Some people might be experiencing game slow down during heavy shot outs. I have found lots of way how to make game smoother even by 30 more fps.

Changing your resolution

First of all anyone who says that lowering your resolution make game smoother don't listen to him. It is bull♥♥♥♥.

The lower your resolution is the higher is your CPU usage

The higher your resolution is the lower is your GPU usage.


As you can see, this game doesn't need good GPU at all. It needs good CPU. This is when making your resolution as high as possible comes in. It will not make game look better but also smoother.


Editing DeltaTime


Delta time is amount of time taken to render individual frame.

That means every time we make the value higher, it will simulate less frames per second.

Making the value too high makes the game more choppy as it will skip more frames.

To change it go to: Data Realms\Base.rte\settings.ini

Best value is 0.02 You wont notice any differences except the big fps jump. If it wont help make the value higher (my is 0.0211111)


Disabling Vsync

Disabling vsync is important at most of the games. Vsync matches your monitors refresh rate/frequency, with a 3D applications frame rate.

In other words that means it tries to make so game wont get more FPS as your own monitor. This prevents to so called "screen tearing".

Disabling is relatively easy. Go to \Data Realms\Base.rte\AllegroConfig. Find line disable_vsync =

Behind = put yes so it will look like this: disable_vsync = yes

[i]Editing RealToSimCap

Further testing reveals that changing simcap improves performance by 2 or 3 frames

Not exactly sure what does it do, but i see no difference in game except improved frame rate.


Hope i helped and feel free to post more tweaks.

Been there done that....
And better if I may add.

Also, you're wrong.

Delta time is the amount of time between two PHYSICS calculations, AKA if you make it too high it will have too much time for rendering the actual image and skip a few physics.

Making the screen bigger is actually more bull♥♥♥♥ than making it smaller. More pixels=more ♥♥♥♥ to render=more render time. Simple as that.

Actually, enabling vsync should make no difference, I'm not even sure if it works in the first place, I've had some pretty awkward framerates without fiddling with it. like 18(which you can't divide 60 by...)

Real to sim had something to do with how the game translates it's simulation speed to it's frame rate. The cap was at which framerate it would stop going faster. As in, the game doesn't go any faster after, I think, 50/60 frames per second.

First of all 90% of what you said is bullcrap. If you don't know what you are saying then PPLZZ shut up.

Bigger resolution higher gpu usage lower resolution smaller CPU usage. Simple as that. Test it yourself. If you say something without testing it you must be complete retard or you must be trolling. Also this one is proved



That is what exactly i said. Dunno what are you trying here.

And this one made me think that i am talking with biggest ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ on the internet. Enabling vsync can improve your fps even by 30. I tested it on multiple games and this game is not exception.

About that thread. How could you say it is better if it has same things as me ? Again, you say some bull♥♥♥♥ but you never say the reason WHY.

If you wona keep on acting smart then go on. So far you have showed only your equitably small amount of brain.

Well this thread is off to a great start. In the interets of science I'll test out your fixes later today and help provide some hard proof one way or the other. Both of you need to calm it down, however.

Judging from when the account was made and the seemingly great amount of "know-how" of the OP on CC... Troll?
Could be wrong, just speculating

Lowering game resolution helps a lot. Cortex Command doesn't use the GPU at all, so when you've got a smaller resolution, the CPU can spend more resources calculating physics than rendering the image. This has been posted before, why do we need another thread? Oh and you should work on your spelling.

The other thread is loads better because it's well-written, easily comprehensible and it explains everything much better than you do. It's also much older and contains the same stuff, so I don't see why we need another topic.

That is stupid. Where did you get this from ? I am pretty sure the bigger your resolution is the higher your gpu intensity is. So higher resolution = smaller cpu usage.


Also what did i spell wrong ?

Want to, shootouts, render individual frames. You should also use the apostrophe more and improve your grammar a bit.

It's common knowledge that Cortex Command is highly unoptimized. It doesn't use more than one core in your CPU, and it doesn't use the GPU at all.
Why would a larger resolution make it use less CPU processing power? Since the game doesn't use the GPU at all, a larger resolution gives the CPU just a bigger image to render for each frame.

Well thanks for fixing me but "wona" is slang of want to. Also we are on internet i don't really think it is necessary to use apostrophe it but thanks anyway.


Ok again. Cortex command doesn't use GPU that means that means we can overpower gpu with high resolutions as much as we want. We need to free the cpu. More cpu power = more frames

Easy profit. I most likely play all games on high resolution due to fact that i have dual core cpu and good graphic card.



Also you said that CC uses only one core. So does it mean that i can double the performance by making it use both of them ?

What Natti is saying is that as far as we know, all rendering is done on the CPU, the only thing that the GPU does is take the rendered image and pass it through to your display. However, that is knowledge from several builds ago, and I don't know if Data has shifted any rendering to the GPU, so that's why I'm going to run some tests later on today.

If all rendering is still done on the CPU, then a higher resolution would directly impact FPS, but if all rendering is done by the GPU, then up until the GPU is overloaded, higher resolutions would have no effect upon FPS. In either case I do not believe that higher resolutions would positiviely impact FPS, it merely affects your viewable area of the map.

But we shall see.

EDIT: Also, due to the way Cortex is coded, it cannot make use of more than one core. However, if you have more than one core, your OS may take advantage of its knowledge of this fact and shift all other processes onto one core, and Cortex onto another.

That is entirely wrong. CC renders everything on the CPU and outputs the image data to the GPU to display to your monitor. If you don't understand what I just said or what anyone else said let me cut it out for you.

The CPU does all the work, the GPU is just a gateway to you monitor and doesn't have much of an effect on speed unless it is really old and unable to output anything about 800x600 at a reasonable rate.

Besides, how would using the GPU lessen the work on the CPU? That's like saying one guy is going to have an easier time doing his job if someone next to him is working on something else.

Ok, and this is in no way meant to offend you, Cortex Command does not use the GPU. End of conversation, I've tested it, it doesn't make it any faster. Maybe it does so because it doesn't have to do some crazy rescaling on full screen, but I can hardly imagine it makes much of an impact.

Now, since you clearly attacked both me and Natti I think I have the right to say that it's plain stupid to say that increasing GPU usage will decrease CPU usage.
It's like saying that if we produce more apples, there will be less bananas.
It does however use the CPU to render each pixel, BEFORE sending the information through the GPU to the screen, and since your screen always needs to fill it's x amount of pixels, this should be about as GPU heavy as running windows. (TESTED)

I also do know what I'm saying.

I would like to know if you want us to turn Vsync on, or off. Because you clearly have internal conflict about it. (Check your posts.)

I never argued with the Vsync part. I added to it.

It is better because it is well written, more in depth and actually contains more tricks than your thread.

And what does equitably mean according to you? Because as far as I know it means just and impartial. (Question, not an insult.)

Since I was ninja'd quite badly:
Wona isn't slang, wanna is.
I wanna see you use an apostrophe because it makes reading things easier while also making the text you are reading look a bit more professional.

At this point in development it would not only take a herculean effort to make Cortex Command run on more than one core but it would probably decrease performance until he'd done an ungodly amount of tinkering.

Also, on the DeltaTime issue, there's a big difference between calculating physics and rendering frames. You said it governed the latter, it does not.

I didn't attack you or natti either. Only thing i did i that i said you are wrong but lets stop with this and stick to the topic.


About resolution. I didn't entirely get it. If you say that it shouldn't change performance then why in games like fallout it gets laggy as hell on max setting and resolution 800x600 then 1366x768 ? It does same with gta IV and other games. Better performance

The answer is that it doesn't.
If you're seeing performance changes then I don't know what to tell you, perhaps your computer contains some kind of perpetual motion machine?
Increasing the resolution causes more drain on your GPU, reducing your resolution causes less drain on your GPU and has no detrimental effect to your CPU.
It is not a means by which to allocate work balance between one and the other as you seem to believe, increasing the resolution just creates extra work.

I'd advise you to check your resolution theory again more closely, I am pretty certain that you will find that increasing the resolution actually negatively impacts your computer's performance.
If you require more proof I'd be pretty happy to demonstrate it myself.