New PC build vs Doom

[Pirx]

I'm thinking currently about building a new pc.

 

Currently I'm on a 4670k @ 4.2 or 4.3 GHz, 16 GB 1666 MHz RAM and a  gtx 1070.

 

New one might come in a few months when the 9700k or 9600k (depends on prices aND relative performance) is available, faster RAM about 3000 MHz, and either a used 1080ti or an rtx 2070, should be at about the same level, whatever i can get cheaper. I'm not in about hurry though.

 

Now why I'm asking such a question about a new machine on a forum dedicated to an ancient game: it's what I play mostly, and it's still cpu limited. And it annoys the hell out of me when it dares stuttering in a slaughter scenario  (gzdoom usually)

 

Does anyone have a comparison specifically for doom ports?  On a cannon lake series processor. I just want to know if this new build  makes any sense considering my use for it ( yes, I also have modern games, would be nice if I also found time for playing them  :p )

 

The 9000 series should bring some extra % IPC and overclock higher due to being soldered.

 

Sorry for little research but it's a pain for me with only  a phone. Thanks. 

[wesleyjohnson]

Any port that stutters on your current machine, is going to keep stuttering no matter what speed hardware you get.

There is something that causes a stall, and it is not going to go away just because you overclock more.  It will just use more clock cycles when it does stall.

 

On DoomLegacy, I gave it a control to limit the number of sprites that are drawn per frame (closest have priority).  This fixed the slowdown on wads with hundreds of monsters.

You just adjust it until you get the response that you prefer.

There was a frame rate comparison some years ago, presented in this forum.   The only thing I remember is that DoomLegacy had the highest frame rate, (due to careful programming he said).

 

I run 1.6 GHz CPU, with 900 MB memory.  I play at 800x600, so that is adequate, even for OpenGL.

Doubling the resolution requires 4 times the CPU speed, and video card speed, to keep the same responsiveness.  Video cards are already maxed out, and they are the bottleneck for OpenGL, not the CPU speed.  (With software rendering it is almost all CPU speed, but I expect that you are using OpenGL rendering.)

This means that you are not going to get much improvement for all that expensive hardware.  You get more effect by reducing the resolution you play, even a little.

 

 

Edited September 3, 2018 by wesleyjohnson

[chungy]

GPU strength will matter most for GZDoom. the 1080 or 2080 cards should do fine.

[jval]

You should first identify the bottleneck.

Try to lower the screen resolution.

If the problem appears even in lower screen resolution modes, then it's the CPU that causes the bottleneck.

If the problem disappears then try to invest in faster GPU, rather than CPU.
 

 

 

[OliveTree]

"But can it run Doom?"

[Cant delete my DW account]

Zandronum is a better alternative to GZDOOM in terms of performance.

[kb1]

7 hours ago, FraxGamer314 said:

Zandronum is a better alternative to GZDOOM in terms of performance.

On which CPUs? What resolutions? Software or hardware rendering? Which video cards/sound cards? What settings? What maps? Singleplayer, multiplayer? Under what memory conditions? With how many free threads?

 

I'm not trying to be harsh, or picky here. Each port does literally thousands of different things, and the speed at which it can accomplish those tasks depends on all the above factors, and many more.

 

Maybe you could accurately say that, on average, on your computer(s), with the setup(s) you use, and the maps you play, one port appears to perform better. But, generally, every developer tries to make his/her port as fast as possible, for each of those tasks, with varying levels of success.

 

Isn't Zandronum a modification of GZDoom anyway? Doesn't it frequently synchronize with the GZDoom codebase? If that's true, they should both be similar in performance, right?

 

Regarding OP question: You should be able to do some profiling to determine where your bottlenecks occur. In Windows, a crude Task Manager check should reveal the state of your CPU, and let you determine if you're currently bound by CPU. Load up a map that "stutters slightly", and see if the CPU is pegged. And, there should be some profiling tools available for your graphics card. If you do hardware rendering, you can load up that same map, and reduce some graphics options to determine if the GPU is the bottleneck.

 

Becoming intimately familiar with these two values, during setting and map changes should, over time, paint a picture for you about the state of these two most important factors. If you notice that frame rate goes way up when, say, anti-aliasing is turned off might suggest that your video card is struggling. However, if this and other similar graphics features don't drop the frame rate below your acceptable level, but a more populated map does, your CPU might be struggling.

 

The devil is in the details. The true knowledge only comes after spending time studying these factors, during the changing of various adjustable settings. Notice which settings have drastic immediate effects, and this will help pinpoint what hardware limitations are in effect.

[Danfun64]

Zandronum 3.0 is based on the GZDoom 1.8.6 codebase. It doesn't have some of the rendering changes the latest versions of GZDoom have, and doesn't support ZScript. That it has somewhat lower system requirements than GZDoom 3.5.1 isn't that surprising.