What would you advise ?

like I said an AM with six '01's would be a good start.

The best way to set up the sim is to start with low settings and increase them until we see performance is suffering then go back a notch. So with applying AMs to big core counts we do the same thing - we start off with four or six cores allocated sensibly with '01's. Then we study that and try increases until we see no improvements. We do it that way because after a point we don't see gains at all but the CPU will increase in heat unnecessarily - giving AMs and HT a bad name.

Look at it another way: Let's say we have a system that when we run four cores with aggressive processes they saturate the available system bandwidth. What happens if we add another? The available bandwidth is divided some more. In that way an app with the monolithic main rendering task like P3D will suffer.

What happens after that is we can get a fake kind of 'smoothness' to the sim but it runs  inefficiently - if we only study fraps graphs we might think we have a good setup.

As Hasse has an 18 core 7980x with HT and is using 20 lp’s I probably would try that too . Especially with 3 outside views.

00,00,00,01.01,01,01,01,01,01,01,01,01,00

This ?

 

As I said before - 6 cores should be enough to start with - work with that first - don't just go and whack in 10 cores! How do you think four core guys rigs operate - they get along just fine.

If we have 14 urns we can collect water from the river and fill up our swimming pool in no time!

Funny thing is we can carry two or three but when we try to carry more we spill the water all over ourselves, forget the idea of swimming, and go down the pub instead.

Starting with 6 urns, I mean cores, is better that way then try adding more looking for the sweetspot your system can handle.

You'll notice that the monolithic nature of the processes we keep to the HT enabled '01' configuration work the same if we have HT off and '1'.

So we are using AMs for our other apps to keep them away from those cores, we don't want the unused HT LP used by another app. So we can say that P3D doesn't require Hyperthreading as it's making those processes that stick to their LPs. That's true but we want other stuff to utilise the improvements of HT where we can get it, that's in the system resources the sims draw from.

Gerard. Start with HT disabled and use an AM with 6 '1's in it -  00000011111100 = 252 would be a good place to start. keep other exe's out of exe.xml and start those in a batch on the 11110000000000 last four cores, leave the first two empty. Increase core count after 8 reduce the addon exe cores accordingly to test more cores.

When you've workout out the core allocations you can then worry about setting that all up so that the first LP available to the sim is the one that can run fastest. And consider where the most used cores might be located apart with lesser inbetween.

After that you need to consider HT enabled and that calls for your '01's, or '10's if you prefer for the main sim processes that want and have been designed to split onto other cores - remember they don't know if it's the next core or just the next HT LP so we AM those.

Adding more cores mainly reduces the scenario load times which you can see with a stopwatch, check them twice because of windows caching - remember the sim takes longer to start up after a cold boot than it does the next time in. When you add cores and don't get a decrease in scenario load time you added too many.

Edited March 16, 20188 yr by SteveW

 Hi guys, sorry for interrupting but what do you think of using Process Lasso to manage the CPU cores.  I have a 4 core 'HT on' CPU and  an AM to start P3Dv4 (Main Thread) on Core 1 (84 = 01,01,01,00).

I then set Process Lasso to run P3D on 01,01,01,10  and all other programs tasks on 10,10,00,01...

 

Therefore the full Core 1 is only available to the Main thread of P3d. and the rest of the Cores are shared but on different threads ...

Is Process Lasso a good way of managing things ?

Use that for addon apps and exe's from the exe.xml that *do not handle affinity*. P3D has the special section [JOBSCHEDULER] where you specify an AM for P3D to do its own thing.

1 hour ago, SteveW said:

Use that for addon apps and exe's from the exe.xml that *do not handle affinity*. P3D has the special section [JOBSCHEDULER] where you specify an AM for P3D to do its own thing.

I have the AM=84 01,01,01,00  in the Config....   but this is mainly to make sure the MAIN P3D thread starts on CORE 1... 

Once the Main thread has started on CORE 1 then it tends to stay there and the bonus is with the Affinity mask in Process Lasso set to allow P3D to run on CORE 0  other P3D threads can use Core 0 thread 10   and they do start spawning here ...

 

Therefore the Main P3D thread  CORE 1 remains clean and away from new processes etc starting on CORE 0...

 

and P3D has a presence on all CORES..

 

 

Edited March 16, 20188 yr by aerostar

Well ,  I forgot I'd changed things a bit experimenting and this shows not exactly as I was saying...  the OTHER programs processes are seperate except sharing on core 3 (thread 6) but the main thing , I thought was to keep P3D main thread on a core all to itself (core 1) away from (core 0) where most new processes start and give it a presence on all cores and the rest of the programs / processes have 3 cores to use.

Or maybe from what I think Steve said it would be better if I set P3D to use 1;2;4-7  

Nothing is supposed to be running on CORE 1 (thread 3) don't know why there is activity...  this started after the big WIN 10 update a short while ago. Can't find any mention of any processes on here.

Edited March 16, 20188 yr by aerostar

Hi Aerostar,

Steve surely will get back to you. We are very lucky to have someone like him around 

However , as far as I know : use AM for Fs and PL for the rest.

I even use it more enhanced following Steve’s advice :  AM for Fs and Affinity batchfiles ( starting up on specific cores ) for all Fs addons. PL then may do the rest.

 

Edited March 17, 20188 yr by GSalden