Yeah, the game is pretty heavy on the CPU as well as GPU if you let it. Sorry for the late reply. Since the last update, I've installed all my old applications and kept the OS clean (no start-up processes). After a month of usage, I can say for basic tasks within the OS, the system feels a tad snappier under 32-bit than 64-bit. Unfortunately, I don't have any numbers to back this up. The Windows Experience Index remains at 3.2. My 64-bit install was only two months old. As for Company of Heroes, there was no improvement in performance. The numbers were generally the same with Alpha 1 or 2. I still have an occasional warning during heavy combat, although maybe a bit less often. 4v4 (8 player) games remain problematic.
I think it's time for a new machine. :) On Jun 21, 11:57 am, FrozenLord <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, I ran the test on 800x600 and the absolute minimum of details > (set to low or even none when possible and moving the model detail > slider to the very left end). > So one thing is sure now: Company of Heroes relies far more on CPU > than on GPU. > > On Jun 4, 6:32 am, burgerbot3k <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Interesting results, thanks. They seem consistent across drivers. Are > > you running at 800x600 as well? > > > A hard drive just arrived to replace my current one. I plan to install > > Windows 7 32-bit and then run the benchmark again. Maybe we can still > > gain a few fps by going 32-bit. Since the maximum supported memory is > > 4 GB for the 945GM, I figure 32-bit and 64-bit are interchangeable. :) > > > I looked at the specs for your GM965 chipset and it shows the max > > memory as 4 GB on Intel's site but 8 GB on Wikipedia. Strange. > > > Will return in a day or two with new results. > > > On Jun 3, 4:29 pm,FrozenLord<[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I've done my tests on the standard installation (no changes to any reg > > > values) with the Steam version of CoH (incl. both add ons) and got > > > these results: > > > > Standard Driver from Windows Update > > > 18.3 - 33.3 - 06.7 > > > 18.2 - 33.3 - 07.7 > > > > Alpha 2 > > > 21.7 - 61.0 - 05.9 > > > 21.9 - 60.4 - 06.4 > > > > Sigma 3.0 > > > 21.5 - 60.3 - 04.9 > > > 21.4 - 59.9 - 08.0 > > > > Sigma 3.1 > > > 21.5 - 58.3 - 06.8 > > > 21.7 - 59.4 - 07.9 > > > > I've run the test a second time right after the first run-through > > > (second row). > > > MD 1.1 is not included since the version I found wouldn't install on > > > my PC (giving an error stating that my Windows was not supported - > > > although the driver is the x64 version)... > > > > My system is: > > > Intel U7600 (Core 2 Duo @ 1,2 GHZ) > > > 4 GB Ram > > > Intel 965 X3100 > > > Windows 7 x64 > > > > On Jun 2, 1:10 pm,FrozenLord<[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > Thank you for adding values for the Sigma v3.0 :) > > > > > I'll try to post the same benchmarks with my laptop (U7600 Core 2 Duo > > > > @ 1,2 Ghz, 4 GB Ram, X3100, Windows 7) later today ;) > > -- 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS
