released Multi-Threading Discussion

[jurinko]

Considering the next update being now planned on 1st March, I guess Multithreading will be in.

[Hiob]

25 minutes ago, jurinko said:

Considering the next update being now planned on 1st March, I guess Multithreading will be in.

guess or hope?

Probably best to keep the expectations at bay.

[Bananabrai]

6 minutes ago, Hiob said:

expectations at bay

I would say so as well

[Lurker]

On 1/24/2023 at 10:29 PM, Dragon1-1 said:

A typical gaming CPU has 8 cores, even the i9 13700, which boasts 24, actually has only 8 with full performance, and 16 "efficient" ones, which are kind of slow by gaming standards. I don't know how they compare in practice, but I don't think they're much good for rendering.

There is a huge misconception about P and E cores and what they can and cannot do. The E cores are actually pretty great for gaming but they have to be utilized properly, and this can be done in multiple ways. There is a reason why the i5 13600k beats out nearly every single Ryzen out there in most gaming benchmarks that utilize multithreading (yes even the fabled 5800X3D) and even beats out the 12th generation i9. 

Edited January 31, 2023 by Lurker

[Dragon1-1]

Yes, "have to be utilized properly" is a big ask, particularly for games made before the i5 13600k came out. As it stands, the i5 beats Ryzen in benchmarks, while Ryzen wins in actual gameplay, particularly with anything that's not specifically designed to take advantage of that many cores. There are limits to parallelization, and most places where it matters, X3D's massive cache gives you a measurable win over piling on more cores that will sit idle all the time.

DCS is unlikely to utilize the efficient cores properly. In fact, it'll be good if it's able to tell the scheduler to keep it on performance cores. The way they're implementing multithreading doesn't exactly inspire confidence, so I'm expecting the Ryzens to rule for a foreseeable future.

[Lurker]

15 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Yes, "have to be utilized properly" is a big ask, particularly for games made before the i5 13600k came out. As it stands, the i5 beats Ryzen in benchmarks, while Ryzen wins in actual gameplay, particularly with anything that's not specifically designed to take advantage of that many cores. There are limits to parallelization, and most places where it matters, X3D's massive cache gives you a measurable win over piling on more cores that will sit idle all the time.

DCS is unlikely to utilize the efficient cores properly. In fact, it'll be good if it's able to tell the scheduler to keep it on performance cores. The way they're implementing multithreading doesn't exactly inspire confidence, so I'm expecting the Ryzens to rule for a foreseeable future.

It all depends on what Eagle Dynamics does with their engine, but even if what you say is true with regards to DCS World (Which I doubt but I have seen 0 actual benchmarks in DCS World comparing these modern CPUs) DCS World is not all I care about in the world. 

 

 

[Bananabrai]

33 minutes ago, Lurker said:

DCS World is not all I care about in the world. 

Joke.

[Dragon1-1]

57 minutes ago, Lurker said:

It all depends on what Eagle Dynamics does with their engine, but even if what you say is true with regards to DCS World (Which I doubt but I have seen 0 actual benchmarks in DCS World comparing these modern CPUs) DCS World is not all I care about in the world. 

Let's put it that way: I fly my flightsims in VR, everything else goes onto the full HD screen, at about 1/4 as many pixels in each direction. I'm looking into upgrading to a nicer, brighter 2K screen, but that's still not even half the pixel count of the headset. Either way, I have yet to run into a performance wall in any other game I care about. Even my other flightsims perform reasonably well with settings more or less maxed out (though admittedly, they all suffer from the same issues as DCS, anyway). So, the rig is getting optimized for DCS, since if I do that it'll have more than enough overhead to run anything else I might need. I expect that to hold true even on a 2K display.

What I'm saying is true, ED did a big writeup on how they're initially doing multithreading. You know how many threads we will have? The answer is two. Two whole threads. Three if you count audio processing, which already has its own thread, but it's not like that's a massive part of the overhead. Unless ED plan to further parallelize the workload, you could get decent results out of a downright antiquated Intel CPU as long as core clocks were good. The prodigious amount of L3 cache on my X3D is going to do far more than a bunch of largely unused efficiency cores, Linus actually did benchmark them, not on DCS, but the 5800X3D comes out ahead in another sim with similarly bodged handling of the CPU.

Edited February 1, 2023 by Dragon1-1

[Lurker]

37 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

The prodigious amount of L3 cache on my X3D is going to do far more than a bunch of largely unused efficiency cores, Linus actually did benchmark them, not on DCS, but the 5800X3D comes out ahead in another sim with similarly bodged handling of the CPU.

 

Would you mind posting a link to where I can find this benchmark? I've tried to find some DCS benchmarks with the i5 13600k (or any of the 13th gen Intel CPUs) but have been unsuccessful so far. The only thing I have to go on is my own experience. 

As far as unused efficiency cores are concerned, there are other things that can be done with the E cores while the P cores are busy doing their thing with the main processes. While you are playing your game, things need to run efficiently in the background. Background windows processes, things like WMR, or SteamVR, etc. all of that adds up and if this workload can be handled efficiently (something that seems to have been fairly well optimized in the Windows 10/11 task scheduler, but that was really broken at launch) then this is definitely a plus. I'm not arguing with you here, I don't even care about how things work within DCS world, my point is that people needlessly believe that this tech is "worthless". It's not. 

Edited February 1, 2023 by Lurker

[Tom Kazansky]

32 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

You know how many threads we will have? The answer is two. Two whole threads. Three if you count audio processing...

I agree with the sentiment of your post. I just want to add what Bignewy said about the future of DCS multithreading:

"Initially two threads (graphical and logical) will be implemented, and once the technology is stable and mature, we plan to expand this number."

from:

This does not make your statement any weaker because it might take years imho.

[BIGNEWY]

from our first newsletter of the year 

Multithreading
Multithreading has been one of our primary efforts to improve DCS performance, and it is currently in closed beta testing. Initially two threads (graphical and logical) will be implemented, and once the technology is stable and mature, we plan to expand this number. Large and complex missions, both single player and server based as well as the upcoming dynamic campaigns, will see the most significant performance enhancements. 

Our render graph was written from scratch along with many other subsystems. We now benefit from parallel rendering that schedules inter-dependent rendering tasks in a correct and optimal order (e.g., mirror reflections first, then mirrors while running other independent draw calls in parallel), frame graph, graphic scenes, scene renderer, and scene manager. We unified all other graphic subsystems that permit node embedding in the render graph. This allows us to rapidly experiment with new graphic pipelines and enhance efficiency. The introduction of our render graph will improve DCS efficiency and deliver optimal performance with modern graphics APIs such as Vulkan.

[Dragon1-1]

16 minutes ago, Lurker said:

Would you mind posting a link to where I can find this benchmark? I've tried to find some DCS benchmarks with the i5 13600k (or any of the 13th gen Intel CPUs) but have been unsuccessful so far. The only thing I have to go on is my own experience. 

This is actually a comparison against the i9 13900k (turns out Linus only tested against the previous generation, which was current when the 5800X3D came out), not in DCS, though. I'm not aware of any DCS-specific benchmarks, only that the big civilian sim suffers from similar CPU-bound graphics performance and limited multithreading, making it a good stand-in. 

As you can see, the 5800X3D actually tops the i9 in that one, and in others it stands up to it well enough for my liking. Unless you're doing highly parallel workflows, and need the background processes (I try to run lean when VR is on, not much use for anything in the background except WMR and voice recognition), I doubt you're going to get a whole lot of use out of piling on extra cores.

[SkateZilla]

There's a whole 5800X3D thread in the hardware section.

[okopanja]

6 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

from our first newsletter of the year 

Multithreading
Multithreading has been one of our primary efforts to improve DCS performance, and it is currently in closed beta testing. Initially two threads (graphical and logical) will be implemented, and once the technology is stable and mature, we plan to expand this number. Large and complex missions, both single player and server based as well as the upcoming dynamic campaigns, will see the most significant performance enhancements. 

Our render graph was written from scratch along with many other subsystems. We now benefit from parallel rendering that schedules inter-dependent rendering tasks in a correct and optimal order (e.g., mirror reflections first, then mirrors while running other independent draw calls in parallel), frame graph, graphic scenes, scene renderer, and scene manager. We unified all other graphic subsystems that permit node embedding in the render graph. This allows us to rapidly experiment with new graphic pipelines and enhance efficiency. The introduction of our render graph will improve DCS efficiency and deliver optimal performance with modern graphics APIs such as Vulkan.

If I may voice from desperate crowd: which quarter?

[Fropa]

On 2/1/2023 at 3:21 PM, okopanja said:

If I may voice from desperate crowd: which quarter?

2 weeks™

[SkateZilla]

On 2/1/2023 at 3:21 PM, okopanja said:

If I may voice from desperate crowd: which quarter?

[okopanja]

44 minutes ago, SkateZilla said:

Is ISO 8601 time format a better suggestion?

Edited March 5, 2023 by okopanja

[Thinder]

On 1/31/2023 at 8:00 PM, Dragon1-1 said:

Yes, "have to be utilized properly" is a big ask, particularly for games made before the i5 13600k came out. As it stands, the i5 beats Ryzen in benchmarks, while Ryzen wins in actual gameplay, particularly with anything that's not specifically designed to take advantage of that many cores. There are limits to parallelization, and most places where it matters, X3D's massive cache gives you a measurable win over piling on more cores that will sit idle all the time.

DCS is unlikely to utilize the efficient cores properly. In fact, it'll be good if it's able to tell the scheduler to keep it on performance cores. The way they're implementing multithreading doesn't exactly inspire confidence, so I'm expecting the Ryzens to rule for a foreseeable future.

Most players doesn't know what to do with their Zen 3 in order to increase their performances in gaming.

That's because the misconception about high street RAM kits (non-B.die) working just as well as the premium Cl14, that's completely false kind of forum disneylandish stories.

With a Cl14 RAM kit, the Ryzen 7 5800X 3D runs circles around a 5600X at 4K 2 X MSAA in 3DMark test, while it clocks faster 4.6GHz vs  4.5GHz, the only difference was 3200MHz vs 3600MHz, but the 5600X and the GPU (EVGA 1080Ti) were boosted with Ryzen Master and Afterburner. NO boost for either in the 7 5800X 3D comparative test, test conducted back to back during my upgrade.

Yet I gained 32.34% Combined Score, the CPU was running 14.09% faster, the GPU 18.91%, so they can brag about the i5 13600k, I say bring them on.

There is a reason why the 5800X 3D has a 96MB L3 cache and it's latency, they stated that very clearly when it came out, so bounded with Cl14 RAM it doesn't throttle down under load, all channels stays fully opened, there is no bottleneck, and low latency RAM + low latency CPU combined to give much higher gaming performances.

Now those AMD bashers can bring all their Youtube videos as well, so far I haven't seen ONE which gives the RAM/CPU details and when they do, it's showing a bottleneck (Cl14 removes it), no wonder Intel CPU compare well...

You want your Ryzen 3 to run fast? = Cl14, 4 X 1 rank for interleaving, from 3200MHz, you can easily O.C it to 3600MHz or fit a 3600MHz kit as I did to avoid O.Cing but the 5800X 3D will really fly with this RAM.

ps, the 5800X 3D also runs faster than the 5800X in multithreading, by memory, something like 25%... In a mainly CPU based game, the cache brings 20% gain, the Cl14 RAM 12.34%, multithreading isn't gonna be an issue with this bound...

Edited March 5, 2023 by Thinder

[Dragon1-1]

You again with your peddling. No, your overpriced magic RAM won't magically make things better in the actual sim. It might show up on benchmarks, but it's a rather hard sell that it'll translate to real usage in a meaningful way.

[SkateZilla]

Its Valid in DCS.

B.Die Ram + SMA + VCACHE = Better Performance in DX9/11 Graphics Engines.

Edited March 6, 2023 by SkateZilla

[Dragon1-1]

1 hour ago, SkateZilla said:

B.Die Ram + SMA + VCACHE = Better Performance in DX9/11 Graphics Engines.

Ah, so that's why it works so well for him.  It's because our outdated and obsolete graphics engine is particularly sensitive to this kind of thing. I guess it's similar to why 5800X3D performs disproportionately well in DCS, although it's a beast in modern graphics-heavy titles, too.

I kind of regret not getting that kind of setup now, although won't matter with Vulkan, which is a lot more sensible, and should become a non-factor with multicore.

[SkateZilla]

1 hour ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Ah, so that's why it works so well for him.  It's because our outdated and obsolete graphics engine is particularly sensitive to this kind of thing. I guess it's similar to why 5800X3D performs disproportionately well in DCS, although it's a beast in modern graphics-heavy titles, too.

I kind of regret not getting that kind of setup now, although won't matter with Vulkan, which is a lot more sensible, and should become a non-factor with multicore.

Something that kills FPS in DCS is DRAW CALLS.

Having enough Cache to store more directly on the CPU Lowers the CPU Overhead on the draw calls.

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

2 hours ago, SkateZilla said:

Something that kills FPS in DCS is DRAW CALLS.

Having enough Cache to store more directly on the CPU Lowers the CPU Overhead on the draw calls.

Will this continue to be relevant once we have a fully fleshed out DCS 3.0 with MT + Vulkan, or will the gain from 3D cache be lower than it is now?
Or are flight sims a genre were 3d cache will always offer substantial benefits?

[Pride37]

12 hours ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

Will this continue to be relevant once we have a fully fleshed out DCS 3.0 with MT + Vulkan, or will the gain from 3D cache be lower than it is now?
Or are flight sims a genre were 3d cache will always offer substantial benefits?

THIS!!! That's exactly THE most important question I'm asking while I'm eagerly waiting for the 7800X3D to upgrade... Or go for a cheaper 13700K now...

I know the best is to wait one more month for the benchmarks in DCS to come, but after that, how will it scale when we have full MT and Vulkan support??

[Hoirtel]

49 minutes ago, Pride37 said:

THIS!!! That's exactly THE most important question I'm asking while I'm eagerly waiting for the 7800X3D to upgrade... Or go for a cheaper 13700K now...

I know the best is to wait one more month for the benchmarks in DCS to come, but after that, how will it scale when we have full MT and Vulkan support??

Considering the vcache helps in most games I can't see this changing but I am also in a similar position to you, waiting to upgrade. I think if you are a VR user vcache will still be very helpful. I think MSFS uses a few threads and this still really likes vcache.