Spring RTS Engine

plz advise

in fact could you guys also tell me which proc is best?

nvidia seems to be more stable.
but can crash too.

dual core, quad core, what GHZ? make and model?

c'mon... 10 views, probably gamers, with newer systems and no responses

do i have to post pics of girls?

no idea. my shit is old.
i think spring does support dual core now? not sure about quad.
maybe tell how much $$$ you want to spend and what stuff you might continue to use so others can give detailled advice..

girls please yes.

there is always a happy medium, and thats what I want.

I'm looking at the Radeon Ud HD 5770 850MHZ 1GB 4.8GHZ but the rest of the pc is up to you guys

You have asked a vague question to which there is no correct answer. Also, not every person who plays spring is a hardware expert.

get the best nVidia graphics card you can, get the best CPU you can...

you should be getting a duel or better CPU and 64bit so you can have more ram...

spring (with the exception of the under-development multicore support build) doesn't really need more then 1 core but Windows 7 sure runs better with it so thats good... also make sure your CPU's individual core clockspeed is high because spring is CPU intensive.

Dual-core now (single-core-processing-power uber alles), but SMPSpring is a WIP so we don't know what the future holds.

nVidia > ATI for spring... but no idea what exact chipset to go with.

I have Asus GeForce 8800 GTS and it seems to work great for all the shaders etc. But I guess this card is already a bit old...

I'd go with Nvidia anyways since it has best compatibility and support.

yeah, Nvidia is less crashy with drivers usually in spring, and under linux, it is nearly a must, as there ATI is even much worse with drivers.

for CPU, i recommend AMD, as it is usually half the price for about the same thing. for spring, you gain nothing with more then two cores. as was already said, it will will not be able to fully use two, and more cores mean more power consumption. also here though, it depends on what else you use the PC for.

gts 250

spring ran smooth on my old 1.8ghz core2duo with 8600gt on medium graphics anything better then that (which is just about anything these days) would be more than enough for just spring. ATM im using e6750 c2d with 9600gt and that runs spring flawlessly, 400fps at beginning of game at medium graphics and drops to about 30 at the largest of games. I would recommend getting a quad core (for other things) but all you need for spring is dual core, I hear AMD Phenom 2 are good also now days and way cheaper, but dunno first hand. Defiantly go Nvidia for spring, I've never had any graphics related problems with nvidia and spring

If you'd posted this in Off Topic I could've given you a good answer sooner.

For Spring here are your issues:

1) CPU is critical. You need a fast, preferably dual or quad core CPU to get good performance especially as games get bigger/longer. Anything that says "core 2 duo" on the box will be perfectly good. If you don't have something similar or equivalent, it's more than likely that any speed problems you have will be due to the CPU being too slow rather than the GPU. Any Phenom II or even Phenom I should probably be fine.

2) If your main concern is Spring, you don't need a really good GPU and I'd recommend something from Nvidia <Removed Due To Offensive Flaming - Neddiedrow> That said, most people don't have too bad a time, we just can't use silly high-end things like dynamic water for instance (sometimes). So a GT 240 or better would probably be perfectly adequate and more importantly, very cheap. Alternatively, anything at all from the Radeon 5xxx series will run Spring perfectly well, as will a Radeon 4770 or better I'd imagine. A Geforce 9600 or 8600 would be more than adequate if you can pick one up used, IIRC, but these are now quite outdated. Ebay, Kijiji, Craigslist, etc, could be searched to find a bargain 4870 or 4890 card to give you something more modern and powerful without going over $150 or so.

3) This is not an especially good time to buy a graphics card. Wait another month if possible, as Nvidia will have launched the Fermi series (hopefully?) by that date. Unless they miss another deadline. Again. For the eleventeenth time. Fermi's going to be a crock of shit, but it will likely mean price reductions for older Nvidia cards... maybe, which might mean slightly-reduced prices for ATI cards... maybe. The thing is, it really is going to be a crock of shit so there's also a pretty good chance that nothing will happen at all. In any case, a month isn't too long to wait.

4) If you do not have a PCI-Express slot and must use AGP instead, investigate the highest-end Radeon 3xxx series card you can find. Some of these had AGP variants and they were the last, best AGP cards released.

edit: wait a minute, you're bitching about a 4 hour time lag between a post being made and someone giving you a helpful reply? I take it back, you need something by Matrox.

just to re-ensure you: 4 cores will not bring the slightest advantage over 2 cores for spring, not even for the (not totally stable yet) multi-threaded version of spring (GML-Sim).
The ATI < Nvidia for spring thing is purely technical, and has little to do with spring or its devs.
the rest of what Caydr said is fine i guess (did not read all of it).

I'm recommending quad core if possible because it would allow people to run things in the background with less of an impact on gameplay. For example, leaving their photoshop, firefox, mirc, utorrent, max, etc sessions open, as I often do. Or even watching a TV show at the same time so the boring parts of the game aren't so boring.

It's also just a better buy and more future-proof, that's all. Dual core is a hundred times better than single core, but quad core means now you've got all the performance of dual core plus the ability to not dedicate your entire computer to a game in order to get the best performance.

If the price is less than 50% more (which it often is), go for the quad. I have a fast dual core but if I could take it back and pay 50% more without eating return fees and such and get a quad core, with the knowledge I have now I'd definitely do it.

There are also games now that actually benefit from quad core, unlike a couple years ago. I think I remember reading that Bioshock 2 for example will load 4 i7 cores to about 50% on average. A (2 core) C2D would likely be loaded more like 125% per core on average, you'd have to turn settings off.

http://starcraft.incgamers.com/blog/com ... phic-cards - nvidia 196.75 drivers kills gpus. just FYI.

I've recently moved to a phenom II 965 BE & DDR3 1600 from an athlon X2 4400+ DDR 400. I have kept the same gfx card (9800gt, which is just a rebranded 8800gt).

I now play at 1920 x 1200 as opposed to 1280x 1024, and at higher settings. The jump in frame rate has been huge, so i was clearly bottlenecked by the processor & ram. Even in the biggest games my framerate has been perfectly playable, GPU gets taxed toweards the end, but CPU doesn't break a sweat. Overclocks very well aswell.

I would go AMD all the way tbh, beats Intel handsdown as far as price / performance is concerned. Quad core athlon II's are very cheap and will serve you well both for spring and other games and tasks.

nVidia 9600 GSO here, works fine; paid $85 for it from tiger direct on sale, this was last summer.

big slowdown, at least on my system, comes from CPU.

for my next upgrade i will probably be getting a new mobo, and an intel i3 or i5 processor

My advice is best.