Jump to content

Required CPU to avoid slow down/time dilation


Recommended Posts

Damn, I am at 20% time dilation with it (Rhineland test mission) (runs at 80% real time) - and this TD is my biggest issue.¬†ūüėĘ

I can get nice solid framerates with no stuttering and things running smoothly on my very modest system - but alas all may not be well at times. Some missions great, others - bam, there it is -- with seemingly no rhyme or reason. AA seems to have a fairly large impact - yet I can run the first P-38 Bodenplatte campaign mission without any TD, for example - however I just ran a PWCG with lower settings on Kuban with what appeared to be about the same amount of AA assets (and very few active aircraft (comparable to P-38 mission) - and as I got closer to target area (flying IL2s), bamn - down to 80% real time again. Yet other times it's fine. Uggh, can't consistently sort out the cause in my case.

Edited by Redwo1f
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Redwo1f said:

Damn, I am at 20% time dilation with it (Rhineland test mission) (runs at 80% real time) - and this TD is my biggest issue.¬†ūüėĘ

I can get nice solid framerates with no stuttering and things running smoothly on my very modest system - but alas all may not be well at times. Some missions great, others - bam, there it is -- with seemingly no rhyme or reason. AA seems to have a fairly large impact - yet I can run the first P-38 Bodenplatte campaign mission without any TD, for example - however I just ran a PWCG with lower settings on Kuban with what appeared to be about the same amount of AA assets (and very few active aircraft (comparable to P-38 mission) - and as I got closer to target area (flying IL2s), bamn - down to 80% real time again. Yet other times it's fine. Uggh, can't consistently sort out the cause in my case.

How are you coming up with the 80% figure? Is there a tool to measure this?

 

S!Blade<><

 

 

IMG_20210210_142215855.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

By 80% I mean that the clock in the aircraft cockpit (or in this case, Gambit's Rhineland  test mission time call (displayed on screen) is 20% behind the actual time using a stopwatch.

 

*********

Oh, P.S. - been playing with settings all day, and seems at least for PWCG, that turning my AA Density from Medium down to Low seems to have, at least so far (fingers crossed), eliminated any TD I was having earlier.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Redwo1f said:

By 80% I mean that the clock in the aircraft cockpit (or in this case, Gambit's Rhineland  test mission time call (displayed on screen) is 20% behind the actual time using a stopwatch.

 

*********

Oh, P.S. - been playing with settings all day, and seems at least for PWCG, that turning my AA Density from Medium down to Low seems to have, at least so far (fingers crossed), eliminated any TD I was having earlier.

 

Alright, thanks for the information.

 

S!Blade<><

 

 

IMG_20210210_142205551.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Redwo1f said:

By 80% I mean that the clock in the aircraft cockpit (or in this case, Gambit's Rhineland  test mission time call (displayed on screen) is 20% behind the actual time using a stopwatch.

 

*********

Oh, P.S. - been playing with settings all day, and seems at least for PWCG, that turning my AA Density from Medium down to Low seems to have, at least so far (fingers crossed), eliminated any TD I was having earlier.

 

 

I would in your case try to monitor the frametimes onscreen (and not the FPS, google why not) and try to find out what is peaking the frametimes. I know Afterburner does have a nice feature that can show an onscreen Frametime graph and its digit, while playing in the monitor world. For VR I can advice fpsVR, that can be found as cheap payware in the Steamstore. 

What is btw your hardware? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Dutch2 said:

 

I would in your case try to monitor the frametimes onscreen (and not the FPS, google why not) and try to find out what is peaking the frametimes. I know Afterburner does have a nice feature that can show an onscreen Frametime graph and its digit, while playing in the monitor world. For VR I can advice fpsVR, that can be found as cheap payware in the Steamstore. 

What is btw your hardware? 

 

Yes, I will take a look at that too. I will talk about the Gambit's Rhineland  test mission as it is indicative of my experiences with TD when I have it - though with that mission it is there at the very start (with all those B-25's and also AA (though lite) present). It runs smoothly. Not getting noticeable stuttering/skips, etc. Framerates in cockpit stay 72-89 fps (69-105 outside) throughout (my monitor is only physically capable of 67hz anyway (slight overclock to get that)). Things "flow" (for lack of a better word) just fine - however, I guess the rate at which my cpu is sending to video card is slowed - in my case 1 minute game time (by aircraft cockpit clock - or in this case actual time call displayed by the mission) is actually 1 min 12 sec real life time (even though the fps are fine - at least for my system and monitor) - and this stays consistent throughout with this mission/benchmark. So, it is slower than it ought to be.

 

This is my understanding of what time dilation is (please correct me if I misinterpret). I have a modest system - though I do play at 1080p. I don't do VR. My specs are i5-7700, 16GB ram, GTX 1660 super. I don't always experience time dilation - and much of the time, and many missions I encounter none (game clock speed matches real life) - however, when I do hit it, it almost invariably tends to be that 20% hit (1 min in-game time = 72 secs realtime - the slo-mo effect (and just big enough to notice for me - though still smooth as butter, if that makes any sense). 

 

I know in here and in other threads it has been surmised to be likely related to the game engine, programing/optimization, and in particular AI - the taxing it takes on a system with more and more "thinking" assets (and influenced by mission design) - though as Gambit says, it just seems to occur no matter what in some situations. I don't encounter it often with static campaigns (though admittedly I haven't played them all (but own many)) - and never experience it with Quick play missions whatsoever. Can't comment really on in-house dynamic campaign engine (as I really don't use it anymore). It does occur more frequently for me with PWCG (and I have since really started to look with more a purpose as to this issue in particular and various adjustment settings -- and as I said, AA seems to be a big player for me and my system here (at least that is what it is looking like at this point).

 

Edit: For anybody with a similar system and also PWCG player, right now these settings seemed to have greatly improved/eliminated TD (so-far-so good - still early):  Air Density - Low, Ground Density - Medium, AA Density - Low, CPU Allowance - Low, Structures - Medium.

Edited by Redwo1f
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Redwo1f said:

Edit: For anybody with a similar system and also PWCG player, right now these settings seemed to have greatly improved/eliminated TD (so-far-so good - still early):  Air Density - Low, Ground Density - Medium, AA Density - Low, CPU Allowance - Low, Structures - Medium.

Hi, would you mind telling me what the settings were at, prior to these settings, when you were still having the issue?

 

Can you list any iterations of the settings that did *not* seem to help (or made it worse)?

 

What I'm thinking is, of course, which of the settings helped - and thus which are likely more related.  If that makes any sense.

 

I'm just before getting into the sim myself (thanks to a very kind soul who knows my gratitude), and so I'm interested in any pros/cons, whatever.

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if most know it but this problem was experienced back in PWCG in ROF. I experienced it back in the day in ROF when my AMD Phenom II 965 BE and GTX 770 4 GB was a fast system. I found back then that the high activity setting would experience this problem heavily in dogfights and medium activity was still basicaly unplayable in large dofights, 8-10 planes or more. Only the low activity was usable for me. Don't get me wrong I love what Pat was doing then and is doing now, but this is not a new problem.

 

S!Blade<><

Edited by BladeMeister
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, NoBreaks said:

Hi, would you mind telling me what the settings were at, prior to these settings, when you were still having the issue?

 

Can you list any iterations of the settings that did *not* seem to help (or made it worse)?

 

What I'm thinking is, of course, which of the settings helped - and thus which are likely more related.  If that makes any sense.

 

I'm just before getting into the sim myself (thanks to a very kind soul who knows my gratitude), and so I'm interested in any pros/cons, whatever.

 

Thanks.

 

Well I wasn't working with the goal to try and see what increases TD on my system, so I didn't increase the settings (except in one case - will mention later).

I can tell you that I made a change in CPU Allowance from "Medium" to "Low" - and that made an impact - but not always consistently so (and that makes sense as it is my understanding based on Pat's posts, if I am understanding them correctly,  that that effects "friendly" generation of bombers not directly involved with player's mission). Made that change first.  But the bigger impact has been reducing AA Density from what I had previously as "Medium"  down to "Low". - was reluctant to make this move initially as I like to do a lot of fighter bombing and ground attack (but low still seems okay, though not as deadly - but the trade off seems fair as far as TD for me, at this point). Actually increased Structures from "Low" to "Medium" without any adverse impact for my system, so it seems to date. Still looking at things and seeing if things hold. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I never did read or see from serious reviewers, anything about using TD for benchmarking, you could ask Steve from GamersNexus what his opinion is about this new type of test methodology.  

 

This do sound weird, but if your are suspecting the i5-7600 non-k, I suppose its not an i5-7700, does holding up the Vcard then use higher graphic ingame settings. On the internet there is an explanation why a system is running decent Frametimes at 4k, while at 1080 its sucks 

 

If not did, then turn on XMP in your Bios, its free, safe and will gain extra horsepower to your system. 

 

Anther interesting experiment, based on my ROF and WoFF experience, would be disable all Vsync, ingame and at Nvidia CP. Use Windowed mode and cap your FPS to 60FPS, if you are running an 60Hz monitor then shift down to 58cap. 

 

But most important you have to determine what is  bottlenecking. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dutch2 said:

I never did read or see from serious reviewers, anything about using TD for benchmarking, you could ask Steve from GamersNexus what his opinion is about this new type of test methodology. 

 

 

Hi Dutch, I'm not sure but there may be a misunderstanding here.

 

It is not my impression anyone is 'using TD for bench marking' (I could be wrong).  Earlier in the thread it was discussed that "time dilation" (TD) causes slowdowns that are visible in the game as what you might call 'slow-motion'.  I don't think anyone was referring to a "TD" as a type of test methodology - again, I could be wrong.

 

(BTW "time dilation" is not my choice of terms, but not up to me what others call it)

 

Incidentally, of course everyone has their own preference, but Steve at GN has been wrong before (as have all online "influencers").  I personally recommend not looking at *any* online source like they're always right (because they're not).

 

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

 

Hi Dutch, I'm not sure but there may be a misunderstanding here.

 

It is not my impression anyone is 'using TD for bench marking' (I could be wrong).  Earlier in the thread it was discussed that "time dilation" (TD) causes slowdowns that are visible in the game as what you might call 'slow-motion'.  I don't think anyone was referring to a "TD" as a type of test methodology - again, I could be wrong.

 

(BTW "time dilation" is not my choice of terms, but not up to me what others call it)

 

Incidentally, of course everyone has their own preference, but Steve at GN has been wrong before (as have all online "influencers").  I personally recommend not looking at *any* online source like they're always right (because they're not).

 

 

about TD: If reading here, people are thinking its an judgement on games performance. I’m not saying it isn’t, who knows its like the whole Frametime discussion that started with https://techreport.com/review/21516/inside-the-second-a-new-look-at-game-benchmarking/   Think its very interesting but we only need to know if its the right way. 

 

about GN: If you have an better suggestion let me know, but Steve is one of the few who is easily to contact, while he is a very experienced tester. And, if he is wrong he is always willing to admit about that, unlike others. 

Maybe Igor from Igorslab could also be the right person inhere btw. 

Edited by Dutch2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless I'm mistaken, I believe what people are discussing in this thread is that "time dilation" is (somewhat) of an issue with game performance - again, not a method of measurement; rather, a problem in the way the game behaves.  A "bug" if you will (although I'm not saying it is a bug specifically, nor has anyone else).  More a 'wart' in colloquial software terms, perhaps.

 

Re: GN/Steve - I take *all* of those people - Linus, Jayz, Steve etc etc etc...with a huge grain of salt.  They are all imperfect and often influenced themselves by other factors that may or may be accurate/appropriate.  I've seen Steve make absolute mistakes in his videos, and the worst is that too many people act like he can't be wrong - therefore when he *is* wrong, it's still accepted as being correct.  Problem.   Anyhow, that isn't the subject of this thread.

 

As I've said above, I think there is possibly some confusion about what TD is.  It is an issue that people have seen occurring in the game, as opposed to any sort of benchmark or measurement tool.  I hope this makes sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/27/2020 at 7:14 PM, Jaws2002 said:

You can do A LOT BETTER by swapping the motherboard, memory and CPU, even if you get them second hand from Ebay. 

      You can get a brand new Ryzen 5  3600 for a $159 and it will run rings around the 4790k.

That will allow you to get a much faster , newer motherboard and pair it with faster, ddr4 memory, for a much more potent overall computer.

 

On 7/28/2020 at 3:34 AM, Jaws2002 said:

Intel 9000 and 10000 series are better for this game, so a 9600 should give you very good performance. Paired up with a new motherboard, fast DDR4 and your 1070, you should have a very good setup for 1080P.

 

I went for an i5 9600k bundled with a Gigabyte Z390 Ultra Durable Mobo and Coolermaster CPU cooler all for £375 new on Ebay. For people on a tight budget it's a really good deal!

 

I am hoping to overclock to 5GHz (cpu) and I got second hand 32Gb Corsair Vengeance LPX 2666 DDR4 RAM for under £100, which my tech friend says he can overclock to 3600MHz. He reckons that the CPU is good at single core performance, but I haven't got it all up and running to test it due to very slow internet at the moment, but soon I will post on the forum my results with IL-2 for people interested in a cheap build.

 

Around Christmas time I was waiting on stock of the RTX 3080 and 3070 cards, if I hadn't bit the bullet on a used RTX 2080ti I would still be waiting!

 

Be well,

Algy-Lacey

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NoBreaks said:

Unless I'm mistaken, I believe what people are discussing in this thread is that "time dilation" is (somewhat) of an issue with game performance - again, not a method of measurement; rather, a problem in the way the game behaves.  A "bug" if you will (although I'm not saying it is a bug specifically, nor has anyone else).  More a 'wart' in colloquial software terms, perhaps.

 

Re: GN/Steve - I take *all* of those people - Linus, Jayz, Steve etc etc etc...with a huge grain of salt.  They are all imperfect and often influenced themselves by other factors that may or may be accurate/appropriate.  I've seen Steve make absolute mistakes in his videos, and the worst is that too many people act like he can't be wrong - therefore when he *is* wrong, it's still accepted as being correct.  Problem.   Anyhow, that isn't the subject of this thread.

 

As I've said above, I think there is possibly some confusion about what TD is.  It is an issue that people have seen occurring in the game, as opposed to any sort of benchmark or measurement tool.  I hope this makes sense.

 

Great then we have only you, to teach us then :popcorm:  

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, BladeMeister said:

I don't know if most know it but this problem was experienced back in PWCG in ROF. I experienced it back in the day in ROF when my AMD Phenom II 965 BE and GTX 770 4 GB was a fast system. I found back then that the high activity setting would experience this problem heavily in dogfights and medium activity was still basicaly unplayable in large dofights, 8-10 planes or more. Only the low activity was usable for me. Don't get me wrong I love what Pat was doing then and is doing now, but this is not a new problem.

 

S!Blade<><

hehehe

 

Sorry, but I just now saw this post.  Definitely relevant and good to know.  Seems that this would probably mean newer systems would not necessarily be as likely to have the issue, then...if I'm following.

 

Which sounds reasonable, because newer systems have come a long way since the 965BE and 770 ;)

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

hehehe

 

Sorry, but I just now saw this post.  Definitely relevant and good to know.  Seems that this would probably mean newer systems would not necessarily be as likely to have the issue, then...if I'm following.

 

Which sounds reasonable, because newer systems have come a long way since the 965BE and 770 ;)

LOL. YES THEY HAVE! I have been slowly dropping very far behind the technology curve, but in the next week I will be very close to the top again.:good: By the way that 965¬† & 770 combo is still running strong and running IL2 at 59FPS consistently on a Balanced graphics setting. The old girl is still pulling her weight and runs in the low 60s C¬į. She is going to be taken apart, cleaned and possibly upgraded a bit and be my Win7 machine for older sims.:)

 

S!Blade<><

Link to post
Share on other sites

I love those older computers...of course, people move on but the machines are still very capable of surprising levels of performance, as you know :)  I just recently watched a video about older Core2 Extreme QX9650 being able to run many games far newer than the chip itself is.  Fascinating.

 

At the same time, naturally, performance demands have increased - so no surprise at all that a much newer, more detailed sim would benefit from something...newer, we'll say ;)

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

I love those older computers...of course, people move on but the machines are still very capable of surprising levels of performance, as you know :)  I just recently watched a video about older Core2 Extreme QX9650 being able to run many games far newer than the chip itself is.  Fascinating.

 

At the same time, naturally, performance demands have increased - so no surprise at all that a much newer, more detailed sim would benefit from something...newer, we'll say ;)

LMAO, I just noticed your Forum name and the light ūüí° went on. Boy do I feel dumb! Maybe I can do some testing soon LOL. A system or methodology will need to be created to observe any meaningful data as to the reason this slow down in visual fluidity occurs while the FPS remains high. Personally I think it is to many objects being supported by IL2's engine during PWCG or possibly during the in game career, which I have also encountered. I wonder If taking one of PWCG missions and opening it in the Mission Editor(ME) and then piece by piece deconstructing the mission might reveal the most resource hungry objects which are causing this slow down. Say disable the AAA in a mission or maybe substituting a lesser building template. Anyway, basically picking apart or disabling key parts of one of these missions that has a known slow down to isolate the culprit. Just thinking out loud while the bulb is still lit. LMAO

S!Blade<><

Edited by BladeMeister
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like an excellent approach to figuring out what's going on.  Of course, I wonder what the 'cutoff' is - IOW, what level of machine is required to preclude the issue?  It does seem that newer setups don't/wouldn't suffer from it.  Would you say that's accurate?

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

Sounds like an excellent approach to figuring out what's going on.  Of course, I wonder what the 'cutoff' is - IOW, what level of machine is required to preclude the issue?  It does seem that newer setups don't/wouldn't suffer from it.  Would you say that's accurate?

You would be in a much better position to determine that cut off level than I would.  Just running a clean install, no mods, plus PWCG only would seem to be the best foundation. I am not sure if BOBP would be the best map to test on though as it is quite big and possibly the must resource hungry of all of the maps.

 

S!Blade<><

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right...and TBH, it's not as if the 7600k is in any way incapable; certainly far from it.  Also, you'll note the single-thread improvement is nowhere near that of multi-thread.  The Zen3 architecture is remarkable.  I've built two of these X570/5600X platforms fairly recently, and they are real monsters :)  The most recent one competes on fairly equal terms with my own 9900k (which is overclocked at 5100) when using AMD PBO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, NoBreaks said:

Sounds like an excellent approach to figuring out what's going on.  Of course, I wonder what the 'cutoff' is - IOW, what level of machine is required to preclude the issue?  It does seem that newer setups don't/wouldn't suffer from it.  Would you say that's accurate?

 

There are other posts around suggesting that it can and does happen to everyone, regardless -- and Gambit27 (major mission/campaign designer) has stated that it is unavoidable - it just happens regardless of cpu (suggests some significant engine/optimization flaws to me - also why big bombers will not likely ever be possible in current situation (yet alone lots of ships either I am thinking, idk - I am probably doomed anyway as far as that goes, lol)).

Edited by Redwo1f
Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly all things considered, IMHO, this is just a product of having all of the AI use the same FMs as the player controlled plane does. Then add on a bunch of active AA, active trucks, tanks and whatever else and you have one loaded CPU and stressed memory and SSD/HDD and GPU. Plus you have PWCG working and doing all kinds of awesome stuff with the mission itself. I just wonder if anything can be isolated as causing this slowdown beyond this general cause?

 

S!Blade<><

Edited by BladeMeister
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes all that (completely agree), and not utilizing multicores well or effectively with the current engine too, I think (and potentially the very programing/optimization of the AI coding as well). For reference (and not meant to be a this is better than that at all), I have yet to encounter TD whatsoever in Tobruk (with similar and even much heavier assets present) - though I have the odd stutter there (for me, system related in that department¬†I am sure). I am starting to get obsessed with pulling out a stopwatch now though¬†ūüė≤ūü§™

Edited by Redwo1f
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, two totally different sim engines. Unfortunately I have spent very very limited time in DW Tobruk so I look forward to jumping into that sim all hot and heavy also with the new rig. It is almost ready!ūüėĀ What little I did fly in Tobruk with my AMD 965 & GTX770 combo, I encoutered a very smooth fluid experience such as you described. It is a good time to be a sim pilot!:)

 

S!Blade<><

Edited by BladeMeister
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/13/2021 at 1:17 AM, Dutch2 said:

I never did read or see from serious reviewers, anything about using TD for benchmarking,

 

So what?

There is nothing special about ‚Äúserious reviewers‚ÄĚ other than they decided to create a channel or a web page

 

On 2/13/2021 at 1:17 AM, Dutch2 said:

 

you could ask Steve from GamersNexus what his opinion is about this new type of test methodology.

 

Thanks but no thanks - we don’t need special Steve to comment on something that he knows nothing about in this case.

 

TD is not something that manifests in most games, as most games will maintain 1 to 1 time, but respond to the throughput deficit by decreasing frame rate. This is not the case with this engine, here we get TD. We know this, so we don‚Äôt need Steve to give us an ‚Äúok, you can use TD to measure performance - I give it my approval‚ÄĚ

 

 

 

On 2/14/2021 at 1:55 PM, BladeMeister said:

Honestly all things considered, IMHO, this is just a product of having all of the AI use the same FMs as the player controlled plane does.

 

I believe that’s part of it - not the whole story though. AI attack logic when it kicks-in also causes a huge hit for some reason...not related to flight model.

 

 

On 2/14/2021 at 1:55 PM, BladeMeister said:

 Plus you have PWCG working and doing all kinds of awesome stuff with the mission itself.

 

Nope - just mission logic. Some of it fancy, but nothing that accounts for TD.

 

 

On 2/14/2021 at 1:55 PM, BladeMeister said:

 

I just wonder if anything can be isolated as causing this slowdown beyond this general cause?

 

 

Yes

A few things as mentioned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding PWCG, you made this statement earlier in the thread.

"Certain things like Attack MCU logic, AAA ‚Äúbrains‚ÄĚ seem to have a great deal to do with this phenomenon."

PWCG has to use these MCUs and sometimes has a lot of AA, and I am not sure how this is created in his app, but it must contribute to the load just as if you had made the mission in the ME yourself. Certainly you know better than I do after creating all of the missions/campaigns that you have. My new rig is finished! Wahooo!:) Just downloaded IL2 GBS last night and I will try to test the mission you suggested in a week or so. I have to think this is just, "it is what it is", and there is not clear cut answer.

 

S!Blade<><

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

Regarding PWCG, you made this statement earlier in the thread.

"Certain things like Attack MCU logic, AAA ‚Äúbrains‚ÄĚ seem to have a great deal to do with this phenomenon."

PWCG has to use these MCUs and sometimes has a lot of AA, and I am not sure how this is created in his app, but it must contribute to the load just as if you had made the mission in the ME yourself. 

 

Yep - but it’s still just standard editor logic. In other words there’s nothing unusual going on in the sense of resources being utilized as opposed to a manually created mission. He does some creative things with waypoints, but that’s a non-factor.  The difference in any mission is always how many units, of what type, and what are they doing.

 

I have cases where a heavy mission runs fine, then a single extra aircraft suddenly causes heavy TD.

The degradation is not linear nor always predictable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gambit21 said:

 

Yep - but it’s still just standard editor logic. In other words there’s nothing unusual going on in the sense of resources being utilized as opposed to a manually created mission. He does some creative things with waypoints, but that’s a non-factor.  The difference in any mission is always how many units, of what type, and what are they doing.

 

I have cases where a heavy mission runs fine, then a single extra aircraft suddenly causes heavy TD.

The degradation is not linear nor always predictable.

So it is what is and we just deal with it and move on???

 

S!Blade<><

Edited by BladeMeister
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, BladeMeister said:

So it is what is and we just deal with it and move on???

 

S!Blade<><

 

Under the hood optimization is required - options are limited and inconsistent where editor work is concerned... that's all I know.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/19/2021 at 8:24 PM, Gambit21 said:

 

Under the hood optimization is required - options are limited and inconsistent where editor work is concerned... that's all I know.

ūüėį

 

Would DX12/Vulkan as API enable multi-core cpu usage? That could be the Holy Grail if so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...