Login

russian armor

A good starting computer setup to play Coh2

4 Sep 2014, 17:35 PM
#21
avatar of Mettiu

Posts: 100

If you wanna play games with good FPS dont spend too much on CPU, RAM, or MB. You should build your rig around good graphics card. You dont need i7 to run games fine. i5 or even i3 will do fine for most. You dont have to pay for 1833MHz RAM. There will be "zero" difference in game if you buy 1600Mhz (I personally prefer better timnings on RAM especially with Intel Haswell). Pick best GPU you can afford and put other stuff together if you cannot afford high end.
4 Sep 2014, 18:01 PM
#22
avatar of PingPing

Posts: 329

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Sep 2014, 17:35 PMMettiu
If you wanna play games with good FPS dont spend too much on CPU, RAM, or MB. You should build your rig around good graphics card. You dont need i7 to run games fine. i5 or even i3 will do fine for most. You dont have to pay for 1833MHz RAM. There will be "zero" difference in game if you buy 1600Mhz (I personally prefer better timnings on RAM especially with Intel Haswell). Pick best GPU you can afford and put other stuff together if you cannot afford high end.


You'd be right if you were talking about any other game than COH2 - unfortunately COH2 needs a beasty CPU AND GPU - its not simply graphics dependent.
4 Sep 2014, 19:05 PM
#23
avatar of Mettiu

Posts: 100



You'd be right if you were talking about any other game than COH2 - unfortunately COH2 needs a beasty CPU AND GPU - its not simply graphics dependent.

I dont have beasty CPU (i5 4690S) which is not high end and game runs fine becasue I have Gainward 780 GTX Phantom GLH. I saved money and didnt get i7 but spent extra 100 bucks on better GPU and thats my point.
and
4 Sep 2014, 19:07 PM
#24
avatar of and

Posts: 140

While CoH does need a good CPU, an i3 should be sufficient if that's what the budget allows for. I am pretty sure that even for CoH, you get the best FPS/$ by mainly prioritizing the graphics card.
4 Sep 2014, 19:26 PM
#25
avatar of voltardark

Posts: 967

So it seem that some people run CoH2 pretty well on a average computer.
Maybe the engine aren't that bad. I think that COH2 is probably one of the most all around demanding game on the market.(Being both GPU and CPU intensive at the same time.)
4 Sep 2014, 19:35 PM
#26
avatar of Sarantini
Honorary Member Badge
Donator 22

Posts: 2181

So it seem that some people run CoH2 pretty well on a average computer.
Maybe the engine aren't that bad. I think that COH2 is probably one of the most all around demanding game on the market.(Being both GPU and CPU intensive at the same time.)

4 Sep 2014, 19:43 PM
#27
avatar of Smaug

Posts: 366

i have r9 270x and can max out @ 1080p with low AA.

only fps drops during blizard to about 45-50.

cpu is i7 930 @ 3.6 and 8 gb ram
4 Sep 2014, 20:08 PM
#28
avatar of PingPing

Posts: 329

jump backJump back to quoted post4 Sep 2014, 19:07 PMand
While CoH does need a good CPU, an i3 should be sufficient if that's what the budget allows for. I am pretty sure that even for CoH, you get the best FPS/$ by mainly prioritizing the graphics card.


I wish that were the case:

http://www.techspot.com/review/689-company-of-heroes-2-performance/page4.html

You could play COH2 with an i3 - but you'd still need a TITAN GPU just to get 41 fps - and thats 41 fps at Medium settings only.

A good quote from the conclusion of that article:

"You also have to question whether CoH 2 should really need more than one GTX Titan for highly playable performance at 1920x1200 on maximum quality. While the game is very detailed and certainly one of the best looking RTS titles we've ever seen, we aren't convinced its visuals warrant that kind of GPU power.

Even on medium quality, when playing at 1920x1200 the performance was much lower than we expected. The GTX 680 and HD 7950 averaged just 41fps, while the more affordable GTX 660 and HD 7790 gave 28fps.

Some players might accept an average of 30fps for this title being an RTS and all, but as a huge fan of these games, I really can't enjoy them with anything less than 60fps, which is a problem with CoH 2."


"Unfortunately, we're a little disappointed with the results overall as CoH 2 seems far too demanding for what it is. Furthermore, for a game that requires such a tremendous amount of graphical power, its lack of multi-GPU support feels like a serious blunder to us."


And remember - optimization and performance got significantly WORSE since the release of WFA.
Vaz
5 Sep 2014, 00:02 AM
#29
avatar of Vaz

Posts: 1158

Oh boy - this is a hard one due to COH2 being both GPU AND CPU intensive.


CPU wise you're constrained to a minimum of an i5 or FX-8350 (If you're AMD inclined) - and Intel prices really haven't dropped, i5-2500k's still hold their value, so you really can't get a cheap option here. Expect to pay about $300 +/- for a good CPU/MB combo.

RAM - I found 16GB to be a "sweet spot" for COH2 - 8GB was noticeably slower.

GPU - Now here you can find value. I'd recommend picking up a used 7950 (which is re-badged as a 270X) for +/- $100 on ebay, or a 7970 (re-badged as a 280X). No reason to buy the "New" card when the old one is just as good, if not better in some ways given the overclocking ability of the 7950 and 7970.

An SSD, while nice, isn't a necessary component for a "starting" computer - but for $99 you can get a Crucial Mx-100 256GB which would be more than enough for an OS and several game/programs.

Still - its really hard to get a "cheap" performance COH2 system.

So assuming $300 for the CPU/MB, $100 for the GPU, $100 RAM, $80 PSU (700W + Seasonic etc), $80 Case (depending on taste) and $100 SSD - you're looking at $760 for a very strong system.


It's true you'll need a little more than the limit for the system, but please tell us how coh2, a 32-bit program, can address more than 4GB? If your windows is choked by other programs running along with coh2 that is something else. 4GB is all you need to MAX coh2. I haven't checked in game memory usage, but I have a feeling it's much less than 4GB. Just at the title screen it only uses 700MB on my system.
5 Sep 2014, 00:06 AM
#30
avatar of Puppetmaster
Patrion 310

Posts: 871



I wish that were the case:

http://www.techspot.com/review/689-company-of-heroes-2-performance/page4.html

You could play COH2 with an i3 - but you'd still need a TITAN GPU just to get 41 fps - and thats 41 fps at Medium settings only.

A good quote from the conclusion of that article:

"You also have to question whether CoH 2 should really need more than one GTX Titan for highly playable performance at 1920x1200 on maximum quality. While the game is very detailed and certainly one of the best looking RTS titles we've ever seen, we aren't convinced its visuals warrant that kind of GPU power.

Even on medium quality, when playing at 1920x1200 the performance was much lower than we expected. The GTX 680 and HD 7950 averaged just 41fps, while the more affordable GTX 660 and HD 7790 gave 28fps.

Some players might accept an average of 30fps for this title being an RTS and all, but as a huge fan of these games, I really can't enjoy them with anything less than 60fps, which is a problem with CoH 2."


"Unfortunately, we're a little disappointed with the results overall as CoH 2 seems far too demanding for what it is. Furthermore, for a game that requires such a tremendous amount of graphical power, its lack of multi-GPU support feels like a serious blunder to us."


And remember - optimization and performance got significantly WORSE since the release of WFA.


I average around 70 - 90 fps with max settings aside from physics on medium @ 1440p with a 2600k and a 290x. I'm guessing those benchmarks were using the ingame benchmark which drops frame rates much lower than you would typically find playing the game. I used to run the game @ 1200p on a 6970 and it ran pretty decent considering how old the card is.
5 Sep 2014, 00:17 AM
#31
avatar of _underscore
Donator 33

Posts: 322

The techspot write-up has very limited usefulness since they don't seem to be aware of the AA options. Their 'Max' results uses 4x SS, which is essentially running higher than 4k resolution. Then they seem surprised to encounter such performance issues.

Also yes it must be the in-game benchmark since even my old 7970 runs 2560 fine in-game. I even use v-sync to keep it capped at 60fps. I think these cards go for about $200 nowadays.
5 Sep 2014, 00:20 AM
#32
avatar of PingPing

Posts: 329

jump backJump back to quoted post5 Sep 2014, 00:02 AMVaz


It's true you'll need a little more than the limit for the system, but please tell us how coh2, a 32-bit program, can address more than 4GB? If your windows is choked by other programs running along with coh2 that is something else. 4GB is all you need to MAX coh2. I haven't checked in game memory usage, but I have a feeling it's much less than 4GB. Just at the title screen it only uses 700MB on my system.


If your OS is 64-bit, you'll be able to take advantage of more than 3GB of RAM.

Try it for yourself - try 8GB then 16GB and see what differences work FOR YOU
5 Sep 2014, 00:21 AM
#33
avatar of PingPing

Posts: 329

The techspot write-up has very limited usefulness since they don't seem to be aware of the AA options. Their 'Max' results uses 4x SS, which is essentially running higher than 4k resolution. Then they seem surprised to encounter such performance issues.

Also yes it must be the in-game benchmark since even my old 7970 runs 2560 fine. I even use v-sync to keep it capped at 60fps. I think these cards go for about $200 nowadays.


7950's are going for +/- $90 on ebay - 7970's a touch more.

And the article is good for my point - the game is poorly optimized.
5 Sep 2014, 00:45 AM
#34
avatar of _underscore
Donator 33

Posts: 322

Well nobody disagrees that the game could use some tweaks at the low end. But think about it - if they don't run any benchmarks without supersampling, the only conclusion we can draw is that supersampling is very demanding for graphics cards. And we already knew that.

But we can still blame Relic for not putting enough information in the options menu :D
Vaz
7 Sep 2014, 08:25 AM
#35
avatar of Vaz

Posts: 1158



If your OS is 64-bit, you'll be able to take advantage of more than 3GB of RAM.

Try it for yourself - try 8GB then 16GB and see what differences work FOR YOU


It doesn't work like that, lol. Why do you think when you open task manager, it distinguishes between 32 bit programs and 64 bit programs? 64 bit windows can access and address terabytes of memory. If your running a 32 bit program within that 64 bit windows environment, that doesn't make the program able to address the 64-bit address range. What windows can do, is provide 4GB of memory for multiple programs up to the amount of memory it has. I mentioned that you may see a difference based on what you run along with Coh2, but for someone that simply loads windows and coh2 only, there isn't going to be a difference between 8 and 16 gigabytes of RAM. This isn't a personal preference, it's science.


If you don't want to believe me, that's fine. There are many sources that will tell you and anyone else interested here the same thing. Here is a link if anyone is interested in understanding the relationship between 32-bit and 64-bit in windows.

Science
16 Sep 2014, 03:29 AM
#36
avatar of ludd3emm

Posts: 292

I need some help from you people who actually knows something about computers.

Computer specs:

GPU: GTX 770

CPU: i5 3570K

RAM: 16GB

SSD Hard drive



Despite having what I've heard is a quite a good computer, CoH2 lags quite hard from time to time, especially in big fights.

I have these graphic settings in the game:

Display Res: 1920x1080 60HZ

Gameplay Res: 66%

Image Quality: Medium

Anti-Aliasing: Off

V-Sync: On

Texture Detail: Medium

Snow Detail: Low

Physics: Medium

I also have sound quality low.


Anyone know what is bottlenecking my performance? I wish I could overclock my CPU but my MOBO is too cheap for that. A clan mate with a very similar computer to mine (little better CPU and GPU but not noticeable) runs this game on almost max settings and he got worse internet then me and he can still stream with super good quality.

Anyone having an idea?
16 Sep 2014, 05:54 AM
#37
avatar of tengen

Posts: 432

You shouldn't be having any problems with that rig. How are your temperatures while running games?
16 Sep 2014, 11:26 AM
#38
avatar of MilkaCow

Posts: 577

ludd3emm - What kind of lag do you experience? Is it a FPS drop or is it units freezing?
First one means the lag is actually due to the performance of your PC.
Second one means it's due to server connection. Using WLan, having a router with a lot of gadgets hooked to it, Noun gnawing on the server cable again, ... there can be many reasons. Speed of your connection alone isn't everything.

16 Sep 2014, 12:00 PM
#39
avatar of tuvok
Benefactor 115

Posts: 786

game works great at 1080p on my 2nd pc with a 270x and an old cpu (overclocked E8400).
16 Sep 2014, 12:02 PM
#40
avatar of tuvok
Benefactor 115

Posts: 786

I need some help from you people who actually knows something about computers.

try turning vsync off. also, check ssd space to be at least 15% free
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

484 users are online: 1 member and 483 guests
joelng1989
9 posts in the last 24h
37 posts in the last week
152 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45057
Welcome our newest member, Kodgbsaref
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM