Multicore Optimization

Hi, I did a search and couldn't find anything to answer my question.
Obviously we all know the issues Supcom had with only using 2 cores but I'm curious is the new PA engine being built on the idea of using multiple cores of available? I mean I would love for my I7 to actually get some smart usage.

If that is true then that is brilliant news. I am sure everyone has been wanting to take full advantage of their quads and i7.

Nah, I don't think it's true, I mean, it's only on the kickstarter.

Thanks for clarifying that

What about 4 cores with hyper threading?
Will it see 4 or 8 ??

Pretty sure the operating system treats the i7 as an 8 core machine, and the CPU handles distributing that load across the 4 cores.

Plus the Reddit linked fomr the Confirmed features and suggestions sticky at the top of this forum. :roll:

Don't forget the FAQ

You don't specify multi-core unless you intend to use them (you'd just give a speed)

We definitely intend on using all the cores as much as is practical. It's probably a bigger deal on the server than the client.

Now that you're already able to connect clients to a server, build units, send them around and blow things up, do you have more experience with system requirements and what CPU architecture is best for clients/servers?
My laptop is about to die (way too old for PA anyway) so I am planning to buy a new PC/laptop soonish.
You say you "definitely intend on using all the cores as much as is practical".
But how much is practical?
I am particularly thinking about either getting a quad core i5-3570@3400 MHz
or an "octa" core FX-8350@4000 MHz.
Do you have an idea which would be better suited for PA clients and/or servers?

If you have a good engine that supports multicore than it doesn't matter how many cores your cpu got...

Of course building a good multicore and flexible engine from the ground up isn't an easy task.

That's why it's almost always preferable to use an already developed engine instead to develop a new one...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_game_engines
http://unigine.com/products/unigine/

For a project like PA that is not true. PA is just too far away from the mainstream, so premade engines don't account for its very special requirements.

What really would be interesting is, how ams vs intel behaves as amd uses two integer modules per core. think something like PA would be good to check how this works out compared to hyperthreading.

I still check the GPGforum thread about the AI/game slowdown problems every few months to see if a solution has been found.
It has not.

PA being designed to properly utilize the PC`s power is essential for it to do the "massive battles" thing.

Any word on it being 64bit or supporting/needing >several gigs of ram ?

Confirmed to support 64 bit. It is aimed to be scalable far into the future, that is why neutrino has stated he prefers not to put an upper limit on planet size, amount of planets and unit cap. Therefore it'll use as many ram as you've got if you scale your game to that amount.

Uh really? then what are these multicore cpus all about in the first place?
lets just stick to one core and have a perfectly multicore supporting engine and we are sorted?

That's rubbish, if we have an engine that supports multiple cores with perfect scaling, then 2 cores make the engine run twice as fast as 1 core and 4 cores make it run twice as fast as 2 cores etc...

I am aware that such perfect scaling is practically impossible and sometimes less cores with higher performance per core are better than plenty of cores with little power each.
But in some good multicore supporting workloads the 8 core Bulldozer CPUs can even compete with expensive i7s, while standing no chance in other workloads...
So if the engine really is supporting 8 cores with good scaling than it does make a difference.

From what I've seen, multi core optimization is awesome(obviously), but there is a certain point where you simply get "enough" of them.

So, you probably will see more benefit from a quad core than a dual core, however you may not see much more benefit from say, a 3930K compared to a 3570K.

It is true that with the ability to scale a PA game, we will probably be able to make bigger games with higher end hardware, but since most of the heavy lifting is done server side, the individual systems may not benefit as much from extreme multi core processors, with the exception of skirmishes.

This video covers the the usefulness of multi core processors in game fairly well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4PDoy-mi0A

I've seen BF3 running just fine with high settings on an i5-661 dual core. Now, we'll have to wait and see with PA, but it seems unlikely to me (although, I obviously don't work for Uber, so I couldn't tell you) that an 8 core will significantly outperform a quad core , unless your running a server or something like that.

And @ rarrr, if your primary focus with your new PC is gaming, the FX-8350 will probably be the better choice just because of cost difference, and that AMD and intel processors actually get pretty similar performance WHEN IT COMES TO GAMING. If you're interested in other CPU intensive programs, you should probably look up the respective benchmarks for whatever they may be. (With video encoding for example, the i7-3770K pretty much destroys the FX-8350)

Here's some in game benchmarks comparing the i5-3570K, the i7-3770K, i7-3820 and the FX-8350.

http://teksyndicate.com/videos/amd-fx-8 ... benchmarks

I think he meant the same thing, if the engine has good multicore support (aka a scaling one) it doesn't matter if you have 8 weaker cores or 4 stronger if the overall performance is the same.
At least that's what I read from his post.
as for

answer: power saving (at least one reason))


@pelicandude
as neutrino mentioned before, the multicore part will have more influence on the server side so comparing it to traditional games might be valid just for the client side.

Well I guess most people here are aware of the advantages and disadvantages of multicore cpus.
But the AMD/Intel thing is more then just a question of cores, as they have "fundamentally" different architectures.

if I buy a new PC now, then I will have the best PC amongst my closer friends/siblings so they will expect me to host the games, so I am probably not only a mere client in most of my games as I like playing with my siblings/friends in lan best (I got a few of them to pledge on kickstarter too ).

That's also why I asked for their experience about requirements of both, client and server.

I don't actually play that much, so PA is the only new game I am planning on playing "exhaustively".

And more often than not, the intel cpu at the same price is in an advantage over the AMD cpu in the moment. But I guess with AMD 8 core CPUs being used to power both, PS4 and xBox 720 at least games will soon be better optimised for AMD CPUs than nowadays where they are optimised for Intel CPUs (which makes sense as intel has a way bigger market share than AMD..).
So I just hope that uberEnt benchmarks in some way or another some different architectures (i5, i7, Bulldozer FX, Phenom II) and core numbers and shares their experience. (And my secret hope is that AMD "wins" the comparison here)
I'd guess they must be interested in such benchmarks themselves too...