Just Why question ( Single Threaded Games )

[alphabeta]

Why are Games are still being made as a single threaded Games I mean a games like AC / FarCry 3 / Total war : Rome II. there's got to be a reason for this 

[Trik'Stari]

I would assume it's because of consoles. Could be wrong though. Could also be people with outdated hardware etc.

[Firearm2112]

My laptop appreciates it

[Trik'Stari]

My laptop appreciates it

Can they not make it so the game detects the system your running on and optimizes for it? It shouldn't be that hard to simply have it detect the number of threads or something.

[Firearm2112]

Can they not make it so the game detects the system your running on and optimizes for it? It shouldn't be that hard to simply have it detect the number of threads or something.

agreed

[Wingfan]

its a conspiracy!!!

[alphabeta]

Can they not make it so the game detects the system your running on and optimizes for it? It shouldn't be that hard to simply have it detect the number of threads or something.

 

I think that is the So called Pc optimization hope to see it someday 

[Trik'Stari]

I think that is the So called Pc optimization hope to see it someday 

Maybe if consoles quit dicking around and either catch up, or devs finally admit that they are shit (the consoles) and are limiting the field and they no longer want to program for shit hardware.

[harrynowl]

Well I have limited knowledge on the subject but multithreading isn't always possible, for example say you have instruction 1-50, but the next instruction can only be run after the first completes.

 

So instruction 1 runs on core 1, instruction 1 finishes.

 

Instruction 2 now needs to be run, however core 1 is free.

 

So it just sits on core 1 forever.

[Wano97]

Not again this thread... Why does it matter? It will still run fine

Quite funny how people are saying that the devs are shit though

[alphabeta]

Not again this thread... Why does it matter? It will still run fine

Quite funny how people are saying that the devs are shit though

 

 It will still run fine !! For the love of god just read about Total War Rome II performance  

[Wano97]

 It will still run fine !! For the love of god just read about Total War Rome II performance  

I didn't read anything about that game yet, so I have no clue what's going on there

Well I heard it was hard to run it at decent fps

[alphabeta]

I didn't read anything about that game yet, so I have no clue what's going on there

Well I heard it was hard to run it at decent fps

 

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/218380-i5-4440-bottleneck-r9-280x/

[Wano97]

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/218380-i5-4440-bottleneck-r9-280x/

Do I see 15 fps there? That is really horrible

[alphabeta]

Do I see 15 fps there? That is really horrible

 

it is

[Sauron]

Using mre threads doesn't automatically make the game run better. It depends on what kind of instructions are passed to the cpu. Some tasks perform exactly the same because they need to be executed sequentially. If the game doesn't have anything that requires parallel processing might as well save some of the cpu's power.

[nj4ck]

Quite funny how people are saying that the devs are shit though

 He said that consoles are shit, not the devs :lol:

[Faceman]

@alphabeta

Not only what @Sauron said, but the vast majority of people still only have 2-4 core processors.  Game developers make games for the masses, not the select few who have more than 4 cores.

 

This is the Tech Talk with the Intel Engineer, with a question specifically from me on June 20th of this year:

 

Start listening at minute 24:30

 

--"Game developers have been telling us for years that Hyperthreading and more cores will have a more linear effect on performance, and for years this has remain untrue.  Do you think Hyperthreading will soon show more profound performance gains when it comes to gaming in the near future?  If so, how long?  It seems like it has been 3 or more years that recommended specs have been telling us to buy i7s, yet the performance difference is negligible when comparing an i5 and i7.  Does it make sense to try and "future proof" by going with an i7 over an i5."

 

--"Realistically what game developers do is develop to the lowest common denominator, which is still 2 cores."

 

Another soundbite at Minute 33:30:

 

"Why would we release a consumer grade chip with 6 cores when software is not taking advantage of it?"

 

He says that rhetorically.

 

"Dual core is the bottom of the stack....We are moving forward as the software calls for it, but until we see demand for 6/8/10/12 cores in the mainstream world, what advantage would Intel have at releasing these parts, that can't really be utilized, it is really a niche place for 8 threads to be utilized."

 

The most telling moment of the stream starts at minute 60, there is too much to list word for word so I will summarize:

 

Intel wants more thread utilization, they want to push us up the stack because technology is there.  They are frustrated that software hasn't caught up, but when you look on Steam, and you see what kind of systems people have, the vast majority is dual core.  So if I'm a game developer I am designing the game for dual core because that is where the money is.

 

Listen to the stream starting from minute 60, and you will understand that games are not being made for more than 4 threads.

[alphabeta]

Using mre threads doesn't automatically make the game run better. It depends on what kind of instructions are passed to the cpu. Some tasks perform exactly the same because they need to be executed sequentially. If the game doesn't have anything that requires parallel processing might as well save some of the cpu's power.

 

 

@alphabeta

Not only what @Sauron said, but the vast majority of people still only have 2-4 core processors.  Game developers make games for the masses, not the select few who have more than 4 cores.

 

This is the Tech Talk with the Intel Engineer, with a question specifically from me on June 20th of this year:

 

Start listening at minute 24:30

 

--"Game developers have been telling us for years that Hyperthreading and more cores will have a more linear effect on performance, and for years this has remain untrue.  Do you think Hyperthreading will soon show more profound performance gains when it comes to gaming in the near future?  If so, how long?  It seems like it has been 3 or more years that recommended specs have been telling us to buy i7s, yet the performance difference is negligible when comparing an i5 and i7.  Does it make sense to try and "future proof" by going with an i7 over an i5."

 

--"Realistically what game developers do is develop to the lowest common denominator, which is still 2 cores."

 

Another soundbite at Minute 33:30:

 

"Why would we release a consumer grade chip with 6 cores when software is not taking advantage of it?"

 

He says that rhetorically.

 

"Dual core is the bottom of the stack....We are moving forward as the software calls for it, but until we see demand for 6/8/10/12 cores in the mainstream world, what advantage would Intel have at releasing these parts, that can't really be utilized, it is really a niche place for 8 threads to be utilized."

 

The most telling moment of the stream starts at minute 60, there is too much to list word for word so I will summarize:

 

Intel wants more thread utilization, they want to push us up the stack because technology is there.  They are frustrated that software hasn't caught up, but when you look on Steam, and you see what kind of systems people have, the vast majority is dual core.  So if I'm a game developer I am designing the game for dual core because that is where the money is.

 

Listen to the stream starting from minute 60, and you will understand that games are not being made for more than 4 threads.

 

Solved