Development screenshots #1 [Closed]

Well yeah but its game optimizing. They can push the game as hard as possible while having it optimized for lots of different PCs.

 

New kaveri apu's don't seem like a huge leap from the older ones. Seems like they're faster (or more optimized?) but clocked lower so the cpu part benchmarks almost the same as the richland apu's. GPU is supposed to be better though. Lower TDP than older ones also.

Apu's are a bit dumb though. The Gpu is still crap for serious gaming and if you want to get the best out of it you need to buy high speed ram which costs a buttasston. Better off getting a dedicated graphics card, cpu, and some 1333 or 1600 ram.

 

I think the appeal to someone like estama is the possibility of using HSA and hUMA in his programs, or stuff like the huge cache on iris pro. Anything is probably better than his current rig, raw performance is probably not as important as the special features you get from an APU type system.

 

On the plus side at least you're the go-to guy for low end optimisation testing.

 

While we are talking about optimization I'd like to point out that the original core i series is still not getting good fps. I have a 4/8 lynnfield running 3.2 to 3.6 ghz and it has a problem with more that 3 cars. :/

 

With the stock Moonhawk I get about 25FPS on my CPU at 4.2GHz (I get 19-20 on stock speed) Does this mean I would get maybe 35-40FPS with the update?

 

4 cores and 8 threads. That's purely an optimization problem. I saw Gabe's specs somewhere and I do believe that he's got an original Core i as well, coupled with a couple GTX 500 series cards. Granted... I think Gabe had his overclocked, now that I think about it. For me, in AMD land, the game becomes unplayable at about 8 cars on a 6 core system. I think Gabe said at one point that it should be a car per core, so in theory, you SHOULD be able to run 8 cars without a problem. But, again, it's an optimization problem.

 

IIRC it was one core per physical core. I also remember them saying that hyper-threading doesn't help much either.

 

HT gives around a 30% gain. I should be able to handle 3 cars without a dump to sub-20s though. The moon hawk and h45 by themselves smash the poor CPU into the low 30's. I think it is poor STP though, the 4770k would double my power.

 

YOu cant limit it like that in code. Software can only spawn threads. Windows then manages threads itself and will shift them around cores as it sees fit. Nothing stopping it from going onto a hyperthreaded "core". BeamNG spawns 1 thread per car. On a single core system they will all be processed on the single core the same way you already have a good 100 or so threads running on your machine already, on a 16 core machine (they exist, as do higher counts) there is room for the threads to spread out.
Windows has a tendency to group all of the windows services onto core 0 and then start applications on core 1. From there it will manage them based on actual need.

 

Yeah, I just thought that while back one of the devs said it was one car per physical core.

 

thats because they DID, in a livestream, in chat

 

So memory overclocks help here? That's different.
I also assume that haswell-e with DDR4 will smash everything, being an 8/16 with DDR4 and all.

 

Yeah, some optimizing must be done, that's for sure. What I was saying is that taking it to an extreme is very time consuming and often brings little extra performance delta. And, in my opinion (repeat, MY opinion haha) when you have the option to make it run better or prettier, prettier is better because, 'With time, slow becomes fast, but ugly, will always always be ugly'' (''AirSKiller's Quotes' 2014'' xD)

- - - Updated - - -

Memory bottleneck is not solved (most of the times) by simply slap extra MHz's (did the test, my memory running at 1330 and 2400 (can't go higher) brought about 5-10% extra fps's in BeamNG, only :/)

 

But there isn't really much that Estama can make prettier. He codes the physics side. Sam and Gabe make it look prettier, and they are definitely doing a good job at that

 

Yes, I know that and they really are! Hell, all of them are doing a great, awesome job! :O hahaha

 

The CPU and GPU work in parallel so you have to optimize for both. Making the physics run faster doesn't give you anymore FPS to give to graphical improvements.

 

Yes I knoooowww, please don't all start stating that now :l I was just giving out my general opinion, it was not strictly about BeamNG.
But 'prettier' in physics terms could mean running them at 2500x a second instead of 2000 like now. (If it changed anything, I don't know)

 

IRL, that warning is in a jeep cherokee. I would expect that in this but not in a jeep!