3 and hyperthreading. We both win and we can bench games ourselves instead of relying on websites to do it for us like we did back in the good ole days IMOOriginally posted by lil_jimmy_nortonComment
-
Re: BF2 optimization may be worst then we thought
Now I would like to take this opportunity to address the new 1.2 patch from BF2. I suggest you visit them now and add your input on what needs to be addressed.
Here is the link for the optimization vote...not by me please be advised this issue is a growing controversy that has many more involved then every to get the game properly optimized.
Main Forum for EA UK
Here is the link to address the BF2 1.2 patch...just scroll down to the lastest news
Comment
-
Re: BF2 optimization may be worst then we thought
wow... i got amd
Comment
-
Re: BF2 optimization may be worst then we thought
Since i started building my own computers, i have only used AMD, for many reasons.Originally posted by SuperTyphoon
I read (before I started using them) that AMD CPUs were better than Intel at games.
They were cheaper (sometimes by a LOT) than Intel, but offered comparable performance.
Personally, up until the latest CPUs started coming out, I found AMD easier to compare and keep track of which one you want. The Pentiums tended to get a little confusing (at least to me).
Now, I won't even consider an Intel. I can get the same performance, for less money, and spend the difference on other parts, or in the case of a previuos build, got the mobo/CPU(HS+Fan) for $10 more than the Pentium CPU alone.
Basically, AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD!!!Comment
-
Re: BF2 optimization may be worst then we thought
http://www.extremetech.com/print_art...=166689,00.aspIt intrigued me why Intel CPUs have inferior performance in some games and in others they are on par with AMD.
Therefore, I have reverse-engineered Battlefield 2 game executable and come to the following conclusions:
1. It was compiled using Visual Studio 2003 C++ compiler.
2. It was compiled in blended mode almost without any optimizations.
Since no optimization was done, all calculations in the game were done using floating point calculations. AMD is better in floating point calcs. So they should do better in bf2.
I always buy AMD cpus only. I build my won PCs all the time. I can tell any one looking for advice that AMD is much better than Intel.. and it is cheaper.Comment
-
Re: BF2 optimization may be worst then we thought
I have a P.4 and it runs the game and my computer just fineOriginally posted by SuperTyphoonComment
-
Re: BF2 optimization may be worst then we thought
Why are people sounding so suprised? The P4 has always been worse than the AMD Athlon's in games. And games have been coded like they are now for years. Cudos to ID for making the extra effort to get some better performance out of the P4.
The reason AMD is doing better than P4 has to do with it's architecture. Short pipeline with fewer stages. P4 has a longer pipeline with more stages. In addition the AMD clearly has a better FPU (games use this alot and have for years).
When Half-Life 2 was in development it became clear that the game ran pretty bad on Nvidia cards compared to ATI due to their poor DX9 performance. So Valve had to do a lot of extra work to atleast get some decent performance out of the Nvidia cards. If you compare this with Intel/AMD the P4 atleast doesn't completely suck without special optimations.
Instead of asking why game devs should have to make special efforts to make games run better on a Intel CPU, why not turn it around and ask why Intel can't make a good CPU for games instead?Comment
-
Re: BF2 optimization may be worst then we thought
But wait till you put a 3500+ in there, then you will see how really fine it runs. You would never go back the the P4. Believe me.Originally posted by SlapidusComment
-
Re: BF2 optimization may be worst then we thought
Mine runs great(Intel 945GI MOBO / P4 @ 3.4 / 6600GT PCI-e / 1Gig DDR2 PC4300 / 80Gig SATA Drive / Onboard Sound = 60-99FPS all day long(not on all high settings of course). I've had no system problems with BF2 or BF2:SF, just the regular glitches/bugs that came with the game. Infact, if you read through most of the "Performance" threads on these forums they seem to be started by AMD users, not Intel. Just my experience based on what I have read on these forums. However, maybe I am one of the lucky ones, and should just keep my mouth shutOriginally posted by SuperTyphoon
TComment
-
Re: BF2 optimization may be worst then we thought
Man, I upgraded my cpu from 3.2 and BF2 plays a whole lot better now. No need to overclock at this point. But I still wonder how much better it will do with SSE2 enabled...Comment
Comment