Cheat Engine

adaptusaaf

I'm going to buy or build my own custom computer just for ce. The game I play is very important to me, I have 30 hacks on it already, and want to make many many more. The problem is all of my ideas cannot be implemented because scanning just for 'unknown initial value' takes 11-13 minutes. And I test alot before I hit a goldmine.

So what are the OPTIMAL requirements to make CE work Ninja fast if you could build your own PC darkbyte? I'm not uber rich so I dont need state of the art gaming cards (the game i play is simple but huge in memory). The pc im on right now is a dinosaur dont even talk about 'upgrading' it, would be easier to make a new one.

It would be soooo nice if CE instant-scanned all the time. Omg.

If your pc can scan for unknown initial value in a huge clientside-memory game then please tell me how you do it aswell!

Thanks for the help in this brainstorm

PS sorry for loving your program too much.

Dark Byte · Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 5:33 am Post subject:

fast cpu
fast harddisk
and memoryrunning at least at normal speed (at least 4GB)

Unknown initial value scan is mostly dependent on the amount of ram you have and on your harddisk write speed

also, you can try messing around with the scanbuffer in settings.
If your cpu or harddisk doesn't have a lot of cache, try a smaller size. E.g: 8kb tends to be good for some older systems

noko_112 · Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:14 am Post subject:

Setting it to 8kb worked dreams for me, and dont have it on "time critical" since it tends to hang (On bigger list's)

Csimbi · Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 6:27 pm Post subject:

Dark Byte · Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 9:04 pm Post subject:

I'm not sure myself, I think it's got to do with the cache of the cpu, so a 8 kb cache buffer stays changed inside the cpu after a small read while a big read would have the cpu miss a lot of cache hits

Also I notice that scanbuffer is mostly affecting the results when a lot of results are being written to disk. So could be the diskcontroller and/or disk handles small chunks of consequently writes better than a huge chunk every now and then.
On my comp I don't notice much difference in speed if I use a small or big buffer when there's not many results. (e.g a 4 byte scan for a value bigger than 1000)

Radiation · Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:45 am Post subject:

Dark Byte, is there a chart or graph comparing the CPU speed to the cache buffer? or not even the CPU speed, but anything else? thanks a heaps.

smpa · Newbie cheater Reputation: 0 Joined: 27 Oct 2009 Posts: 11

Get a faster computer.

Radiation · Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:32 pm Post subject:

how can i see what scanbuffer is best for my system? what is it dependent on?