Questions for people with bigger gaming setups

[Vampyre_by]

10 minutes ago, nakomaru said:

Laptops CPUs are basically toys. And when they're not, their cooling can't keep up. My i7 laptop from three years ago gets 12 fps too. My desktop i7 from 6 years ago gets 45-60 at 3x. My 9700k gets 40-57fps late game at 10x. (Now I'm playing on a half width map to keep a perfect 60 at 10x, highly recommended.)

have you done something additionally to optimize the game? I have i9 9900 and 32Gb RAM and late game fps is never exceeds 27-30 fps

[nakomaru]

7 minutes ago, Vampyre_by said:

have you done something additionally to optimize the game?

Just about everything possible. Aggressive report pruning, 3 (active) dupes, limited pathing, a little bit of solid tiling.

The base will probably break without a bunch of mods (especially high capacity storage), but you can see what you get. I get a solid 60 at 3x, and 53-57 fps while zoomed in to the lava at 10x. 40-50 with realistic static camera positions. On the testing branch.

[Vampyre_by]

7 minutes ago, nakomaru said:

On the testing branch.

aha, here is the trick. I will try, thanks

17 minutes ago, nakomaru said:

Just about everything possible. Aggressive report pruning, 3 (active) dupes, limited pathing, a little bit of solid tiling.

The base will probably break without a bunch of mods (especially high capacity storage), but you can see what you get. I get a solid 60 at 3x, and 53-57 fps while zoomed in to the lava at 10x. 40-50 with realistic static camera positions. On the testing branch.

Ok, what I got: 115 fps while zoomed on lava on 3x, 31 when max zoomed out and around 70 with realistic static camera positions. 

P.S. cycle 21382, you're crazy:)

[Ketmol]

As a lot of people have already written. Very few games, including ONI will actually use all your cores so single core performance becomes more important than how many cores you got. 

HOWEVER. If you do plan to stream, do video recording and editing of your gameplay it becomes a very different story.

But for pure game-play an I5 would probably be the most cost efficient since you can put the extra money (if you are working within a max budget) on a better GPU, more RAM etc

[kingy10005]

on my I5 8600K it uses 2 cores pretty high about 50 to 60 % and the other 4 do about 30 % usage if that . i have noticed that lower clock speed tends to be more likely to lag the game just my thoughts

 

ps this game is perfectly happy locked at 30 fps not like its a fast shooter online game 

On 01/10/2019 at 2:18 PM, nakomaru said:

Just about everything possible. Aggressive report pruning, 3 (active) dupes, limited pathing, a little bit of solid tiling.

The base will probably break without a bunch of mods (especially high capacity storage), but you can see what you get. I get a solid 60 at 3x, and 53-57 fps while zoomed in to the lava at 10x. 40-50 with realistic static camera positions. On the testing branch.

just tried your save on my 6 core I5 8600k looks like the games main tasks are running on two cores only and not much on the other 4 its getting pretty close to maxing out 2 of them but i am running only a light over clock at 4.3 constant all cores mite try 4.8 see if that does any thing for it

 

 

 

ps i ran it using integrated graphics just because i can hehe

[kingy10005]

35 minutes ago, kingy10005 said:

on my I5 8600K it uses 2 cores pretty high about 50 to 60 % and the other 4 do about 30 % usage if that . i have noticed that lower clock speed tends to be more likely to lag the game just my thoughts

 

ps this game is perfectly happy locked at 30 fps not like its a fast shooter online game 

just tried your save on my 6 core I5 8600k looks like the games main tasks are running on two cores only and not much on the other 4 its getting pretty close to maxing out 2 of them but i am running only a light over clock at 4.3 constant all cores mite try 4.8 see if that does any thing for it

ps i ran it using integrated graphics just because i can hehe

just ran it with a 4.8 over clock and it helps but not as much as i would of thought about 5 % better over all . still seems to be limited to just 2 cores and not really using the other 4 tho mite be a game engine limitation 

[nakomaru]

Yes, it is a game engine limitation that the majority of the computational load ends up on a couple threads. Best we can do is wait for more optimizations/multithreading/GPU offloaded compute.

[kingy10005]

just did a test runs fine on 2 cores only uses them both up and 4 cores uses them both up but once you go past 4 cores it does not seem to know how to use them effectively so can run this game on a I3 most likely lol

On 30/09/2019 at 6:59 AM, BLACKBERREST3 said:

Programs are starting to use 8 cores now? can you provide examples, most ones that I use only use 1-4 cores.

far cry 5 uses 8 if i remember correctly and assassins creed odyssey but there the only ones that come to mind could be newer ones that use 8 also  

[fox_kirya]

On 30.09.2019 at 8:59 AM, BLACKBERREST3 said:

Anything over 8GB goes over recreational use.

Having 64 GB RAM and NVIDIA Quadro P4000. SolidWorks, Autodesk products. And 64 GB is still not enough for SolidWorks. 

[KittenIsAGeek]

I disagree with @BLACKBERREST3 on that as well.  8GB RAM is, in my opinion, the least you should have if you're running windows 10.  Up until last year, I would have agreed with him.  Things have changed a LOT in the last year, and I've watched the base system resources for windows and linux increase dramatically.

Modern OSs are designed around multi-threading, which means that generally users are running more than one application at a time.   It used to be that when you started a game, you shut down your other stuff and just focused on the game.  Now we have the game running, Discord chats, web pages with youtube videos, and possibly live-streaming all going at once.  Performance _really_ tanks when you start swapping your RAM to disk.

Anyway: TL;DR --> 8GB should be the minimum RAM for a modern computer.

[BLACKBERREST3]

On 9/30/2019 at 1:59 AM, BLACKBERREST3 said:

Anything over 8GB goes over recreational use.

Maybe recreational was the wrong word for it considering commonly used programs and games eat memory now compared to 1-2yrs ago. I remember when I used to play dolphin emulator with my friends in highschool. My gaming laptop at that time had 8gb of memory. The thing didn't even have solid state until I upgraded it 2 years later, then I sold it to a friend.