-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Quad Core Utilised In Gaming?
- Thread starter Overslop
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Dec 2006
- Posts
- 8,204
lost planet gives a 2x as many frame rates compared to duel cores. Id expect similar things from games which utilize all 4 cores effectively.
Associate
- Joined
- 12 Jun 2007
- Posts
- 1,628
- Location
- East London
no matter what game it is you will see an improvement, as you can set every background task to run on say 1 core. (or 2) and maximising the efficiency of the other cores that the game will use.
![[PTG]shogun](/styles/overclockers/avatars/2.png){kind=avatar}
Associate
- Joined
- 13 Sep 2006
- Posts
- 147
- Location
- running from 8igdave
alan qake requires more than 1 core so it defo will have quad support 
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 2,125
Duel said:
CTRL+ALT+DELETE and in t...h...e... (Why the hell is t...h...e blocked when you put the letters together ? )processes tab just right click a process (Say a conversion) and there should be something there to set affinity.
Dont have a dual/quad core myself yet but neighbour has, but havnt looked at his system in a while.
Associate
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2007
- Posts
- 1,498
you can set the affinity like that but its automatically done by windows
Microsoft Flight Sim multi-core information - sounds very impressive
QUOTE
Multi-core Performance Work
Intel is using FSX as one of their prime examples at IDF, so we had a lot of engineering time from one of their threading guys. Intel doesn’t do that lightly. We used the time to good benefit.
During loading, we run the DEM loader on threads. You'll see good balanced usage across all cores, as well as about 1/3 faster load times on average.
During flight we spawn threads for Autogen batch rebuilds as well as the terrain texture synthesis. The terrain texture work tends to be a bit bursty; as an area gets generated the load reduces true. But as you fly forward, as you bank, and as the terrain is lighted ( once a minute ) threads are spawned. The terrain grid system is radial around the current viewpoint, and, depending on level of detail, radius can be up to 4.5 tiles in either direction, something like 64 tiles. So there is plenty of work to go around. Autogen is more constant, with a 2km extent being batched.
Even given the bursty nature of the core usage when flying, when there is load, its pretty balanced across the cores. And we got rid of as much of the stutters as we could by going to a lock-free synchronization style. It’s solid work that we are deservedly proud of.
As far as practical limits on number of usable cores, currently SetThreadAffinityMask only allows explicit scheduling of threads on 32 cores ( the mask is a dword ) on Win32. So that’s our effective limit on number of cores. But as soon as there is a way to explicitly schedule them, we can handle 256 cores.
QUOTE
Multi-core Performance Work
Intel is using FSX as one of their prime examples at IDF, so we had a lot of engineering time from one of their threading guys. Intel doesn’t do that lightly. We used the time to good benefit.
During loading, we run the DEM loader on threads. You'll see good balanced usage across all cores, as well as about 1/3 faster load times on average.
During flight we spawn threads for Autogen batch rebuilds as well as the terrain texture synthesis. The terrain texture work tends to be a bit bursty; as an area gets generated the load reduces true. But as you fly forward, as you bank, and as the terrain is lighted ( once a minute ) threads are spawned. The terrain grid system is radial around the current viewpoint, and, depending on level of detail, radius can be up to 4.5 tiles in either direction, something like 64 tiles. So there is plenty of work to go around. Autogen is more constant, with a 2km extent being batched.
Even given the bursty nature of the core usage when flying, when there is load, its pretty balanced across the cores. And we got rid of as much of the stutters as we could by going to a lock-free synchronization style. It’s solid work that we are deservedly proud of.
As far as practical limits on number of usable cores, currently SetThreadAffinityMask only allows explicit scheduling of threads on 32 cores ( the mask is a dword ) on Win32. So that’s our effective limit on number of cores. But as soon as there is a way to explicitly schedule them, we can handle 256 cores.
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 13,496
Magic Man said:
What he said.
My Core 2 never passes 30-40% in FS-X.
Getting a quad for FS-X is a waste, or at-least atm.
When my DC is used @ 100% then ill look at a C2Q.
Concorde Rules said:
I've definitely seen big chunks of time when I've had FSX pushing both my cores of an e6600 (oc's to 3150) running at 100%. I think plenty of hard work went into SP1 for FSX and I certainly saw a huge improvement with the multi core work. I'd even go so far to say that FSX is now usable on my machine.
Denno
