View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 10:41 pm



Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 3.0's performance on my laptop 
Author Message
Rank 12
Rank 12
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:46 am
Posts: 85
I sat the game idling for a while and watched the cpu usage of each core. im on a quad core.

Core 0 : 14% to 30%
Core 1 : 48% to 73%
Core 2 : 55% to 70%
Core 3 : 27% to 52%

That's not half bad for a beta.
Seems a little high on core 1-2 considering nothing was happening.

Maybe a little more work could be done on multicore's?

_________________
We understand, RIP.


Sun Feb 15, 2015 8:47 pm
Profile
Rank 16
Rank 16
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 4:51 pm
Posts: 314
For gaming on a laptop in general, make sure you switch off power saving for CPU completely. I've had so many games not triggering the cpu to clock up in adaptive mode. Especially when your CPU clock is much lower than what it should be.


Sun Feb 15, 2015 8:59 pm
Profile
Rank 12
Rank 12
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:46 am
Posts: 85
riftporn wrote:
For gaming on a laptop in general, make sure you switch off power saving for CPU completely. I've had so many games not triggering the cpu to clock up in adaptive mode. Especially when your CPU clock is much lower than what it should be.

Yeah, i got all that sorted.



I did some more test's... im a little.... worried....
I lied to the game telling it i have a single core CPU (this should force 3.2 GHZ turbo)
Attachment:
Single core test.png
Single core test.png [ 1.38 MiB | Viewed 13206 times ]

I.. dont know what to say.
The game still runs at a sooth 30 FPS (HOW THE FUCK????) and sit's at 2.7 GHZ.
It should have push to 3.2

1 core = 30 fps
4 cores = 47 fps?

wtf is going on?
BRB getting screenshot of ingame benchmarking.

_________________
We understand, RIP.


Sun Feb 15, 2015 9:13 pm
Profile
Rank 16
Rank 16
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 4:51 pm
Posts: 314
If you really have power savings off, your CPU should be at it's standard clock all the time (if thats 2.7ghz, that would be fine)
Turbo Boost will only activate if the thermal situation allows for it (which is not always the case even with just one core active, especially with a laptop)


Sun Feb 15, 2015 9:26 pm
Profile
Rank 12
Rank 12
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:46 am
Posts: 85
riftporn wrote:
If you really have power savings off, your CPU should be at it's standard clock all the time (if thats 2.7ghz, that would be fine)
Turbo Boost will only activate if the thermal situation allows for it (which is not always the case even with just one core active, especially with a laptop)

Hmm.. I doubt it's heat
Cpu is at a thermal margin of ~26

My laptop is a MSI GX60 and the fan is a beast! i even have a cute little button that forces it to run at full power ,lol.

I'm going to do some research, other games can hit the turbo but this game seems to not...

Also here's the result's of my little test:
1920X1080 - Single core
Attachment:
1920X1080 1core.png
1920X1080 1core.png [ 92.5 KiB | Viewed 13196 times ]

I'm surprised at how well the game's performance on 1 core, in turn it makes me disappointed at how it performs on 4 core's...

_________________
We understand, RIP.


Sun Feb 15, 2015 9:46 pm
Profile
Rank 16
Rank 16
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 4:51 pm
Posts: 314
b00marrows wrote:
I'm surprised at how well the game's performance on 1 core, in turn it makes me disappointed at how it performs on 4 core's...


Multithreading things is hard and sometimes impossible, the physics engine might be limited to one thread and so the actual perf gain you see from using multiple cores is from other things that run in parallel like sound, graphics thread etc.

I dunno what engine XPAdmin uses / how it's built but I wouldn't expect any optimizations in a beta. Also, for a game like this, near-60 fps seems more than enough.


Sun Feb 15, 2015 10:33 pm
Profile
Site Admin
Site Admin

Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:16 am
Posts: 1865
We use four working threads:

- Render thread
- Processing thread
- Physics thread 1
- Physics thread 2

So we are aiming (theoretically) at a quad core. The reason the core's are not used 100% is due to memory speed.
The memory reading and writing (the CPU bus system) is in fact the main bottleneck, as it is with most applications that use more data than the cache allows.

Before processing the data in the CPU its needs to be fetched from memory and that takes times. More time that the actual processing, so the CPU are not used 100%.
Afterwards it is written and that takes also time.

We try to use the resources in the system as best we can and keep the data in cache as much as possible.

In general the Intel architecture is a lot faster than AMD even if the specs are the same on paper.
A Intel quad core 3.4 Ghz should give you good performance (with a minimum framerate measured of 70 fps).

So overclocking or fast CPU does not improve the performance (since the bus is the bottleneck).
If your CPU is very fast compared to the bus running on 1 core will even be the same as multiple cores.

We do 'clip' the framerate to 60 fps (if using DK2 to 75 fps). This because higher framerate is not noticeable.
So if your FPSR is higher that means you could get higher framerate, but it is clipped to 60 fps.

N.b.
The "CPS = 3.4 Mhz" is not a system parameter but calculated at runtime as measured cycles/sec.

I hope this clarifies it somewhat better.


Mon Feb 16, 2015 8:06 am
Profile
Rank 12
Rank 12
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:46 am
Posts: 85
That's some useful info.
I'm still baffled at how well the game runs on a single core.

I don't quite understand cpu's so bare with me.
What sort of spec am I looking for? it is possible to upgrade my laptop and i have 3 choices so If I do upgrade I want to make sure it will help.
As you said the core's speed is not the issue but it is the read/write speed? is this linked with the L2 cashe?

TLDR: what spec/info am i looking for?
EDIT:
I used some cpu software and noticed a "core:bus speed" section, it is changing with my cpu's multiplier but seems to go at about 98~100MHZ. is this what you are talking about?

_________________
We understand, RIP.


Mon Feb 16, 2015 6:50 pm
Profile
Rank 17
Rank 17

Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2014 10:37 pm
Posts: 537
If you plan to buy a new computer and want a gaming machine buy normal computer not laptop, prefebly Intel i5-4690k with Z97 chipset something like Asus MAXIMUS VII RANGER m-board.


Mon Feb 16, 2015 8:29 pm
Profile
Site Admin
Site Admin

Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:16 am
Posts: 1865
@b00marrows

It is difficult to give a good advice on hardware.
It has to do with L2 and L3 caching, but the motherboard has to be up to it as well.
There is regrettably not an "easy" fix that will speed up everything. :geek:


Tue Feb 17, 2015 11:08 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 24 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group.
Designed by X-Moon Productions.