• kadu@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    and it has 47 threads

    I believe you’ve made a typo. But either way, the game can only use (effectively) 4 threads. Your CPU is got 4 cores 4 threads, so 100% usage makes a ton of sense. If you upgraded to a multithreaded 4 cores 8 threads CPU, you’d see performance in this game would not scale up as it should.

    • DacoTaco@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why should it? It runs 60fps at ease with a better system And no, not a typo (Trying to add a screenshot, but liftoff is acting weird)

      • kadu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You do not have 47 threads, friend. If this wasn’t a typo, this does mean you don’t know what a CPU thread is.

        • DacoTaco@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Im a developer, and ive written a thread scheduler for an os, i know what threads are :')
          The game has 47 threads, which you can verify in task manager. What you are thinking of is how many threads the cpu can process in parallel, which is indeed 4 on my cpu and nowhere before was it said you were talking about cpu “cores” ( or cpu threads like you call them )

          However, like i said, the game runs perfectly on my system and my friends’ so the engine and windows seem to balance the priority and timings of those 47 threads just nicely here, even past act 2, and i dont see why it would need to use more cpu cores to process… Nothing. Adding more threads and using more cpu cores does not always mean faster processing of data…