• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Supreme Commander Slowing System Down

IceDigger

IceDigger

[H]F Junkie
2FA
Joined
Feb 22, 2001
Messages
12,366
I just bought the expansion for supreme commander and it is slowing my computer down like crazy. I have a pretty powerful computer with a 4890. Any ideas?

Computer Specs in sig.
 
What graphics settings are you using?

Are you overclocked? This game will use every bit of processor you throw at it. I've watched the CPU usage on my rig.

This game will peg 1 cpu at 100% and will partially use 2 more cores (approx 50% each). If you have a dual core, it should peg both cores at near 100%.

I've noticed that with my cpu (9850BE) at stock clock of 2.5ghz, one of the cores is pegged at 100%. When I OC it to 3.0ghz, it rarely pegs 100% on 1 core...thus leaving some overhead and the game rarely hitches.

If I were in your shoes, I would try to get that 550BE of yours over 3ghz, preferably in the 3.2-3.3ghz range so the second core can run the other game threads while the first one is pegged at 100%.

This game doesn't have stellar graphics or high-rez textures, but when you multiply that by thousands of allied and enemy units on screen at once, it will begin to stress the graphics card.

I run the game at 1600x1200 res, all graphics options set to high except shadows set to low, 2x AA. Your 4890 should be able to push it further, but I wouldn't push the AA too high to keep the fps above 25.
 
supreme is all about the cpu not even my 4.4 i7 can run the game smooth end game
 
The simulation can slow down without the actual FPS slowing down in Supcom.

60 fps and the game chugging in slowmo isn't too strange to see.
 
The game doesn't really stress your HD 4890; I've been running it smoothly with an HD 4650 on two screens (2x1680x1050), but this was using a Core 2 Quad Q8200 (clocked at 2.33 GHz stock). Your Phenom X2 is not enough for this game... IMHO the same goes for any dual core.
 
If you're playing against the AI lots, you might want to google for "Sorian's AI Mod". Not only does it make the AI considerably less stupid, but improves performance a fair bit too. Other than that... overclock your CPU more *shrugs*
 
just turn vsync on and lock it at 30fps.. ive actually noticed leaving the vsync unlocked causes more lag then anything.. and there really is no need to run more then 30fps in the game since thats what most RTS games are designed to run at..

and yes take kaldskrykes suggestion and get the sorian AI mod.. the standard AI has tons of issues..

but you are pretty much cpu limited with the phenom II 550.. supcom completely relies on the cpu and its one of the few games when it first came out that it was able to completely load every core... but it really depends on the OS you are using.. since with windows XP it cant access all the cores.. but in vista/7 it can..

so if you are using windows xp.. then you need to overclock the hell out of that processor.. but even with vista/7 you will want to overclock that processor for supcom..

i can run supcom:FA at 1920x1200 with everything almost maxed out except AA on my phenom II 940 system in my sig.. and hold between 20-30fps until there are more then 1500 units on the screen.. then my system nose dives to around 5 fps.. also with battles with more then 500 units my system pretty much becomes useless until its over..
 
/rant/ said:
The game doesn't really stress your HD 4890; I've been running it smoothly with an HD 4650 on two screens (2x1680x1050), but this was using a Core 2 Quad Q8200 (clocked at 2.33 GHz stock). Your Phenom X2 is not enough for this game... IMHO the same goes for any dual core.
Click to expand...

What? You know what was on the cpu market when this was released?
 
MetalX said:
What? You know what was on the cpu market when this was released?
Click to expand...

this game is to CPU's as crysis is to GPU's. its going to be a while before we see a system that runs this with 100% no hitches. it brings my core i7 to its knees.
 
Smiththers2 said:
this game is to CPU's as crysis is to GPU's. its going to be a while before we see a system that runs this with 100% no hitches. it brings my core i7 to its knees.
Click to expand...

Exactly so no need to factor cpu cores in when it doesn't really matter.
 
theman7233 said:
supreme is all about the cpu not even my 4.4 i7 can run the game smooth end game
Click to expand...

Not true. From my experience it stresses GPU when you have millions of units on the screen. I had to lower my AA in order to get max setting supcom to run smoothly on a 4v4 late game. CPU wise it didn't even used 50% of my 4.0 i7
 
theman7233 said:
supreme is all about the cpu not even my 4.4 i7 can run the game smooth end game
Click to expand...

This. Memory is really important too, but the sheer number of units at endgame will slow any system down. The REAL problem, is not that the game is so "ADVANCED" but rather that the simulation thread does not seem to spill over into more than one core. So essentially what you have is a game that is not REALLY optimized for multicore. Multicore is necessary, but not sufficient--you need raw per clock speed on that sim thread. A game that would be truly multicore would allow the simulation thread (simulation controls the trajectory of the lasers, the unit movement, physics, ect) to take advantage of more than one core.
 
Oh here is a big tip: TURN OFF THE WORLD BORDER FEATURE. It isn't under the graphics settings, i think it is hidden in the game settings. It is the feature that draws the patterns that frame the map. You can change that to a black screen and you gain frames.
 
there are plenty of things you can turn off or down, but i feel as if that takes away something from the game each time :-\
 
Smiththers2 said:
there are plenty of things you can turn off or down, but i feel as if that takes away something from the game each time :-\
Click to expand...
This. Especially concerning the graphics settings, if you don't crank it up to "high", the game will look like it is over 9000 years old.
 
all this talk has me playing the game, but i end up just quiting because its too slow... oh well
 
Smiththers2 said:
not entirely true. it uses more than 2 cores, therefore, it does matter.
Click to expand...

When this was released people played and thoroughly enjoyed it with overclocked Opterons, which was what was available at the time. It doesn't matter. No excuse not to enjoy this game because you don't have an i7 or C2Q, that's stupid advice.
 
MetalX said:
When this was released people played and thoroughly enjoyed it with overclocked Opterons, which was what was available at the time. It doesn't matter. No excuse not to enjoy this game because you don't have an i7 or C2Q, that's stupid advice.
Click to expand...

so let me get this straight. you are 100% ok with it taking 5 hours to play a total simulation time of 45 minutes? oh and ive got the world border off, water off, and a few others off. looks like poo. i love the game still, but damn it needs more powah
 
Hell, I even played SupComAF on an old Pentium 4 with 1 GB of RAM... overclocked the hell out of it (as far as you can say that with a P4)... how was I even able to play? :s
 
Smiththers2 said:
so let me get this straight. you are 100% ok with it taking 5 hours to play a total simulation time of 45 minutes?
Click to expand...

Of course not. But I'm not going to avoid the game because I don't have an i7 that it will continue to run like shit on.
 
MetalX said:
Of course not. But I'm not going to avoid the game because I don't have an i7 that it will continue to run like shit on.
Click to expand...

i guess im just picky. now i just cant wait to see SUPCOM 2. have you guys seen the teaser for it yet?
 
Without even seeing it I'm going to assume a quad is required for Supcom2
 
This is a known issue with Supreme commander and Forged Alliance and is NOT a hardware issue (assuming you have a fast rig).

On certain types of Maps (IE Satons Claw) and if your playing 2 or more ALX AI computers the sim speed can drop as far -5 around the 30 min mark on some of the fastest quad cores with the highest end GPU's. Some people are mistaking this issue as a FPS issue. Sim speed can be -5 while FPS are good at like 45FPS+ etc.

The AI pathways are reportedly poorly optimised. There are a number of mods in community forums that improve things and there is a few threads there explain the problem a lot better than I just did.
 
i use core maximizer. it does help, but still never see 100% cpu. so the AI can cause slow downs? i will def look into the mods for that..
 
Just play with humans, the AI freaking sucks anyways and slows the game like a mofo. Really the game was meant to be played by humans, all the excitement of 12 nukes going at you and wondering if your anti nuke missiles will shoot them all down(the ai doesn't do that). Of course I only play 3-4 player games, I dont see slow downs unless there is an AI mucking everything up.
 
Yea your right AI is poorly optimised esp on certain maps and depending how many AI you have etc.

Unfortunately people like myself prefer to set up close to impossible multiple AI games just to work out strategies to win like a puzzles after dozens of games. Sure the odd human game is great fun, but the Sim speed issue has pissed me off for years.

I have tested this with various quad cores and GPU's and its def not hardware related as pretty much settled on in the SC forums.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top