Show CPU model ID in lobbies

As far as I can tell, this was already once suggested but rejected. Still, I repeat it.
The CPU performance test in its current form is pretty much useless. It only measures, albeit in a very artifical way, the CPU peak performance. However, given more laptop users show up left and right, with quite amazing short-burst peak performance, the respective scores are no longer a useful benchmark. A number of times we experience slow downs at the 20 minute marks, because thermal throtteling kicks in on a single player.

This problem becomes increasingly annoying. A host should be able to decide whether he wants to allow mobile CPUs or not. Relying on the "community common sense" did not work so far.

No one ever made a better test. Thats why we dont have one. And its not a priority for ppl maintaining game code.

This was the last issue on github about cpu benchmark:
https://github.com/FAForever/fa/issues/2434

Please read my comment:
https://github.com/FAForever/fa/issues/2434#issuecomment-385811821

This could explain why a CPU benchmark is useless in any cases
We should test memory speed.

@speed2 When it comes to thermal throtteling one would need to have high load for a significant amount of time to benchmark it. That makes such a benchmark unpractical. Therefore I suggested showing the mere CPU model.

For people who don't want to learn all the CPU models benchmark at least gives something. If the problem is thermal throttling after 20 minutes then what difference does the CPU make anyway, unless you know the cooler it's attached to?

You would know a mobile CPU is in use and simply kick its user, because it's somewhat pointless?

Only if you have all the CPU models memorized. And even then, are you sure every laptop CPU is a distinct model from a tower? And even then, who is to say that every laptop CPU can't play every game?

but if, if, but and what about the 1%? And ....

Stop the bs pls. Ppl that want to play with lag can just ignore it.

I suggested this earlier (to display CPU model) and just as now, the excuses not to do it are ridiculous.

Very simple example; ALL the Intel -U CPU's will throttle. That's simply a given because at full boost (that they use for the benchmark) can only be sustained a very short time before power delivery and heat become a problem. For ppl using laptops where the biggest task is opening a 100 page PDF this is excellent and manufacturers can skimp down on power circuits, cooling and the consumer gets a cheaper, lighter and thinner laptop. Not suited for FAF though.

Bigger games in FAF are ruined by ppl with shitty throttling systems. There should be something in place that would override the shown cpu score for these players. That includes the ppl that turn on their software streaming after running the bench, like lilSidlil.

@Pearl12 said in Show CPU model ID in lobbies:

Only if you have all the CPU models memorized. And even then, are you sure every laptop CPU is a distinct model from a tower? And even then, who is to say that every laptop CPU can't play every game?

Your argument boils down to "perfection is not easily achieved, so we should not improve".

@Uveso said in Show CPU model ID in lobbies:

This was the last issue on github about cpu benchmark:
https://github.com/FAForever/fa/issues/2434

Please read my comment:
https://github.com/FAForever/fa/issues/2434#issuecomment-385811821

This could explain why a CPU benchmark is useless in any cases
We should test memory speed.

The first link; hilarious. A Q6600 user still living in about 2006...

The second link; false. CPU speed is still an issue. Thermal throttling is all over the place. Also ppl load up their CPU with things like VLC, Youtube, streaming. The existence of "fast i7's" does not mean everyone has one.

Also; the older i7's are simply too slow anyway. The cheapest current-gen Celeron (the G5900) is faster than the i7-920 for example. 2nd gen i5 is already faster than 1st gen i7.

@jcvjcvjcvjcv said in Show CPU model ID in lobbies:

@Pearl12 said in Show CPU model ID in lobbies:

Only if you have all the CPU models memorized. And even then, are you sure every laptop CPU is a distinct model from a tower? And even then, who is to say that every laptop CPU can't play every game?

Your argument boils down to "perfection is not easily achieved, so we should not improve"

More like, "Your idea would only work in some cases and it would be unreliable even in the cases it does work, effectively making it moot." I'm not saying perfection is not easily achieved, just that your idea doesn't actually work.

Nice straw man though, that's one for the textbooks.

To expand (/explain again since you insist on diluting to logical fallacies): people don't know CPU models and therefore displaying CPU models is not helpful. It's easy from your chair since you apparently know so much about them to argue that other people do, but honestly, they are just numbers to most people. If you really want to prove that it would be useful, create a survey of random CPU models and see if the average FAF player can determine which one will lag. If indeed they can, I'll concede.

Or, if you know so much about CPU models, then maybe you should make a mod that just displays a checkmark if a certain computer will lag. There's perfection. It would require a lot of work on your part, but I think it would be really cool. Do it! (I'm 100% serious. That would be really cool. Or is perfection too hard to achieve?)

@Pearl12 said in Show CPU model ID in lobbies:

@jcvjcvjcvjcv said in Show CPU model ID in lobbies:

@Pearl12 said in Show CPU model ID in lobbies:

Only if you have all the CPU models memorized. And even then, are you sure every laptop CPU is a distinct model from a tower? And even then, who is to say that every laptop CPU can't play every game?

Your argument boils down to "perfection is not easily achieved, so we should not improve"

More like, "Your idea would only work in some cases and it would be unreliable even in the cases it does work, effectively making it moot." I'm not saying perfection is not easily achieved, just that your idea doesn't actually work.

Nice straw man though, that's one for the textbooks.

To expand (/explain again since you insist on diluting to logical fallacies): people don't know CPU models and therefore displaying CPU models is not helpful. It's easy from your chair since you apparently know so much about them to argue that other people do, but honestly, they are just numbers to most people. If you really want to prove that it would be useful, create a survey of random CPU models and see if the average FAF player can determine which one will lag. If indeed they can, I'll concede.

Or, if you know so much about CPU models, then maybe you should make a mod that just displays a checkmark if a certain computer will lag. There's perfection. It would require a lot of work on your part, but I think it would be really cool. Do it! (I'm 100% serious. That would be really cool. Or is perfection too hard to achieve?)

Showing CPU make and model would be an improvement over the current situation. It is not unreliable. Currently there are too many fake low bench scores. And most of those are laptop players.
You do not need to memorize all the models, nor are there that many.

Your argument about that some average does not know something goes pretty flat on it's face as this whole game is something very few people master. The people that do not care about lag can continue their normal business of playing with players with 400 cpu score.

One CPU information is shown one could make a mod to display a checkmark yes...
But it's not really needed. The passmark list is a pretty good guide.

The best thing would be a bench score derived from previous actual performance. But that is very hard to get, while just doing the next best thing (displaying cpu model) will give 90% of the result for 5% of the effort.

But as long as nobody ever gets banned for faking the bench number..........

Just hand out free 8600Ks for everyone

@AchievedCheetah8 said in Show CPU model ID in lobbies:

@jcv

Stop playing Dual Gap and it wouldn't lag shitter

Setons lags just as bad with ppl with shitty cpu.

Even 3v3 Ozone..

Showing the mere cpu model seems like a thing that would only help a very small amount of the community to judge the cpu power. I see how ppl get kicked cause somebody else thought their cpu name sounded shitty also not sure if the lua code can even read such values.. Idoubt it

With 6v6 games you only need 1 out of 12 players to understand it

@jcvjcvjcvjcv said in Show CPU model ID in lobbies:

@Pearl12 said in Show CPU model ID in lobbies:

Only if you have all the CPU models memorized. And even then, are you sure every laptop CPU is a distinct model from a tower? And even then, who is to say that every laptop CPU can't play every game?

Showing CPU make and model would be an improvement over the current situation. It is not unreliable. Currently there are too many fake low bench scores. And most of those are laptop players.
You do not need to memorize all the models, nor are there that many.

If you are asking for cpu model in addition to speed score, then sure. Go ahead.

@jcvjcvjcvjcv said in Show CPU model ID in lobbies:

Your argument about that some average does not know something goes pretty flat on it's face as this whole game is something very few people master. The people that do not care about lag can continue their normal business of playing with players with 400 cpu score.

It doesn't have to fall flat on its face, because you're not standing up to begin with. You have no data to back up your argument. You have, once again, made a generalization. "Oh, people master this game, therefore they must know all the CPU models." Orly.

Where. is. your. data?

@jcvjcvjcvjcv

You must be playing with some very bad cpus are smth, but I do understand that thermothrottling is a bitch.

I'd like to add to this topic that the benchmark being used and throttling are two different problems that would require to be solved separately.

And, next to that, I'd love to add in that:

• You can fake the benchmark score and therefore probably the CPU model too.
• Considering we are 'power users' according to you, overclocking OR underclocking a CPU wouldn't be taken into account if you show the CPU model. Especially underclocking is a powerful technique for laptops to prevent the throttling you mention. Therefore your new technique is also unreliable, as I believe Pearl is trying to show to you

I thought of a version of 'benchmarking' that would be a lot better: every minute throughout the sim you compare the sim rates of all the players in the game. You get a number between -1 and 1, depending if you are below, on or above average.

At the end of the game this number can be merged with previous games - allowing you to show some form of pattern that is more reliable than the current test. If your CPU does perform on average well then this number would be positive. If your CPU performs averagely poor then this number would be negative.

This is all done locally and stored similarly to how the benchmark is stored. As of writing I am not sure how that is stored - there may be a flaw there.

I think it would help best in combination with the current benchmark, which needs to be retrofitted slightly to check for memory speed because that is in fact the major bottleneck for CPU's if no throttling is happening:

• https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/The-Gap-between-Processor-and-Memory-Speeds-Carvalho/6ebec8701893a6770eb0e19a0d4a732852c86256?p2df

From a practical point of view, @speed2 Do you know if there is a way to retrieve the information shown in the console command ren_ShowNetworkStats? It contains all the information this would require.

@Jip that sounds amazing.

How would it work across maps? I have an older CPU (2012) that doesn't lag except in huge games like Setons. Since we know the average is susceptible to outliers, I'm wondering if playing the occasional Setons would make it look as if I have a laggy CPU when on 95% of maps it's not a problem.

I'm guessing people would just learn that a certain number is likely to lag on certain maps? Like, if my average is -0.3 (to pull an example out of thin air), that's probably fine for up to 10x10s, but might be worrisome on a longer 20x20.

You can make it map (size) or player number dependent. I just need access to the data in that console command. It is in the client, just maybe out of reach.