Multiple core support (quadcore, hexacore)

[vk_rs]

This is really necessary for a game like this.
With NVMa SSD, I have a 3k MB/s, and yet the game uses only one processor core, meaning I will have the lags and waiting times the same as on older machines.

[SlimNasty™]

I'm assuming when you say your's is only running on one processor core, you're actually on about TpF1?

In regards to TpF2 from the listed requirements for the new title it does look like they maybe up-scaling their engine so you'll need at least a quad core, illustrating that it maybe switching more towards better multicore support. But no one at this moment knows exactly what is happening behind the scenes and I suspect when/if a beta happens it maybe closed like previously and under an NDA so you may still have to wait a little longer to find out.

You have to remember this is only a small developer team behind this and this new title will only be their third and they've already come so far from Train Fever.

[genemead]

Also remember this game is written for the "masses" running "average" computers- not for just the "elite" users running high-end computers.

IF it's multi-core, great. If not, it is what it is. I trust UG- either way they'll make it run as good as they can.

[Dan]

This old chestnut, huh?

Transport Fever is already multithreaded, as the vast majority of modern games are.
It doesn't use only one CPU core, you're just using a naive way to assess core usage.

No game ever made will have 100% balanced parallelism... it's just not the way games work - they're innately sequential, time dependant processes, where you can only offload so much of the processing to other cores.
So there will always be a main thread, and other threads will finish their work sooner. In most cases, significantly sooner. The effect of this is, when you look at normal CPU core usage, you'll see one core working, because all the other cores spend most of their time waiting for either the primary thread, or for the GPU to complete rendering a frame.

That does *not* mean the game doesn't support multiple cores. It absolutely does, and it can be offloading a massive amount of processing to those threads, and still appear in your resource monitor to only be using 1 core's worth of CPU.

[Krik]

Grimdanfango is right. Not every task can be multi-threaded and not every task should be multi-threaded.

TF propably already use several threads for stuff that don't depend on each other like sfx, gfx and game logic. But a lot of stuff needs to be processed in a sequential matter. You can see that in game where supply and demand only updates when a train completes a full round trip. The effects of that round-trip can only bei calculated at that point of time.

There's also the issue where possible multi-threading actually slows the program down. Threads have to communicate with each other. Imagine a thread handles one car in-game. That car has to ask each(!) other car if they are on a collision course to decide if it has to slow down. Assume there are 100 cars. Each car has to ask the other 99 cars - that's 9900 checks! And each check requires your CPU to switch between the car threads. And each thread has to run on the same core as the other threads. Afaik cosumer CPUs don't allow inter-core thread communication because that just means you have to pause a whole core until the thread in the other one is responding.
There are a number of ways to speed the checks up. One of the ways is to pass on multi-threading.

[pkk]

Originally posted by genemead:

Also remember this game is written for the "masses" running "average" computers- not for just the "elite" users running high-end computers.

IF it's multi-core, great. If not, it is what it is. I trust UG- either way they'll make it run as good as they can.

If it was a game aimed at the masses, it could be run with integrated graphics. However, even the most powerful currently available integrated graphics, the Ryzen 5 2400G APU, which can run many games well, is below the TF2 minimum spec.

[CunkFeatures]

Originally posted by vk_rs:

This is really necessary for a game like this.
With NVMa SSD, I have a 3k MB/s, and yet the game uses only one processor core, meaning I will have the lags and waiting times the same as on older machines.

The game loads and runs from RAM, not the disk drive. Multithread works fine my end.

[CunkFeatures]

Originally posted by pkk:

Originally posted by genemead:

Also remember this game is written for the "masses" running "average" computers- not for just the "elite" users running high-end computers.

IF it's multi-core, great. If not, it is what it is. I trust UG- either way they'll make it run as good as they can.

If it was a game aimed at the masses, it could be run with integrated graphics. However, even the most powerful currently available integrated graphics, the Ryzen 5 2400G APU, which can run many games well, is below the TF2 minimum spec.

No gamer, or anyone with interest in their hobby, would use an iGPU. They'e just too ♥♥♥♥.

[Sir Daniel of Phandalin]

Originally posted by tomtalk24:

Originally posted by vk_rs:

This is really necessary for a game like this.
With NVMa SSD, I have a 3k MB/s, and yet the game uses only one processor core, meaning I will have the lags and waiting times the same as on older machines.

The game loads and runs from RAM, not the disk drive. Multithread works fine my end.

Yes, but actually no. The game loads from the HDD/SSD, not RAM. RAM just stores the active and idle code. Although, that doesn't matter anyway. The problem with the game is that it's run on one thread, and not even the i9 9900k can run it without maxing out it's one allotted thread.

[CunkFeatures]

Originally posted by Cpl. A Patriotic Meme:

Originally posted by tomtalk24:

The game loads and runs from RAM, not the disk drive. Multithread works fine my end.

Yes, but actually no. The game loads from the HDD/SSD, not RAM. RAM just stores the active and idle code. Although, that doesn't matter anyway. The problem with the game is that it's run on one thread, and not even the i9 9900k can run it without maxing out it's one allotted thread.

Yup, exactly what I've said. Meaning...

Originally posted by vk_rs:

With NVMa SSD, I have a 3k MB/s,

has nothing to do with...

Originally posted by vk_rs:

yet the game uses only one processor core

You could have 4 SSD' in RAID0, wont make a difference once you've loaded your save. In fact the only disk reading done is for new vehicles.

[vk_rs]

You could have 4 SSD' in RAID0, wont make a difference once you've loaded your save. In fact the only disk reading done is for new vehicles.

I was listing them to eliminate them as the bottleneck of the process, but thanks for the elaborate response.