Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
redeyes
Sep 14, 2002
I LOVE THE WHITE STRIPES!

Computer in question:


If its not obvious I can't run most of the games installed on this system. They mostly crash at the loader screen. After doing research, the issue seems to be too many drat cores?!

So other than disabling cores in the BIOS, are there any tricks to getting games like Farcry 4 to work with this monster system?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

SamDabbers
May 26, 2003




Have you tried setting processor affinity?

redeyes
Sep 14, 2002
I LOVE THE WHITE STRIPES!

SamDabbers posted:

Have you tried setting processor affinity?

Just tried a few combinations of settings for this and nothing seemed to affect it.. IE, instant crash at loader screen.

Phoenixan
Jan 16, 2010

Just Keep Cool-idge


There might be a few things you can set via the launch options. I had to do the same with System Shock 2 before the Steam and GOG versions came about.

Good luck!

SlayVus
Jul 10, 2009


Grimey Drawer

I know third deadly shadows has this problem. I'm on my phone, but there was a program you could use to set affinity for the program before it launched. In TDS, you had to get the affinity set before it finished with the beginning starting videos or else it would crash.

The_Franz
Aug 8, 2003



Do you have proper video drivers installed? Older games from the turn of the century had problems running on more than one core, but new games are built for threading and shouldn't care if you have two cores or 32. If everything is crashing then there is probably something else wrong.

1gnoirents
Jun 28, 2014

hello :)

Might be kind of extreme but perhaps pull a cpu out and try again. At least it might let you know

redeyes
Sep 14, 2002
I LOVE THE WHITE STRIPES!

1gnoirents posted:

Might be kind of extreme but perhaps pull a cpu out and try again. At least it might let you know

I can disable a CPU by adding a jumper on the motherboard but that isn't acceptable for this box. The answer seems to be.. use a different computer. This particular box was setup to do audio production and although it does work for that, I didn't design it and some of the choices the people made are not appropriate for a DAW.. like putting in a 3D video card and trying to run games. Oh well.

gary oldmans diary
Sep 26, 2005


Have you attempted the fix that dual-core gamers used to make Far Cry 4 think they had 4 cores as it prefers? (https://cpucorefaker.codeplex.com/)
Also, when you set processor affinity did you specify the first 4 cores? Are you setting affinity in Task Manager after it starts or starting it with affinity set (start /affinity 15 farcry4.exe (where 15 is the decimal representation of cores 0-3 in binary 00001111B))?

gary oldmans diary fucked around with this message at 19:51 on Mar 8, 2015

redeyes
Sep 14, 2002
I LOVE THE WHITE STRIPES!

gary oldmans diary posted:

Have you attempted the fix that dual-core gamers used to make Far Cry 4 think they had 4 cores as it prefers? (https://cpucorefaker.codeplex.com/)
Also, when you set processor affinity did you specify the first 4 cores? Are you setting affinity in Task Manager after it starts or starting it with affinity set (start /affinity 15 farcry4.exe (where 15 is the decimal representation of cores 0-3 in binary 00001111B))?

K I did try the start affinity using a batch file., though, I may have done it wrong. I'll try a few more times.

The cpucorefaker looks interesting but there is nothing to download except source code?

Factory Factory
Mar 19, 2010

This is what
Arcane Velocity was like.


IIRC it's a problem with sockets, not cores. Some games can't handle the way memory is managed in dual-socket systems.

redeyes
Sep 14, 2002
I LOVE THE WHITE STRIPES!

Factory Factory posted:

IIRC it's a problem with sockets, not cores. Some games can't handle the way memory is managed in dual-socket systems.

Yeah I am getting nowhere with this machine. Since it was not really for gaming in the first place I am recommending building a separate box. With the amount of money dumped into this thing, i'm sure the owner can buy something else as well.

redeyes fucked around with this message at 17:22 on Mar 10, 2015

Video Nasty
Jun 17, 2003



This will sound absolutely stupid, but how is it possible for a CPU to have 32 cores and only output ~4gHz?

Alereon
Feb 6, 2004

Dehumanize yourself and face to Trumpshed

College Slice

Jake Blues posted:

This will sound absolutely stupid, but how is it possible for a CPU to have 32 cores and only output ~4gHz?
The clock speed is a measure of how fast the transistors are cycling, it isn't a measurement of performance and doesn't get added up between CPU cores. A 4Ghz quad-core CPU has four cores that each cycle up to four billion times per second. In order to translate clockspeed into performance you need to know how much work the CPU does each clock cycle (this measurement is called IPC, or Instructions Per Clock), which depends on the design of the CPU and the specific job it is working on. For example, AMD CPUs tend to do significantly less work on average per clock cycle than Intel processors, so a 4Ghz AMD CPU will be significantly slower than a 4Ghz Intel CPU. This is an average however, so while AMD CPUs tend to be particularly bad at gaming, there are some workloads where they can even be faster than Intel CPUs. You can't usually add up performance for each core to get a total, because most applications usually aren't able to use all available cores.

An additional complication is that higher-end Intel CPUs use a technology called HyperThreading that allows each CPU core to work on two tasks at once, appearing as two cores to Windows. This improves performance by about 10%, as the core can immediately begin working on the other task as soon as the first has to pause to wait for data for example. Overall, this means that a system with 32 cores in Windows probably has two CPU sockets with 8 physical cores each, but appearing as 16 logical cores each to Windows.

TWBalls
Apr 16, 2003
My medication never lies

Alereon posted:

An additional complication is that higher-end Intel CPUs use a technology called HyperThreading that allows each CPU core to work on two tasks at once, appearing as two cores to Windows. This improves performance by about 10%, as the core can immediately begin working on the other task as soon as the first has to pause to wait for data for example. Overall, this means that a system with 32 cores in Windows probably has two CPU sockets with 8 physical cores each, but appearing as 16 logical cores each to Windows.

Yup. Pretty sure this is the processor.

gary oldmans diary
Sep 26, 2005


gary oldmans diary posted:

start /affinity 15 farcry4.exe (where 15 is the decimal representation of cores 0-3 in binary 00001111B)
Whoops it's hexadecimal, not decimal, so you would've prepended the shortcut target to something like C:\Windows\System32\cmd.exe /C START /affinity F “C:\Program Files (x86)\Ubisoft\Ubisoft Game Launcher\games\Far Cry 4\bin\FarCry4.exe” -skipintro

Sounds kinda strange if the game fails on multiple CPUs instead of just not being able to take advantage of multiple CPUs.

wolrah
May 8, 2006
what?


gary oldmans diary posted:

Sounds kinda strange if the game fails on multiple CPUs instead of just not being able to take advantage of multiple CPUs.

Factory Factory hit on a pretty good possibility:

Factory Factory posted:

IIRC it's a problem with sockets, not cores. Some games can't handle the way memory is managed in dual-socket systems.

To explain further, in older PCs the memory controller was in the northbridge of the motherboard chipset. The CPU(s) communicated with it over the Front Side Bus and every CPU ended up with the same view of the memory. In 2003 however this changed when AMD introduced the K8 family. The Athlon 64s and their server counterparts in the Opteron line moved the memory controller on to the CPU package itself to improve performance, but by doing so they split the memory space so in a multi-socket system you now have as many independent chunks of memory as you have CPUs. Look in to NUMA for the details if you want more info. Intel switched to the same kind of design with an onboard memory controller a lot more recently with Nehalem (Core i3/5/7 and related Xeons).

Basically multi-socket makes for a lot more complicated of a memory environment than a single socket system with the same number of cores.

I'm not sure how this would cause a game to actually crash, it should only result in significantly worse performance if it needs to use memory attached to another socket, but it certainly is a notable difference tied specifically to modern multi-socket systems.

Ahdinko
Oct 27, 2007

WHAT A LOVELY DAY


What happens if you disable HyperThreading? (assuming you have it enabled here as its showing 32 logical cores)
That'll at least bring you down to 16 cores in Windows.

If it still happens, use the /numproc=1 boot switch: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/833721. You can use EasyBCD to setup two boot options so you have a normal boot, and a boot where it only uses one processor. At least it'll save you from loving around taking the lid off the case every time. http://neosmart.net/EasyBCD/.

Microsoft's documentation is unclear as to if that numproc switch is for physical or logical processors, so you might have to experiment a bit.

Ahdinko fucked around with this message at 13:30 on Mar 12, 2015

KillHour
Oct 28, 2007



I'm trying to figure out why you dropped $3800 on processors for a DAW, yet have a lovely 4:3 monitor hooked up to it. A proper screen setup is going to increase productivity WAY more than doing a FFT 10% faster. You moron.

MaxxBot
Oct 6, 2003

you could have clapped

you should have clapped!!


KillHour posted:

I'm trying to figure out why you dropped $3800 on processors for a DAW, yet have a lovely 4:3 monitor hooked up to it. A proper screen setup is going to increase productivity WAY more than doing a FFT 10% faster. You moron.

I'm trying to figure out why you seem to think this is the OP's personal machine when they made it really clear that it isn't.

open container
Sep 15, 2008


KillHour posted:

I'm trying to figure out why you dropped $3800 on processors for a DAW, yet have a lovely 4:3 monitor hooked up to it. A proper screen setup is going to increase productivity WAY more than doing a FFT 10% faster. You moron.

More CPU power in a DAW means you can run more plugins on more tracks without bouncing to disk. You are sculpting the sound in real time. It's not at all like rendering a video or something.

Also not sure why you think screen real estate is so important when working with audio.

open container fucked around with this message at 23:45 on Mar 18, 2015

Combat Pretzel
Jun 23, 2004

No, seriously... what kurds?!

open container posted:

Also not sure why you think screen real estate is so important when working with audio.
Fitting all the poo poo in Ableton, Bitwig, Logic or whatever else on screen and be able to comfortably use the user interface.

redeyes
Sep 14, 2002
I LOVE THE WHITE STRIPES!

Yes this is not my personal machine. That was just some crap Gateway monitor for diagnosing problems. No worries folks! The number of CPUs does indeed matter for a DAW for plugins but... This dude has massive outboard DSPs.. racks of em, so CPU matters less in this case. Truth be told this machine was an 'Audiophile' box. Which basically means completely bullshit. It came with a modded Corsair PSU that had pieces of metal shoved into gaps between components:



Like I said, dude in question has money to buy a gaming box and that is what he will be doing.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Combat Pretzel
Jun 23, 2004

No, seriously... what kurds?!

I remember that image from the Audiophile thread.

  • Locked thread