GoldForest

How many/what mods will you run once 1.1 and 64-bit KSP drops?

How many mods will you run with 1.1 and 64-bit?  

70 members have voted

  1. 1. How many mods will you run with 1.1 and 64-bit?

    • Less than 10
      10
    • Less than 20
      5
    • Less than 30
      6
    • Less than 40
      12
    • I have 64-gigs of ram... I'm not worried about the amount.
      22
    • 128 Gigs of ram! Whoo! ALL THE MODS!
      9
    • I fear the kraken and yee should too!!! Arh! Let us be getting out of here me mateys! *Sails away on the Black Pearl with Jack Sparrow*
      6


Recommended Posts

48 minutes ago, Wild Cobra said:

Then how do you explain my benchmark testing showing improvement?

Benchmarks like that are synthetic. They will show you gaining something when you're really not. You have to actually run games and benchmark them to get the real performance data. Don't put all yout trust in benchmarking tools, run a few games to get the real picture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/8/2016 at 8:46 PM, GoldForest said:

 

 


If KSP is getting HT support, or better HT support, I would recommend keeping HT on, even if the physics load stays single core non HTed load, as the other tasks KSP runs will use that HT performance.

Well, I have launched craft in both modes. Maybe it doesn't matter normally until you are using the one important core at 100%. Maybe it also depends on the CPU. I can time a difference. I was told that at best, I might see a 2% performance gain. I see more though, so I suggest it is probably CPU dependent.

Edited by Wild Cobra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

Benchmarks like that are synthetic. They will show you gaining something when you're really not. You have to actually run games and benchmark them to get the real performance data. Don't put all yout trust in benchmarking tools, run a few games to get the real picture.

Synthetic does not mean wrong. Benchmarking one game and seeing an improvement does not mean that other games will or will not see an improvement. Also, there's no such thing as "hyperthread" support, where software is concerned. It's a hardware trick that makes a single core look like two cores (but not necessarily perform like two cores, depending on the particular load).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, godefroi said:

Synthetic does not mean wrong. Benchmarking one game and seeing an improvement does not mean that other games will or will not see an improvement. Also, there's no such thing as "hyperthread" support, where software is concerned. It's a hardware trick that makes a single core look like two cores (but not necessarily perform like two cores, depending on the particular load).

I suspect that the logical core supports gets in the way and slows things down when a process wants 100% of a core.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Wild Cobra said:

I suspect that the logical core supports gets in the way and slows things down when a process wants 100% of a core.

That's possible, but I'd be somewhat surprised if the slowdown was noticeable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, godefroi said:

That's possible, but I'd be somewhat surprised if the slowdown was noticeable.

It's not noticeable unless you measure it.

 

Try it with yours. Build a 500 part + craft, and use SRB's Take a stopwatch and time the same craft how long it takes the SRB to be exhausted with HT on and off. Use the largest one, as it takes over a minute of game time to be exhausted.

 

When you have craft severely lagging, every bit of time helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, godefroi said:

Synthetic does not mean wrong. Benchmarking one game and seeing an improvement does not mean that other games will or will not see an improvement. Also, there's no such thing as "hyperthread" support, where software is concerned. It's a hardware trick that makes a single core look like two cores (but not necessarily perform like two cores, depending on the particular load).

There is such thing as "hyperthreading" support. Games have to be made to utilize HT as well as physical cores. 

Most games don't use over 4 cores, so yes, HT is useless on a four core processor, but if they give the game 8 cores to work with your i7's HT Will come in handy.

And I never said benchmarks were wrong, I just said they don't show real world performance.

I hope Squad implements 16 core support so I can use all cores on my 5820k

Edited by GoldForest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GoldForest said:

I hope Squad implements 16 core support so I can use all cores on my 5820k

Hate to burst your bubble, but the i7-5820K is a 6/12 core processor and has a single thread rating by Passmark of 2006. My puny i7-4790 with it's 4/8 cores has a single thread rating of 2291. The K version is at 2530.

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-5820K+%40+3.30GHz&id=2340

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-4790+%40+3.60GHz&id=2226

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-4790K+%40+4.00GHz&id=2275

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, Wild Cobra said:

Hate to burst your bubble, but the i7-5820K is a 6/12 core processor and has a single thread rating by Passmark of 2006. My puny i7-4790 with it's 4/8 cores has a single thread rating of 2291. The K version is at 2530.

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-5820K+%40+3.30GHz&id=2340

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-4790+%40+3.60GHz&id=2226

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-4790K+%40+4.00GHz&id=2275

Your not bursting my bubble. I know the 5820k Is only 6 cores. I was just saying that I hope they implement 16 core support as I may upgrade to 5960x. Actually, I hope they implement 20 core support. That 6960x sure sounds good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, GoldForest said:

 

Your not bursting my bubble. I know the 5820k Is only 6 cores. I was just saying that I hope they implement 16 core support as I may upgrade to 5960x. Actually, I hope they implement 20 core support. That 6960x sure sounds good.

What's funny, is when the LGA 2011 first came out, I was asking opinions as to get one or not. Even from people of a tech nature, they said only if you're using it for a server. Now it's the new gaming standard. I was looking at it from the standpoint of the quad channel memory bus. Memory access speeds has been, and probably always will by the limiting factor of a system. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Wild Cobra said:

What's funny, is when the LGA 2011 first came out, I was asking opinions as to get one or not. Even from people of a tech nature, they said only if you're using it for a server. Now it's the new gaming standard. I was looking at it from the standpoint of the quad channel memory bus. Memory access speeds has been, and probably always will by the limiting factor of a system. 

Unless they build RAM right into the CPU or give us HBM lanes to and from the RAM and CPU, yeah. Watch, 2017, the year of DDR5, runs at DDR4 2800 MHz  speeds lol.

Man, I wonder what people could do with 10 core - 20 thread CPU like the 6960X.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I only have 32 gigs of ram, but it'll do the job :)  I want the prettiest KSP possible, with an expanded solar system, and the rocket tech to get me out to the new places ^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, eddiew said:

Actually I only have 32 gigs of ram, but it'll do the job :)  I want the prettiest KSP possible, with an expanded solar system, and the rocket tech to get me out to the new places ^^

I wish Squad would put in the purple gas giant they promised... AND... give it rings! Actual rings too! Maybe not make every little rock a model, but defiantly make it a risk to your aircraft, or just go the simple route and make it a non-colliding rotating texture square.

Comets too... with HUGE tails. I want to pull a Treasure Planet and fly through the tail. How awesome would that be?

Speaking of Treasure Planet, why hasn't anyone made a mod for it? I know there's a pirate ship mod, but that's not the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, back to mods and 64-bit:

I don't expect my stockalike install to change all that much, I don't go nuts with part mods so that one works in 32-bit with DX9. I might consolidate my "Let's make airplanes" install with it, though.

My RO/RSS/RP0 install should benefit greatly though. More engine packs and RVE with gloriously big textures, and no need for OpenGL anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the multicore usage btw:

Unity 5 offers the latest version of PhysX, as opposed to generation 2 for Unity 4. I'm assuming the devs have upgraded to that. Why? Latest PhysX engine does support multicore, and has on average a 100% performance upgrade, depending on what element is tested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Samlow said:

On the multicore usage btw:

Unity 5 offers the latest version of PhysX, as opposed to generation 2 for Unity 4. I'm assuming the devs have upgraded to that. Why? Latest PhysX engine does support multicore, and has on average a 100% performance upgrade, depending on what element is tested.

We need another ask the devs Thread. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, GoldForest said:

Games have to be made to utilize HT as well as physical cores.

Nope. They don't. The operating system schedules threads on "HT cores" just like normal cores. Games aren't designed to use "cores" either, only threads. Unless a game set up specific affinity masks for particular threads (and they don't), having more threads than cores will mean that the game (or word processor, or whatever other piece of software) can/will use as many cores as you have.

Now, let's see how many threads KSP uses: ah, look, it's 29. Imagine that. That means that KSP could use up to 29 "cores" (whether HT "virtual" cores or "real hardware" cores, doesn't matter). In the real world, however, most of the interesting work is being done by one or two of those threads, so your software won't "fully" utilize more than a couple cores, but that's the nature of the beast; you don't simply "turn on" support for more "cores". All you can do is parallelize the work; spread it across more threads, and let the operating system do what it is designed to do, i.e. schedule those threads on as many cores as it can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, godefroi said:

Nope. They don't. The operating system schedules threads on "HT cores" just like normal cores. Games aren't designed to use "cores" either, only threads. Unless a game set up specific affinity masks for particular threads (and they don't), having more threads than cores will mean that the game (or word processor, or whatever other piece of software) can/will use as many cores as you have.

Now, let's see how many threads KSP uses: ah, look, it's 29. Imagine that. That means that KSP could use up to 29 "cores" (whether HT "virtual" cores or "real hardware" cores, doesn't matter). In the real world, however, most of the interesting work is being done by one or two of those threads, so your software won't "fully" utilize more than a couple cores, but that's the nature of the beast; you don't simply "turn on" support for more "cores". All you can do is parallelize the work; spread it across more threads, and let the operating system do what it is designed to do, i.e. schedule those threads on as many cores as it can.

Threads = cores though. If a game only has four non-HT threads, your game will only use 4 cores. And where did you find that number? 29? That just doesn't sound right.

Also, please stop the conversation here as I do not want this thread to get locked by a mod or admin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GoldForest said:

Threads = cores though. If a game only has four non-HT threads, your game will only use 4 cores. And where did you find that number? 29? That just doesn't sound right.

Also, please stop the conversation here as I do not want this thread to get locked by a mod or admin.

Threads do NOT equal cores. Threads are logical units of execution; one of the operating system's major functions is to schedule these units of execution onto the physical hardware (or cores). The "Thread" in "HyperThread" is misleading; what's actually happening is that the hardware is telling the operating system that there's two cores where there is actually only one. How many threads a piece of software uses is totally orthogonal to how many cores are in use. Depending on what the threads are doing, the OS may very well schedule all the threads onto a single core, of if it wants, it could schedule a single thread on multiple cores (though not more than one at a time). Much work goes into making operating systems smart about how this happens, and it's very advanced stuff. All the number of threads gives you is a general kinda-idea about how many cores MIGHT be fully utilized, if all other conditions were ideal. and the situation is otherwise normal. When a thread is created, the software does NOT specify whether it's an "HT" or "non-HT" thread. The documentation for the function that creates a new thread in Windows is here if you'd like to take a look. Nowhere does it mention HyperThread.

I got the number 29 from the Windows task manager. I assure you it's right. If you don't believe me, feel free to use the task manager, Powershell's Get-Process cmdlet, Linux' "top" command, or any other appropriate tool to look for yourself. At any given time, your operating system is managing orders of magnitude more threads than it has cores available to it. This has been true since long before multi-core (or even multi-processor) machines were common.

Unless you're older than the average "gamer", I've been writing software for a living since before you were born. I am not guessing at how computers work, nor am I repeating something I read somewhere else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As many of my 100-ish mods that get updated!!

Also, I'm already running 64-bit thanks to the 64-bit community workaround.

Edited by RocketSquid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13-3-2016 at 4:39 AM, GoldForest said:

Mods will most likely be updated before 1.1 even hits your computer as they aren't doing a regular experimental release, instead they are releasing beta's on steam now. All mods have to do is msg one of the staff of Squad, ask for a beta key, and then get to work. I wouldn't be surprised if someone released a 1.1 mod tmrw.

You actualy need a key? I though it would be available for all on steam

Edited by FreeThinker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

You actualy need a key? I though it would be available for all on steam

You're correct, no key is required for the prerelease testing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Red Iron Crown said:

You're correct, no key is required for the prerelease testing.

I know it's bad Forum etiquette, but +1 to this. I've received 30 - 40 PMs in the past week asking this very thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Ted said:

I know it's bad Forum etiquette, but +1 to this. I've received 30 - 40 PMs in the past week asking this very thing.

Yes, but it was not clear you will post the BETA key on a public forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.