[ANSWERED] Dual-Core Support

I have the ability via a dual monitor set-up to view the CPU activity per core while I am playing and I can tell you that both cores are very busy while playing Sins.

SO I dont know what elese needs to be done, but from my observations, it sure seems like Dual Cores CPU's are being untilized to the fullest.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I'd also like to know the possibility of this. I've also read some Intel users supposedly having their other cores working while I've checked my AMD processor and it's operating purely on one core.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Im also running an AMD processor. An X2 3800+ (Which I think is 2.ghz each). No dual core running here, and im running the latest drivers and optimizer.

Still nothing

Successfully updated karma reason!

the_Monk

Join Date 01/2008

+222

As far as I know, the only "multi-threading" SINS does is while it "pre-caches" textures, after that the entire sim is run single-core.

I'm assuming this is so that SINS is able to entertain the "broadest" hardware market and not be exclusive to only the "power-rigs" favoured by mostly FPS-gamers.

the Monk

Successfully updated karma reason!

For the record, I am running an Intel Core 2 Duo and like I said above, both cores are very busy during my entire play session.

There is a Gadget for the Vista side bar called the Multi-meter and it keeps a graphical representation of CPU core usage and RAM usage and I simply drag that over to my other monitor to see what a game is using.

I think its one of the most usefull Vistsa gadgets out there.

Successfully updated karma reason!

the_Monk

Join Date 01/2008

+222

For the record, I am running an Intel Core 2 Duo and like I said above, both cores are very busy during my entire play session.

For the record, my answer was taken directly from a dev post, so......unless he and I are mistaken....

Successfully updated karma reason!

For the record, I am running an Intel Core 2 Duo and like I said above, both cores are very busy during my entire play session. There is a Gadget for the Vista side bar called the Multi-meter and it keeps a graphical representation of CPU core usage and RAM usage and I simply drag that over to my other monitor to see what a game is using. I think its one of the most usefull Vistsa gadgets out there.

It SHOWS you that it's using both...but it's very possible that one core is being used for the game and the other is being used to run everything else on your PC.

Multi-threading is different than just both cores working. It's both cores working on the same exact thing to double the cycles said thing gets. Like SLI it requires specific support to utilize fully. Sure, you could use an SLI setup to run any game...but ones made to support SLI do it better. Unlike SLI, just the drivers for the core won't do anything to help the games support of multi-threading.

1.03 is a small change...Stardock has already said that they are going to be working on a much bigger patch in the future...hopefully that will include multi-threading. (The current level of knowledge on Multi-threading and using it in games is very low. In another year we should be all set.)

Successfully updated karma reason!

For the record, I am running an Intel Core 2 Duo and like I said above, both cores are very busy during my entire play session. There is a Gadget for the Vista side bar called the Multi-meter and it keeps a graphical representation of CPU core usage and RAM usage and I simply drag that over to my other monitor to see what a game is using. I think its one of the most usefull Vistsa gadgets out there.It SHOWS you that it's using both...but it's very possible that one core is being used for the game and the other is being used to run everything else on your PC.Multi-threading is different than just both cores working. It's both cores working on the same exact thing to double the cycles said thing gets. Like SLI it requires specific support to utilize fully. Sure, you could use an SLI setup to run any game...but ones made to support SLI do it better. Unlike SLI, just the drivers for the core won't do anything to help the games support of multi-threading. 1.03 is a small change...Stardock has already said that they are going to be working on a much bigger patch in the future...hopefully that will include multi-threading. (The current level of knowledge on Multi-threading and using it in games is very low. In another year we should be all set.)

I thought that was well, but when I am not running the game, both cores are pretty idle. Like right now for example while I am typing this both cores are barely at 2-4%

But when I fire up Sins, both cores are well over 50% the entire time I am playing the game.

Mayeb its the damn Vista gadget not wokring right, I dont really know. I was saying that to me, when I am playing, it sure seems like both cores are hard at work according to what I am looking at.

Successfully updated karma reason!

All technical problems have to do with CPU usage and all games should "run" on [insert power of 2] cores automatically despite having no actual use for those cores. It is likely that developers, frantically attempting to address posts about games not running well on their quad-core systems with integrated graphics cards, will run bubble sort over and over on a random list of thousands of numbers to please their early-hardware-adopting fans.

[/hyperbole]

Message to Internet: developers will make things use extra cores if they need those extra cores. It's equivalent to buying a $30,000 full size pickup and asking why the gallon sand bucket doesn't use the pickup properly. Monk is correct: it will use the other core for texture loading, because that's what actually needs it some of the time. If the game is choppy, it's likely that the fault is at least partially with your graphics card and you should look there first.

Successfully updated karma reason!

~50% per core is a good indication that it is splitting the same work and not actually utilising both cores individually.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Im also running an AMD processor. An X2 3800+ (Which I think is 2.ghz each). No dual core running here, and im running the latest drivers and optimizer.Still nothing

I am running the same processor and I experience quite choppy gameplay when I have lots of units on the map, I did check my processor and it was only operating on one core.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I understand the devs wanted the game to be accessible to people running only one core but as someone who built a quad core system (without breaking the bank... they are relatively cheap now) I would like to be able to use more than 1/4 of my computer's processing capacity. Supporting the broadest range of systems means allowing both older and newer hardware to achieve a decent amount of its potential--and dual cores are pretty much standard on even budget systems nowadays.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Games should support Duel Core since its really common these days and will become more common after a year. I mean really, even Galciv2 support Duel core and even Quad core. (Correct me if im wrong)
Oh, and advertising it has Duel Core support for just "pre-caches" textures is pretty misleading and tricking consumers.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I understand the devs wanted the game to be accessible to people running only one core but as someone who built a quad core system (without breaking the bank... they are relatively cheap now) I would like to be able to use more than 1/4 of my computer's processing capacity.

You're a gamer? And you bought a quad core? You do realize that no games currently utilize or require four cores, and the only reason that anyone would ever buy one is if they frequently used applications that could, like video rendering or CAD? It's usually a good thing to do research on what you buy before you buy it, rather than just grabbing whatever looks cool, especially with 45nm Wolfdales flooding the market.

Oh, and advertising it has Duel Core support for just "pre-caches" textures is pretty misleading and tricking consumers.

Perhaps you should educate yourself what multithreading is before you complain about "duel core" non-optimization. I doubt the fact that a game is SMP aware sells copies.

I am running the same processor and I experience quite choppy gameplay when I have lots of units on the map, I did check my processor and it was only operating on one core.

What graphics card do you have? What speed of memory are you running? Where are you getting this figure? Are you running AV programs or other hogs in the background?

It's pretty easy to jump on the LOL IRONCLAD HAET MY 8 CORE SKULLTRAIL SYSTEM U NEED SUPPORT bandwagon without understanding what "support" actually means. Again: developers don't make these decisions just to screw people over. If there was a required need for usage of the other core, you would see it light up. Source, for example, is a much heavier game as far as system requirements go, and it utilizes Havok which is CPU-intensive. Yet even the latest Source games like Team Fortress 2 only utilize the second core for sound.

This is a non-issue and there's been a lot of threads about it in the past. If you have performance issues, it is not a massive conspiracy by Ironclad to milk you of your Sin$$$$ Dollar$$$$, it lies with you.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Yo!

Im fairly certain its my CPU bottlenecking. I have an overclocked X1950XTX in my rig which should cope with this game absolutely fine. Also, when I pause the game and look around, it runs a smoothe 60FPS - usually indicated that its the physics and unit calculations on the CPU causing the problem.

I'm not complaining to the devs at all! When I said choppy, its only down to like 40FPS in intensive fights and things. It was mearly a question asking if puting dual-core support into the engine would be possible.

Sorry if I've upset anyone.

Oh, and with regards to Vista, it has better default handling of multi-core cpus. BUT, it also uses a hell of a lot more juice even just to run things like your "gadget". Maybe this is whats showing up on your meter? Also, it only seems to be AMD's not working. Meh, I dunno. Im happy just playing the game as is right now. Im absolutely addicted!

Successfully updated karma reason!

Well, you're running a 3 year old processor compared in benchmarks to a Pentium 4, so I wouldn't expect too much. Could be something else, though, have you tried closing background apps and AV programs? Have you checked core affinity in Task Manager?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Well... 2ghz Dual-Core isn't all THAT old. Its still not too shabby - but yes, the architecture isn't actually new.

I'm not running any AV when I play stuff, and yes, i've checked the affinity. It doesn't use both cores on my AMD at all. Just maxes one out at 100%.

Successfully updated karma reason!

~50% per core is a good indication that it is splitting the same work and not actually utilising both cores individually.

Please forgive me, but I dont understand the distinction.

Also, could the O/S be making a difference? I am running Vista 64bit.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I understand the devs wanted the game to be accessible to people running only one core but as someone who built a quad core system (without breaking the bank... they are relatively cheap now) I would like to be able to use more than 1/4 of my computer's processing capacity.You're a gamer? And you bought a quad core? You do realize that no games currently utilize or require four cores, and the only reason that anyone would ever buy one is if they frequently used applications that could, like video rendering or CAD? It's usually a good thing to do research on what you buy before you buy it, rather than just grabbing whatever looks cool, especially with 45nm Wolfdales flooding the market.
Oh, and advertising it has Duel Core support for just "pre-caches" textures is pretty misleading and tricking consumers.Perhaps you should educate yourself what multithreading is before you complain about "duel core" non-optimization. I doubt the fact that a game is SMP aware sells copies.
I am running the same processor and I experience quite choppy gameplay when I have lots of units on the map, I did check my processor and it was only operating on one core.What graphics card do you have? What speed of memory are you running? Where are you getting this figure? Are you running AV programs or other hogs in the background? It's pretty easy to jump on the LOL IRONCLAD HAET MY 8 CORE SKULLTRAIL SYSTEM U NEED SUPPORT bandwagon without understanding what "support" actually means. Again: developers don't make these decisions just to screw people over. If there was a required need for usage of the other core, you would see it light up. Source, for example, is a much heavier game as far as system requirements go, and it utilizes Havok which is CPU-intensive. Yet even the latest Source games like Team Fortress 2 only utilize the second core for sound. This is a non-issue and there's been a lot of threads about it in the past. If you have performance issues, it is not a massive conspiracy by Ironclad to milk you of your Sin$$$$ Dollar$$$$, it lies with you.

I agree with all your points, and it's far too easy for someone with no direct coding experience to wonder why it's not automaticly possible to take advantage of two cores.

I will point out that writing a good multi-threaded code is far more complicated than writing a program on a single thread, and games are already pretty complex programs as it is. On a more practical level, there are communication costs to consider. Transferring data between different threads can introduce heavy latencies, and so it is often the case that you will actually lose performance by spreading an application over two or more processes. For the immediate future, you will see only fairly self-contained modules farmed out to other cores (like sound or perhaps physics), with the main game-logic all residing on one core.

Unfortunately, it will take a major revision in programming languages to allow a realistic path to implementing general applications (and games specifically) which run automatically on several cores. This is a bit of bummer, since the number of cores on a CPU will have doubled many times before then. On the bright side there is lots of other cool hardware on the horizon tht games may be able to take specific advantage of (GPGPUs - floating point powerhouse type stuff, combined GPU-CPUs on one piece of silicon etc).

Successfully updated karma reason!

Yarlen

Join Date 01/2005

+369

As was stated earlier, Sins does use multi-threading for texture loading only. Any additional threading goodness may appear in an expansion pack, as that stuff is not for patches (it would require a good amount of testing to make sure it was working properly).

Successfully updated karma reason!

Yah 'dual core support' makes it sound like something developers can toggle on, when the truth is, the entire program has to be written multi-threaded from the ground up.

Game developers are going to have to start getting more serious about writing multi-threaded programs though. As parallel processing has finally hit the stage, were seeing more cores to counter the difficulty in increasing the chip speed.

What makes me wonder though, is they move things like AI on to other threads, and people have less cores, would they be playing a different game?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Aha!

A simple answer from a developer. Thank-you very much. This sums up everything I was asking.

With regards to the guy saying "I agree with all your points, and it's far too easy for someone with no direct coding experience to wonder why it's not automaticly possible to take advantage of two cores." AND "Yah 'dual core support' makes it sound like something developers can toggle on, when the truth is, the entire program has to be written multi-threaded from the ground up":

Luckily enough, I know a little programming myself, so, I know this is hard - no... near impossible at the moment! Respect to the developers for getting the engine to run on lower hardware at all! Kudos all round!

Cheers for answering my question Yarlen.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Yarlen

Join Date 01/2005

+369

You're welcome.

Successfully updated karma reason!

What makes me wonder though, is they move things like AI on to other threads, and people have less cores, would they be playing a different game?

GalCivII has a nifty little option of letting AI use more processing power that lets owners of more powerful CPUs go through extra routines. Still, the other owners don't get shafted with a "dumb" AI experience.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Yes, appreciate the answer. For my part, I'd like to clarify that I was never complaining about the lack of dual-core support or stating it would be easy to put in. I just wanted to know if it was or was not part of the game.

Successfully updated karma reason!

[ANSWERED] Dual-Core Support

A possibilty for the future?