GOW 2 slow as hell in GSdx SOFTWARE mode.

[Cpn. Bravo]

There isn't other explanation for this

The explanation was given to you already, more than once. You didn't understand how software mode worked when you made this thread and you still don't seem to.

I have an e8600 that I sometimes run at 4.5GHz. The results will vary from game to game, but I always get significantly worse performance in software mode because I'm only using a dual core, not a quad. When I use software mode on my Q6600 at 3.6GHz, I get very nice speeds, significantly higher than with my e8600 in software mode. Although as expected, hardware mode is usually still better.

Until you get a quad core at the same clock speed as him, you're not going to have anywhere near the same performance.

As for the 9600GT vs 8800M GTS, I don't know what an 8800M is, but if it's the equivalent of either the 8800GT or the 8800GTS for desktop PCs, then it's much better than a 9600GT. I have GoW and GoW2 but they're still wrapped up so I don't know if GoW is GPU intensive or not. It's still another difference to consider.

Before calling him a liar you should make sure to do your research first.

Edit- The 8800M GTS is a little bit weaker than the 9600GT. It has slower core, shader, and memory clocks, but has the same amount of stream processors. It also uses a lot less power, but that's to be expected.

8800 GTS: 62,08 GB/s

The number you posted there is the maximum memory bandwidth of an 8800GTS, which is a desktop graphics card, and not the 8800M GTS, which is a notebook graphics card. The correct number for your card would be 51.2GB/s, and even then there are more things to consider than just that.

[Gentleman]

Son... Kainbr gets 40 FPS with SOFTWARE mode on a CORE 2 DUO EXTREME @ 3.6GHZ !! He is not using a quad core... READ AGAIN before trying to be a smart-ass. Unless a CORE 2 DUO EXTREME has 4 cores and I don't know about it. I know that a quad core can use 3 threads on SOFTWARE mode and gain more speed, I KNOW THAT.

I thought he was lying but he showed some pics, and it seems to be true. So what ??? You gotta a problem with that ? Go somewhere else then.

Read this Smart-Ass, this is Kainbr3's CPU:

Intel Core 2 Extreme Mobile X9000 Processor

Features & Specifications:

* 2.8GHz Clock Speed, Dual-Core

* "Penryn" Core Architecture

* 45nm Manufaturing Technology

* 128 kB L1 Cache (Data/Instruction)

* 6 MB Shared L2 Cache (Full Speed)

* 800MHz Front Side Bus Speed

* Socket-478 Micro-FCPGA Form Factor Design

* 1.225V Default Core Voltage

* Supports 32/64-bit Processing (EM64T)

* Supports SSE / SSE2 / SSE3 / SSE4.1

* Supports Intel Speedstep / C1,C2, C3, C4 and Intel Enhanced Deeper Sleep and Deep Power-Down states

* Supports Execute Disable (xD) Bit

Also Kainbr probably overclocked his CPU to 3.6 GHZ:

The X9000 is the fastest dual-core processor available for notebook computers, and has a price to match. Unlike most notebook processors, the mobile Intel Extreme processors can be overclocked from the BIOS (if the notebook manufacturer allows it). In this review, I will take the X9000 from its stock 2.8GHz clock to an incredibly fast 3.2GHz. The last time we saw a notebook processor around 3GHz was during the Pentium IV dark ages......

http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=4248

[Cpn. Bravo]

Son... Kainbr gets 40 FPS on SOFTWARE mode on a core 2 duo extreme @ 3.6GHZ !! He is not using a quad core... READ AGAIN before trying to be a smart-ass.

I'm not trying to be a smart ass. I can see that the problem that spawned this thread is exactly what I thought it was, and it doesn't have anything to do with any number of cores in a CPU. I know what an x9000 is too.

When I looked up his notebook, I noticed that the parts were significantly different from what they should have been, which meant that he, or someone else must have changed them. Everything except for the graphics card is different. In addition, I was suspicious of the memory bandwidth, but I didn't know for sure if it was correct, which is why I wrote the third paragraph. At that point, I assumed that if he could not tell the difference between his graphics card and the desktop version, that it might be that the x9000 is a way to identify that he has a core 2 extreme(such as someone saying they have a e8xxx CPU). I can't see why anyone would put a dual core extreme into a laptop, so that affected what I assumed. I still don't know if that's really the case, but just in case, let's go ahead and say that I'm wrong for assuming that.

That doesn't affect anything else in my post but that one sentence. I took that into consideration before I even wrote my post, which is why I left that out of the first paragraph. Nothing I wrote there is dependent on him having a dual or quad core. It's nothing more than an explanation of how software mode differs from hardware mode and that you would not accept that people could have a higher fps than you. You did not understand the difference, so you made this thread before even realizing that the number of cores mattered, and if other people told you that they got better speeds than you you immediately wrote them off as lying and told them to "get real." I'd say you stopped doing that when you were told that the number of cores matter, but even in your last post, you put that sarcastic smilie at the end as if you still don't believe him.

That's what all of my post is about except for that one single sentence that makes up the second paragraph, which if I'm wrong, I have no problem admitting I'm wrong since I structured my whole post as to avoid that issue instead of making it directly about it. It's not what spawned this thread so I didn't want to focus on it. I read everything perfectly fine. You had a problem with people getting higher fps than you, and I commented on that.

If you say that you finally understand the difference now, then that's great. That was only one of two points I made, but it's better than nothing.

Edit- There is no such thing as a Core 2 Duo Extreme. They are all called "Core 2 Extreme." That is why I was leaving room for the possibility that it was either a dual or quad core. It could have been a typo, it could have been a generalization, or it could have been that he simply did not know. That's why I avoided mentioning it except for that one sentence.

[Gentleman]

I understand that a long time ago. Someone explained that to me right in the beggining of the thread. Thank you. What bothers me is that Kain is able to get 40 FPS without VU Skip with SOFTWARE mode in his Core 2 Mobile X9000.

[Cpn. Bravo]

If you say that the only thing that still bothers you is the VU skip, then I'll take that and show myself out.

[Gabest]

e8400, 12-15 fps on the ship at the beginning. (ah, it was gow 2, tested 1 )

[sorek]

My CPU (signature) 8-15FPS in GoW2

[kainbr3]

I'm runing at 3.6ghz, but without overclock in GPU in the ss's, but overclocking the GPU the fps max is 4x, no difference. =-(

[chuuey]

can anyone explain to me why the Software renderer is so much more accurate than the Hardware one? Is it because Hardware mode requiers some sort of implementation supported by the card directly? Or simply it's further developed?

[Nexxxus]

can anyone explain to me why the Software renderer is so much more accurate than the Hardware one? Is it because Hardware mode requiers some sort of implementation supported by the card directly? Or simply it's further developed?

The problem is the API such as DirectX or OpenGL.
They can't handle the GS instructions, so it must be translated to DirectX Calls first.
The thing is that the GS uses some effects which are really hard to realize with directX.

A Software renderer is independent, you can fully use the GS instructions without a hacky translation to Directx.
This also gives you more freedom.