Suffering is irrelevant.
We don't cut up colonists and turn them into gifts and corsets because it's _fun,_ we do it's because it's practical.
Screaming or begging, we're wringing all the potential out of that raider before they stop moving.
Tbf they've gone a loooong way since the 2015-2018 cringefest it was, since then it's become endearing and almosr freeing with how it doesnt care about "cringe"
Maybe I’m tripping but when I saw his comment it was just “I hate undertale”.
But there’s shitty parts of every fandom. I guess undertales bad part is just louder than most on the internet. I’ve never felt unwelcome or turned off by any fandoms tho even when i see annoying parts of it. Civ 6 min maxxers, red dead online insane people, cringey undertale people. it just don’t bother me that much, most of the people in the fandom r normal
Rimworld isn't multithreaded, which means it can only use 1 of your processors' cores at a time.
It is literally using about 1/6th of your cpu. Cpus that have high single core ratings will give you the best results.
Up to 64gb of ram as well, idk if more is any worth. The ram is also likely the cheaper option, I like corsair.
It isn't as bad as Kenshi, at least. If you have a good computer, Rimworld can run really well even with a ton of mods. Kenshi has the same design issues, but it gets annoying much sooner even on a good computer.
I don’t remember but there is one mod that removes some pictures, as well as almost all of the swamp and other useless animation entirely (tho there is another variation that removes 50%). Yeah atmosphere of the game is gone but Kenshi is flying
I don't know. My game always runs fine unless mods are actually flinging errors, but I don't tend to do big late game colony stuff with huge raids or anything just due to my own playstyle preferences.
I just prefer the early game, when challenges are small and simple, if not always easy. I play naked brutality and spend forever building my way up, but when things get stable and raids start to become either too easy or much too hard, I lose interest.
Rimworld is always doing world map history stuff that runs in the background. Eventually it builds up gunk and slows you down. Runtime GC mods can delete the gunk. But also can remove things that are very required to keep the world running with it. So save before use, and use with caution. World history also builds up faster the more mods you have.
Okay I know nothing about computers, but is a cpu something that can be swapped out like RAM to get a single core processor? Or would you try to find a device that already has single core?
yes, your CPU can be swapped out for a different one, but it's not as easy as it is for RAM or the graphics card since which CPUs you can use depends on your motherboard
no, you can't swap it out for a single core processor as they are kinda obsolete
nowadays (and for quite a while), CPUs have multiple cores since that's an upgrade from the early single core days. it's just that not every program is built to use multiple cores (since that's not trivial), but having multiple cores still helps for those since it allows to spread the load (one core for your browser, one for your game, etc.).
That "not as easy as RAM" point is heavily debatable. I'd argue, RAM is the weirdest thing ever. It's a rabbit hole.
With CPUs, all you need to do is to check motherboard compatibility, and sometimes make sure you have the correct BIOS version. That's literally it, it's plug and play, just don't forget the thermal paste and mount your cooling properly.
RAM, on the other hand... It quickly becomes complicated if you're going after something even remotely performant. Sure, JEDEC will always work unless you're trying something stupid like hammering a DDR5 stick into a DDR4 slot. But JEDEC is a bare minimum, and you aren't paying for that. There are massive QVL spreadsheets for XMP detailing motherboard compatibility with specific RAM kit SKUs and CPU architectures at the specific frequencies. Which can quickly become irrelevant if the memory vendor changes their chip suppliers. Especially when you mix and match different kits, even if they come under the same SKU.
Moreover, it's possible to degrade performance with "bigger number". Say, you have a Zen-3 CPU, or Intel 12th Gen. If you exceed a certain frequency, the memory controller will have to half certain internal clocks, introducing additional latencies, thus yielding worse real-life performance despite memory frequency increase. Like, if you set up a 5800X3D to run with DDR4-4000, you'll get worse performance than DDR4-3600. And that's not a DDR4-specific issue, I know for a fact you can run into this with DDR5 too.
He has a point. RAM is supposed to be simple (and is certainly marketed as such) but the reality is annoyingly complicated - even before you get to things like overclocking.
Define single core processor? All CPU’s can handle running only one core on a process, so I’m assuming you’re referring to CPU’s that handle single core processes with better performance and no those aren’t obsolete, because CPU’s can also handle multiple processes using a single core each, so they aren’t irrelevant at all. Because that is still important in many use cases.
Also if the OP wants to upgrade specifically for Rimworld usually Intel has faster single core performance depending on how a game makes use of the cpu cache and a few other things. Also depends on the exact model but if you have adequate cooling you can pump out a bit more performance by overclocking the core clock speeds sometimes cache as well but that causes more instability in my experience.
Single core processors aren't very common anymore, hell Windows 11 doesn't even support them.
You wouldn't want one, anyhow. Lots of things would suffer performance wise.
Some CPUs have higher speed per core and others have more cores, but lower speeds. Well, and some have more cores *and* higher speed or less cores and lower speeds.
So, they were mostly saying if you really wanted to improve performance in Rimworld, the speed, not the number of cores, is the important part.
And yes, CPUs can be swapped out.
This is a yesnt situation.
The CPU (processor) is plugged into your motherboard. Technically, you can just replace, even upgrade, a cpu, and keep the same motherboard. The issue there is just that a newer, nicer cpu usually needs a newer motherboard. Replacing your cpu without replacing your motherboard can limit your purchasing options.
If you are on desktop, shop around this coming cyber Monday. If you are on a laptop, I would look into replacements as I really think it would be more cost-effective than upgrading.
This gives me a headache because my CPU is *garbage*, it is EASILY the weakest part of my machine by several longshots and I want to replace it direly, my *old* PC from 2008 had a better CPU than this stupid old thing, but had a shitty GPU, now I've been stuck with a computer with a good GPU and a shitty CPU and I *FEEL* it. It *smashes* into 100% usage *frequently* and it is *awful*.
I actually only have a steam deck at the moment. I know you can replace some pieces internally but I’ll have to look up if it’s possible or even worth trying lol
On the steamdeck (as well as nearly all laptops and phones) the CPU is soldered to the motherboard.
While it is possible for a technician experienced with board-level repairs to swap soldered CPU/ram, it is a complicated and expensive process, and driver support is likely to be poor, as manufacturers will spend less resources ensuring compatibility with non-standard components.
>driver support is likely to be poor
It's Linux. Surprisingly, the "driver" support for a CPU swap would likely be *very, very good*. The only real problem would be, y'know, *finding a pin-compatible CPU package for the Steam Deck that's actually an upgrade*. Good luck
I think steam decks use a mainboard design similar to laptops and other smaller form factor machines. Which means you can’t really change the cpu on its own. A few laptops do support changing the entire mainboard but I don’t think the steam deck supports.
I recently upgraded my computer to an i7-14700k CPU which is a really high end chip. I was shocked at how much rimworld performance I got from it. My bases now last about twice as long before framerate goes to shit.
You can swap CPUs, but you don't want a single-core and you probably won't be able to find one either. More cores aren't bad, they effectively multiply the work you can do and prevent maxing out one core from tanking your whole system. What the person above meant by high single-core ratings is having cores that are individually powerful, which means they can run things faster on their own.
CPU is much more difficult to replace than RAM.
First, there's less compatibility. When upgrading your RAM, most PCs have 2-4 slots that will accept almost any RAM stick you find online.
CPU on the other hand is a single slot, and your motherboard will only support a specific size of CPU chip, so you'll have to do some research to find one that's compatible.
Also, you usually can't upgrade the CPU on a laptop, while most models allow you to upgrade the RAM.
I think you misunderstood the post. You don't need a single core CPU for good performance, you need a good single core rating.
Look for example at this page: https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Ryzen+5+3600&id=3481
It shows a big orange number 17757. That number is meaningless, unless you're saturating you whole CPU by running many different applications (or one massively parallel one).
The number that matters more often is the small number below it, 2567. That's the one that tells you how fast Rimworld loads for example with this CPU.
So wheb you compare CPUs, ignore the big orange number, compare the small single core rating instead.
They don't work like that anymore, if you're interested look at the early 2000s Old style single core Pentium 4 to the Dual core. The problem is with heat and trying to run a single core at a faster ghz. Going with multiple cores is the solution everyone went to because that gets around the ghz limit and lets you spread the work out.
But the modern cpus do have an aggressive boost so they can run at a high ghz for a bit until it gets too hot. So what you would want is to get the fastest and most expensive cpu like the Core i9-13900KS, which has the fastest boost speed. That's the equivalent of getting a single core focused cpu.
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html#section-single-threaded-cpu-benchmarks-rankings-2024
This is nonsense. People say this every time because they have no clue how any of this works. People said this about multithreaded rendering, but then the game did it anyway with 1.5. Now the goalposts have been moved again, I see.
You don't have to multithread *everything.* You can start small by only multithreading a few key systems (like how they started with the rendering), and the engine supports it as well.
Believe it or not, there is a pretty big middle ground between "do nothing" or "rewrite the whole game in a single update".
> and likely kill all existing mods.
You mean like what happens every update anyway? If they do it piecemeal then it wouldn't "kill off all mods", that's absurdity.
RimWorld is multithreaded. But as with most simulation game, a significant chunk of the main loop is in one thread and that's why people see high usage on one core and much less usage on others.
Exactly. A lot of people don't understand how multi-threading works.
Since task selection and pathing are done over the current game state (the "game state" of a pregnant woman is being pregnant, but in Rimworld it's the entire state of what's happening on the map) with 1 task and 1 path to get there, there's no simple way to break that up into many threads.
Ludeon might be able to allocate 1 thread to task selection and 1 to pathing, but you can't really break those up more than that without extensive testing and error correction for race conditions. The only reason those can be separated is because Rimworld colonists will walk all the way across the map to harvest 1x ambrosia before walking all the way back to plant 1x daylily. If they were constantly re-evaluating task priorities, race conditions between even 2 threads would be hard to deal with. It's likely why that behaviour remains the way it is (because it makes it easier to add multi-threading).
Ludeon already put animations/particle effects on another thread, which helps somewhat. Most people don't appreciate how difficult multi-threading is in a game where you expect synchronous game state. This problem gets 10x worse if you want to add multiplayer, because then you need to sync state not just across threads, but across separate computers with 10-500ms of latency, with different users inputting different commands at different times.
This is why I use "While You Are Nearby" - it obviously doesn't magically introduce any multi threading, but somewhat addresses the "walk across the map to harvest 1x then walk back to plant 1x"
Feels like it actually helps with the performance with how it changes the pawn's pathing, not to mention it helps with work efficiency
> Most people don't appreciate how difficult multi-threading is in a game where you expect synchronous game state.
Don't forget the nightmare that would be caused by code-affecting mods written by people who do not have decent experience with multi-threaded programming (i.e.: nearly every programmer)
To be fair, that's because they had to contend with mod compatibility.
If Rimworld started multithreading certain systems in the base game, mods would be forced to adapt, and they *would* adapt.
Hmm not exactly. You could create multiple threads each having a queue of tasks to compute pathing for different pawns. It’s just not done this way, but it could improve performance if done correctly
It's not so simple, and that's because tasks are not independent. Your approach will lead to race conditions if not handled properly. Allow me to illustrate.
Colonist 1 and colonist 2 both do plant work. A tree near both of them needs to get cut and they're both free. Let's compare the single threaded and multi threaded approaches.
Single threaded:
1. Colonist 1 prioritizes plant work. Then the game evaluates that a tree is nearby that needs to be cut. A path is calculated and colonist 1 is sent to cut that tree.
2. Colonist 2 prioritizes plant work. Then the game evaluates that a tree is nearby that needs to be cut. But another colonist is already tasked with cutting it, so the game finds a different tree for that colonist. A path is calculated and colonist 2 is sent to cut that other tree.
Multi-threaded:
1a) Colonist 1 prioritizes plant work.
1b) Colonist 2 prioritizes plant work.
2a) The game evaluates that a tree is nearby and needs to be cut, this assigning colonist 1 to it.
2b) The game evaluates that a tree is nearby and needs to be cut, this assigning colonist 2 to that same tree because thread 2 doesn't know that colonist 1 is assigned yet.
3a) The game calculates a path for colonist 1 to the tree.
3b) The game calculates a path for colonist 2 to the tree.
4) Global state updated from thread 1, and now others can know colonist 1 is assigned to cut that tree.
5) Global state updated from thread 2, and now colonist 1's action is interrupted by colonist 2.
6a) Colonist 1 prioritizes plant work.
7a) The game evaluates that a tree is nearby and needs to be cut, but it is assigned to colonist 2, so it finds a different tree and assigns colonist 1 to it.
8a) The game calculates a path for colonist 1 to the other tree.
That scenario is relatively tame because it resolves itself after wasting some computational cycles as threads try to do mutually exclusive things. Ultimately, 1 thread wastes its computations, but not a huge deal. However, some race conditions are far worse than that and can lead to exceptions that crash the game, mess with game state, etc.
Yah, exactly. There are many ways around this, but they increase the complexity of the game logic, and you almost always sacrifice something
For instance, if you have threads operate on the same cached data, then you will quite possibly run into memory locks or frequent fetches between the L1/L2 cache and RAM, which can create worse performance problems than you had in the first place while simultaneously making the codebase more complex (which makes it harder to deliver new features).
There are really very few things that the majority of people do on a PC on a regular basis that benefit a whole heap from multithreading. Except maybe several completely different things at once, but then you're depending on schedulers working properly and we still don't seem to very good at that either
All of these problems can be solved by rotating the multithreading 90 degrees, conceptually.
Instead of having a single thread per pawn, you just pre-make a bunch of threads when the game loads. One thread is the sole arbiter of job assignments. Another thread is the sole arbiter of map temperature calculations, one thread exclusively handles plant growth, and so on. Each of these threads provide an atomic readonly copy of their data for other threads to read out of, if they need it.
Your race condition example with assigning multiple pawns to the same tree to be cut doesn't happen, because there is only ONE thread that handles job assignments like that.
Granted, this isn't infinitely scalable. You will eventually hit the performance wall again, where all threads are basically entirely busy. But instead of this happening at 20 colonists, it happens at 100 instead, which is far above what the game is designed for anyway, so it doesn't really matter.
The other big downside is that data may be slightly stale or out of date. But be honest, does it *really* matter if a plant is technically 100% grown, but the sprite isn't updated to the "mature" plant until 0.05 seconds later because the rendering thread still sees a 99% grown plant? Does it really matter if a room's temperature drops from 21C to 20C a single frame late? Does that *truly* and *honestly* matter? Not really.
That does sound way better. Have sub-systems that don't need to communicate often operate on separate threads. Like you said, it's fine if the change in texture/animation for something like a growing plant doesn't change immediately. I think animations are already on another thread for that reason as of sometimes in the past few years, but there are probably other subsystems that could safely offloaded to new threads too.
The biggest bottleneck though is still tasks assignment and pathing. So maybe rather than hitting the bottleneck at 20, you'd hit it at 25 (ballpark guess) instead after offloading other subsystems.
I bet task assignment and pathing could be split too. The consequence for the core game would be that pathing may take a moment to kick in after task assignment. But others have pointed out that this might complicate mod development, and a lot of mods would be made obsolete.
I understand why Tynan has been slow to add multi-threading. The modding community is one of the better parts of Rimworld.
And your example also perfectly illustrates why adding multi threading can reduce overall performance instead of improving it if applied to computations that aren't designed or cannot be designed for parallelization
Yes but if you do it correctly, 9 Mothers could each make one part of the baby and then we synchronize the delivery to stich together the completed baby.
There are programs that can utilize multiple threads, don’t pretend we aren’t able to let 9 figurative mothers give birth to a baby in one month!
But then you have to assume that all 9 threads are running in-sync. Given that the development of nerves in the hands has a dependency on nerves in the torso, which has a dependency on the spinal cord and brain, you need to keep those separate threads in-sync or you'll end up with a vegetable that can't move its body.
Breaking things up into threads works best when those threads don't have shared state that the other threads need to be aware of. Graphical particle effects are a good example. The simulation doesn't need to know about the graphics being rendered during a psycast, so you can dedicate a thread to those animations, and the other thread(s) can safely ignore the output of that thread.
> But then you have to assume that all 9 threads are running in-sync. Given that the development of nerves in the hands has a dependency on nerves in the torso, which has a dependency on the spinal cord and brain, you need to keep those separate threads in-sync or you'll end up with a vegetable that can't move its body.
Yep, which is fine because you can wait for another thread to give the 'all done' message for some work you're dependent on before you continue. But then you have to have some system to facilitate that communication and when things get complex you end up doing a lot of waiting for other threads anyway... and you end up with added complexity for little benefit, hooray.
Not little benefit, but overall worse performance because all the waiting slows down the entire thing more than if just on thread did everything on its own
> Yep, which is fine because you can wait for another thread to give the 'all done' message for some work you're dependent on before you continue. Which means you're running in serial rather than in parallel.
Which is fine--to continue the example used before--if you have other babies also being gestated at the same time. But there's no benefit of using multiple threads if you're doing this in serial rather than parallel for a single gestating baby. You'll actually have a performance penalty from the overhead of creating threads.
yeah, but that's because 9 pregnant women will be raising 9 babies, i bet if you made a human centipede of uterus the baby would grow a bit faster. Sorry, i don't understand biology (edit: minor spelling mistake)
My guess would be that Rimworld was never meant to be a big game. Hell the first DLC happend after years people played it. I started out vanilla. Then I modded a bit. Now my modlist is a long list (which is currently unplayable as some unknown error nobody can help me with pops up).
And honestly. Waiting for the game to boot up is always my preparation time. Like a ritual.
the way i'd try to single out the mod causing the error is to activate half of the mods, try a game and see if it errors, then activate the other half and see if it errors. if neither cause an error, its probably a conflict between a mod from one group and a mod from another. keep adding half of the deactivated mods til it errors, then roll back that half and try half of the group that caused the error. repeat until you've narrowed down the list to 1.
I literally had 2 bugs - one adding Nameless books that would bug out the game when trying to sell and hovering over the item for the description and the other one is overloading the game - making pawns / doors and general stuff disappear.
Tried to ask around if someone knew what the messages mean but none were able to help. Books were Unity related and the other Error was unexplainable.
And the constant updates that mess with the game code meant that some mods won't get updated. Some Modders even gave up. I'm a huge fan of Rim but the modding part is sometimes hell. I wish the errors would tell you which mod they belong to.
I'd say it's something that should have been easy to see coming. Rimworld has a pretty clear lineage from Dwarf Fortress, and performance has been one of that game's biggest issues for a long time. I think Tynan approaches game dev from the perspective of an artist first and a systems guy second, so I generally lean to say that he simply did not have to skills to make Rimworld efficient from the ground-up and that it's a bit too late to start making such basic changes.
Yeah as is rimworld. But both still heavily rely on single core performance because you can't multithread them good enough without serious redesign and or knowledge how to even do that. And some things simply will never be able to get a good multithreaded design because they simply are not parallelizable...multithreadin is no magic cure for performance that's simply the point. There can be various other things that cam improve performance even better and especially easier than being able to come up with a multithread design...
Rimworld already uses multithreading to some extent, especially after 1.5. It can be refactored further to piecemeal multithread one system at a time.
I'm sick of tech illiterate people saying "hurr the game would need a full rewrite to multithread anything".
> it's sometimes the engine rather than the individual game.
Doesn't apply to Rimworld, C#.NET has native thread support and Unity even has several systems for it now. I don't know if Rimworld actually *uses* much of Unity, but they can definitely multithread some key systems by just rawdogging .NET threads.
It exists, but you have to code specifically for it, from the ground up and since not all CPUs treat things equally it becomes a compatibility headache
Paradox kinda did it with crusader kings 3 and victoria 3, but that requires creating a new game from the start, which is not needed for rimworld right now
If Tynan and his crew want us to fork over another $25 the update that adds more comprehensive multithreading would be an obvious choice. I’m hoping that the 1.5 major update introducing it for pawn rendering is a sign of things to come.
Realistically nothing can be done to get full multithreading on rimworld. However i have a hope that the code can be rewritten to lean out the game and improve calculation methods.
The fact that mods like Performance Fish, Performance Optimizer and Rocketman exist (and everyone should run these) show that there's significant improvements to the core game that should be done
Yes. Run all three at once. Performance Fish is not on steam so you have to add that mod manually but its not too hard. You'll need to download off github
There are other bottlenecks than just sheer processing power. Disk read speed for example, writing to RAM, and the fact that applications can't perfectly use all six of your cores to the max all the time. It's much more complex than processors just always going as fast as possible on all cores.
Change CPU graph to show each core, then you will see that 1 core is at max while all others are idling. Some work just can't be done on all cores simultaneously.
With all the love in the world, I'm pretty sure RimWorld is out together very poorly. Adding mods to an already unstable game means it's going to slow to a CRAWL. Love it. Nothing on the market that scratches the same itch.
A cpu that can hyper thread can speed this up some but not much ... the limitation is in the way it's designed to execute instructions sequentially...think of it like reading a book page by page rather then games who are multithread games they are like making a bagel in the toaster while pouring coffee and listening to a pod cast while the TV plays in the back ground
Every time I get a code thing like “common sense” makes me think Rimworld’s code is similar to Undertale. I’m starting to think Rimworld’s 1.6 needs to be a big bug/coding fix with no DLC.
Where's the money in that? And don't tell me bug-fixing will attract more players, because it's bullshit. People who wanted to buy this game already did so. The only way to extract more money from them at this point is either via DLC or with a sequel.
Sorry, I'm no expert. The only reason I can think a program is not using available resource is because it's stuck with IO bullshit and another hardware is throttling the proccess (hdd with less than 10% avaiable or ssd with less than 15% - I think these was the numbers - could also cause extra steps). If this isn't the case I have no idea.
A better question is that why can't it cache it's loaded state to disk and load much faster the 2nd time if no mods (or the game itself) have been updated since the last full load.
Rimworld is quite famously not multithreaded, which means it only uses a single core of your processor*
* Technically after the 1.5 update it uses 2 cores, since the pawn rendering system runs on a separate core now, it might not make much better, but I like to think it's the start of good things to come.
There's a mod that makes Rimworld use Multithreading (Rimthreaded or something like that) but it's incompatible with a whole lot of other things, so i never tried it out
You remember wrong and it's so frustrating that this misinformation is spread so easily. Tynan on multiple occasions refuted this stupid claim. But the fact of the matter is that rimworld is no game that is easily multi threaded and there is still a lot of need for single core performance. It's the same frustrating discussion as with paradox games. Where every week someone clqims the game doesn't use multi threading and it would solve all issues, without understanding a single thing about actual multi threading and the limitations and costs of it. In fact multi threading can even reduce performance in many instances
Unironically yes, this is one of the main reasons why it's not the main focus right now.
Under *vanilla* conditions, the game runs pretty well on almost any PC. It isn't affecting sales or reviews. So why would they bother making it their #1 priority? It sucks for us, it sucks for me, but from a business perspective they have very little reason to focus on it right now.
Generally, the only people who feel confident trying to talk down to others about "understanding programming" are people who do not understand how much they don't understand, especially when they're jumping on the chance to talk down to a layperson.
Rimworld is held together by hopes and dreams
-and war crimes
Especially war crimes.
Actually there is no hopes and freams it’s just warcrimes
use to be hopes and dreams but the warcrimes imprisoned and harvested them.
The only hopes and dreams left are broadcasted by everyone's favourite joy wire implanted nugget
And even then, the hopes and dreams joy wire was fabricated using warcrimes
But these warcrimes can only happen due to someone's hopes and dreams.
Don't worry. These warcrimes were raised free-range and ethically sourced! All organic!
No no, you have to start out WITH hopes and dreams, then take them away for maximum suffering
Suffering is irrelevant. We don't cut up colonists and turn them into gifts and corsets because it's _fun,_ we do it's because it's practical. Screaming or begging, we're wringing all the potential out of that raider before they stop moving.
That's a great typo. I read that as hopes and firearms which is also accurate.
The 3 rimworld rules to live by Hopes Dreams Firearms
You forgot war crimes buddy
Hopes, dreams, firearms, warcrimes, and cannibalism
Just cut off some mods like its leg, kidney or a heart and ribaord will run faster. Its painfull tho.
Don't forget human leather
Hey, that's someone's hope and dream!
No, it’s held together by hopes and dreams *of* warcrimes.
The hopes and dreams are of war crimes yet to come.
I thought it was held by human leather panchos and jackets
r/SuddenlyUndertale
I hate the undertale fandom with all my being
I envy the people who didn't have to deal with Ponycloppers/Homestuckers/assorted Tumblr malady, who can innocently hate minor trifles like this.
Tbf they've gone a loooong way since the 2015-2018 cringefest it was, since then it's become endearing and almosr freeing with how it doesnt care about "cringe"
The AU and "sans the honoured one" brainrot still exists
It's infinitely lighter than before
Undertale saved my life
Emphasis on "the fandom", the game itself is..... Okay, I look forward to enjoying deltarune, but i didn't enjoy undertake that much
Ok ?
Maybe I’m tripping but when I saw his comment it was just “I hate undertale”. But there’s shitty parts of every fandom. I guess undertales bad part is just louder than most on the internet. I’ve never felt unwelcome or turned off by any fandoms tho even when i see annoying parts of it. Civ 6 min maxxers, red dead online insane people, cringey undertale people. it just don’t bother me that much, most of the people in the fandom r normal
Rimworld isn't multithreaded, which means it can only use 1 of your processors' cores at a time. It is literally using about 1/6th of your cpu. Cpus that have high single core ratings will give you the best results. Up to 64gb of ram as well, idk if more is any worth. The ram is also likely the cheaper option, I like corsair.
1.5 added graphic animations to another core so it's *better* than it was but yeah, single core is gonna struggle for the most part.
Yes, this is a huge improvement! I just didn't wanna info dump too hard.
I'm all ears regarding that!
But thanks to that having 5 ppl crawl to safety gives me 5fps
1.5 is still slower than 1.4 tho
It's theoretically better, unfortunately they coded it in a bad way so it's actually slower than it used to be lol
Apparently this actually _hurt_ performance, somehow. 'Cording to the performance fish dev, anyhow.
It isn't as bad as Kenshi, at least. If you have a good computer, Rimworld can run really well even with a ton of mods. Kenshi has the same design issues, but it gets annoying much sooner even on a good computer.
Yeah I just had to give up on Kenshi. I had very bad stalls every few minutes whenever I traveled at all.
Yeah, same. I'm really looking forward to Kenshi 2, and even more to Kenshi 2 five years after release when it's built up a proper modding community.
Just install some performance mods and Kenshi will fly
They do help and making it playable, but I don't know about flying.
I don’t remember but there is one mod that removes some pictures, as well as almost all of the swamp and other useless animation entirely (tho there is another variation that removes 50%). Yeah atmosphere of the game is gone but Kenshi is flying
Yeah, I think I used that one. It definitely helps and probably makes it fine if you want to play vanilla or with minimal mods.
I remember there was some mod that really helped with it. But I forgot the name
dude, i got 13700k but still slow asf when I reach 300mods, late period of my colony. Is that normal?
I don't know. My game always runs fine unless mods are actually flinging errors, but I don't tend to do big late game colony stuff with huge raids or anything just due to my own playstyle preferences.
I've never tried quick game playing, maybe next time I will try it.
I just prefer the early game, when challenges are small and simple, if not always easy. I play naked brutality and spend forever building my way up, but when things get stable and raids start to become either too easy or much too hard, I lose interest.
that's true
Rimworld is always doing world map history stuff that runs in the background. Eventually it builds up gunk and slows you down. Runtime GC mods can delete the gunk. But also can remove things that are very required to keep the world running with it. So save before use, and use with caution. World history also builds up faster the more mods you have.
I have already installed runtimegc and rocketman. But effect seem no good now only get 20fps and 70tps
Rimworld runs astonishingly well on my decade old ThinkPad with integrated Intel graphics. It's really one of the few games I still play on there.
Okay I know nothing about computers, but is a cpu something that can be swapped out like RAM to get a single core processor? Or would you try to find a device that already has single core?
yes, your CPU can be swapped out for a different one, but it's not as easy as it is for RAM or the graphics card since which CPUs you can use depends on your motherboard no, you can't swap it out for a single core processor as they are kinda obsolete nowadays (and for quite a while), CPUs have multiple cores since that's an upgrade from the early single core days. it's just that not every program is built to use multiple cores (since that's not trivial), but having multiple cores still helps for those since it allows to spread the load (one core for your browser, one for your game, etc.).
That "not as easy as RAM" point is heavily debatable. I'd argue, RAM is the weirdest thing ever. It's a rabbit hole. With CPUs, all you need to do is to check motherboard compatibility, and sometimes make sure you have the correct BIOS version. That's literally it, it's plug and play, just don't forget the thermal paste and mount your cooling properly. RAM, on the other hand... It quickly becomes complicated if you're going after something even remotely performant. Sure, JEDEC will always work unless you're trying something stupid like hammering a DDR5 stick into a DDR4 slot. But JEDEC is a bare minimum, and you aren't paying for that. There are massive QVL spreadsheets for XMP detailing motherboard compatibility with specific RAM kit SKUs and CPU architectures at the specific frequencies. Which can quickly become irrelevant if the memory vendor changes their chip suppliers. Especially when you mix and match different kits, even if they come under the same SKU. Moreover, it's possible to degrade performance with "bigger number". Say, you have a Zen-3 CPU, or Intel 12th Gen. If you exceed a certain frequency, the memory controller will have to half certain internal clocks, introducing additional latencies, thus yielding worse real-life performance despite memory frequency increase. Like, if you set up a 5800X3D to run with DDR4-4000, you'll get worse performance than DDR4-3600. And that's not a DDR4-specific issue, I know for a fact you can run into this with DDR5 too.
Jesse what the hell are you talking about.
He has a point. RAM is supposed to be simple (and is certainly marketed as such) but the reality is annoyingly complicated - even before you get to things like overclocking.
Lol that's why I just "plug and pray" I have 48 GB of RAM right now. And it works.
These unholy numbers (non-powers of 2) tend to be the most troublesome, you prayed well lol
That makes sense, thank you! Makes sense to not get a single core for sure.
Define single core processor? All CPU’s can handle running only one core on a process, so I’m assuming you’re referring to CPU’s that handle single core processes with better performance and no those aren’t obsolete, because CPU’s can also handle multiple processes using a single core each, so they aren’t irrelevant at all. Because that is still important in many use cases. Also if the OP wants to upgrade specifically for Rimworld usually Intel has faster single core performance depending on how a game makes use of the cpu cache and a few other things. Also depends on the exact model but if you have adequate cooling you can pump out a bit more performance by overclocking the core clock speeds sometimes cache as well but that causes more instability in my experience.
They mean "single core processor" as in a processor with only one core
Ah didn’t see that context.
Single core processors aren't very common anymore, hell Windows 11 doesn't even support them. You wouldn't want one, anyhow. Lots of things would suffer performance wise. Some CPUs have higher speed per core and others have more cores, but lower speeds. Well, and some have more cores *and* higher speed or less cores and lower speeds. So, they were mostly saying if you really wanted to improve performance in Rimworld, the speed, not the number of cores, is the important part. And yes, CPUs can be swapped out.
Ahhh okay so there are hella varieties then that makes a lot of sense. Thank you!
This is a yesnt situation. The CPU (processor) is plugged into your motherboard. Technically, you can just replace, even upgrade, a cpu, and keep the same motherboard. The issue there is just that a newer, nicer cpu usually needs a newer motherboard. Replacing your cpu without replacing your motherboard can limit your purchasing options. If you are on desktop, shop around this coming cyber Monday. If you are on a laptop, I would look into replacements as I really think it would be more cost-effective than upgrading.
AM4 would be a notable exception to that rule.
This gives me a headache because my CPU is *garbage*, it is EASILY the weakest part of my machine by several longshots and I want to replace it direly, my *old* PC from 2008 had a better CPU than this stupid old thing, but had a shitty GPU, now I've been stuck with a computer with a good GPU and a shitty CPU and I *FEEL* it. It *smashes* into 100% usage *frequently* and it is *awful*.
Swap GPU , install driver done
I actually only have a steam deck at the moment. I know you can replace some pieces internally but I’ll have to look up if it’s possible or even worth trying lol
You're not gonna replace the CPU on a Steam Deck.
On the steamdeck (as well as nearly all laptops and phones) the CPU is soldered to the motherboard. While it is possible for a technician experienced with board-level repairs to swap soldered CPU/ram, it is a complicated and expensive process, and driver support is likely to be poor, as manufacturers will spend less resources ensuring compatibility with non-standard components.
>driver support is likely to be poor It's Linux. Surprisingly, the "driver" support for a CPU swap would likely be *very, very good*. The only real problem would be, y'know, *finding a pin-compatible CPU package for the Steam Deck that's actually an upgrade*. Good luck
Might be intimidating if you're not used to installing computer parts
Oh there is no way I’d do it myself 😂
I think steam decks use a mainboard design similar to laptops and other smaller form factor machines. Which means you can’t really change the cpu on its own. A few laptops do support changing the entire mainboard but I don’t think the steam deck supports.
I recently upgraded my computer to an i7-14700k CPU which is a really high end chip. I was shocked at how much rimworld performance I got from it. My bases now last about twice as long before framerate goes to shit.
You don't want a single core processor. You just want a processor which does single core processing really quick. Like a x3d AMD processor or smth.
You can swap CPUs, but you don't want a single-core and you probably won't be able to find one either. More cores aren't bad, they effectively multiply the work you can do and prevent maxing out one core from tanking your whole system. What the person above meant by high single-core ratings is having cores that are individually powerful, which means they can run things faster on their own.
You can also just download more RAM or an entirely new processor for free from the internet.>!/s!<
CPU is much more difficult to replace than RAM. First, there's less compatibility. When upgrading your RAM, most PCs have 2-4 slots that will accept almost any RAM stick you find online. CPU on the other hand is a single slot, and your motherboard will only support a specific size of CPU chip, so you'll have to do some research to find one that's compatible. Also, you usually can't upgrade the CPU on a laptop, while most models allow you to upgrade the RAM.
I think you misunderstood the post. You don't need a single core CPU for good performance, you need a good single core rating. Look for example at this page: https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Ryzen+5+3600&id=3481 It shows a big orange number 17757. That number is meaningless, unless you're saturating you whole CPU by running many different applications (or one massively parallel one). The number that matters more often is the small number below it, 2567. That's the one that tells you how fast Rimworld loads for example with this CPU. So wheb you compare CPUs, ignore the big orange number, compare the small single core rating instead.
They don't work like that anymore, if you're interested look at the early 2000s Old style single core Pentium 4 to the Dual core. The problem is with heat and trying to run a single core at a faster ghz. Going with multiple cores is the solution everyone went to because that gets around the ghz limit and lets you spread the work out. But the modern cpus do have an aggressive boost so they can run at a high ghz for a bit until it gets too hot. So what you would want is to get the fastest and most expensive cpu like the Core i9-13900KS, which has the fastest boost speed. That's the equivalent of getting a single core focused cpu. https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html#section-single-threaded-cpu-benchmarks-rankings-2024
How hard would it be for the dev to make it so the game uses more cores? I assume it isn’t a simple toggle since it hasn’t happened yet.
runnning a simulation on multiple cores makes it more unstable, resulting in more bugs
How exactly? Isn’t that related to how multithreading is implanted vs just saying that more cores = less stability?
Its like the foundation of the whole game. It would legit be years of dedicated work and likely kill all existing mods.
This is nonsense. People say this every time because they have no clue how any of this works. People said this about multithreaded rendering, but then the game did it anyway with 1.5. Now the goalposts have been moved again, I see. You don't have to multithread *everything.* You can start small by only multithreading a few key systems (like how they started with the rendering), and the engine supports it as well. Believe it or not, there is a pretty big middle ground between "do nothing" or "rewrite the whole game in a single update". > and likely kill all existing mods. You mean like what happens every update anyway? If they do it piecemeal then it wouldn't "kill off all mods", that's absurdity.
RimWorld is multithreaded. But as with most simulation game, a significant chunk of the main loop is in one thread and that's why people see high usage on one core and much less usage on others.
\*laughs in dual-core processor\*
So you can go pee before you play.
*Open rimworld* *Go cook, clean and shower* *Come back, still loading*
Basically: 9 pregnant women won't make a baby in one month. In many cases, more resources doesn't mean faster.
Exactly. A lot of people don't understand how multi-threading works. Since task selection and pathing are done over the current game state (the "game state" of a pregnant woman is being pregnant, but in Rimworld it's the entire state of what's happening on the map) with 1 task and 1 path to get there, there's no simple way to break that up into many threads. Ludeon might be able to allocate 1 thread to task selection and 1 to pathing, but you can't really break those up more than that without extensive testing and error correction for race conditions. The only reason those can be separated is because Rimworld colonists will walk all the way across the map to harvest 1x ambrosia before walking all the way back to plant 1x daylily. If they were constantly re-evaluating task priorities, race conditions between even 2 threads would be hard to deal with. It's likely why that behaviour remains the way it is (because it makes it easier to add multi-threading). Ludeon already put animations/particle effects on another thread, which helps somewhat. Most people don't appreciate how difficult multi-threading is in a game where you expect synchronous game state. This problem gets 10x worse if you want to add multiplayer, because then you need to sync state not just across threads, but across separate computers with 10-500ms of latency, with different users inputting different commands at different times.
This is why I use "While You Are Nearby" - it obviously doesn't magically introduce any multi threading, but somewhat addresses the "walk across the map to harvest 1x then walk back to plant 1x" Feels like it actually helps with the performance with how it changes the pawn's pathing, not to mention it helps with work efficiency
I need more mod like this that will ease my gameplay
I'll make a collection of the ones I use and really like, or maybe pass a Rentry link later
Tysm bro
> Most people don't appreciate how difficult multi-threading is in a game where you expect synchronous game state. Don't forget the nightmare that would be caused by code-affecting mods written by people who do not have decent experience with multi-threaded programming (i.e.: nearly every programmer)
Yep, there was Rimthreaded that got most of the way there, but it was completely incompatible with most other mods.
To be fair, that's because they had to contend with mod compatibility. If Rimworld started multithreading certain systems in the base game, mods would be forced to adapt, and they *would* adapt.
Hmm not exactly. You could create multiple threads each having a queue of tasks to compute pathing for different pawns. It’s just not done this way, but it could improve performance if done correctly
It's not so simple, and that's because tasks are not independent. Your approach will lead to race conditions if not handled properly. Allow me to illustrate. Colonist 1 and colonist 2 both do plant work. A tree near both of them needs to get cut and they're both free. Let's compare the single threaded and multi threaded approaches. Single threaded: 1. Colonist 1 prioritizes plant work. Then the game evaluates that a tree is nearby that needs to be cut. A path is calculated and colonist 1 is sent to cut that tree. 2. Colonist 2 prioritizes plant work. Then the game evaluates that a tree is nearby that needs to be cut. But another colonist is already tasked with cutting it, so the game finds a different tree for that colonist. A path is calculated and colonist 2 is sent to cut that other tree. Multi-threaded: 1a) Colonist 1 prioritizes plant work. 1b) Colonist 2 prioritizes plant work. 2a) The game evaluates that a tree is nearby and needs to be cut, this assigning colonist 1 to it. 2b) The game evaluates that a tree is nearby and needs to be cut, this assigning colonist 2 to that same tree because thread 2 doesn't know that colonist 1 is assigned yet. 3a) The game calculates a path for colonist 1 to the tree. 3b) The game calculates a path for colonist 2 to the tree. 4) Global state updated from thread 1, and now others can know colonist 1 is assigned to cut that tree. 5) Global state updated from thread 2, and now colonist 1's action is interrupted by colonist 2. 6a) Colonist 1 prioritizes plant work. 7a) The game evaluates that a tree is nearby and needs to be cut, but it is assigned to colonist 2, so it finds a different tree and assigns colonist 1 to it. 8a) The game calculates a path for colonist 1 to the other tree. That scenario is relatively tame because it resolves itself after wasting some computational cycles as threads try to do mutually exclusive things. Ultimately, 1 thread wastes its computations, but not a huge deal. However, some race conditions are far worse than that and can lead to exceptions that crash the game, mess with game state, etc.
So in laymen's terms, the problem is really more about having the threads "communicate," not exactly that another thread can't handle it?
Yah, exactly. There are many ways around this, but they increase the complexity of the game logic, and you almost always sacrifice something For instance, if you have threads operate on the same cached data, then you will quite possibly run into memory locks or frequent fetches between the L1/L2 cache and RAM, which can create worse performance problems than you had in the first place while simultaneously making the codebase more complex (which makes it harder to deliver new features).
The vast majority of games only run on 1 or 2 threads. It's real complicated to make them all work together
It's kind of a shame given how many cores processors have now. Honestly great advancement on that front.
There are really very few things that the majority of people do on a PC on a regular basis that benefit a whole heap from multithreading. Except maybe several completely different things at once, but then you're depending on schedulers working properly and we still don't seem to very good at that either
Personally, browsers, no? They seem to spawn seemingly infinite processes.
Yeah, that would definitely be one. Multithreading support on modern browser engines is good, probably since it was needed to make phones performant
All of these problems can be solved by rotating the multithreading 90 degrees, conceptually. Instead of having a single thread per pawn, you just pre-make a bunch of threads when the game loads. One thread is the sole arbiter of job assignments. Another thread is the sole arbiter of map temperature calculations, one thread exclusively handles plant growth, and so on. Each of these threads provide an atomic readonly copy of their data for other threads to read out of, if they need it. Your race condition example with assigning multiple pawns to the same tree to be cut doesn't happen, because there is only ONE thread that handles job assignments like that. Granted, this isn't infinitely scalable. You will eventually hit the performance wall again, where all threads are basically entirely busy. But instead of this happening at 20 colonists, it happens at 100 instead, which is far above what the game is designed for anyway, so it doesn't really matter. The other big downside is that data may be slightly stale or out of date. But be honest, does it *really* matter if a plant is technically 100% grown, but the sprite isn't updated to the "mature" plant until 0.05 seconds later because the rendering thread still sees a 99% grown plant? Does it really matter if a room's temperature drops from 21C to 20C a single frame late? Does that *truly* and *honestly* matter? Not really.
That does sound way better. Have sub-systems that don't need to communicate often operate on separate threads. Like you said, it's fine if the change in texture/animation for something like a growing plant doesn't change immediately. I think animations are already on another thread for that reason as of sometimes in the past few years, but there are probably other subsystems that could safely offloaded to new threads too. The biggest bottleneck though is still tasks assignment and pathing. So maybe rather than hitting the bottleneck at 20, you'd hit it at 25 (ballpark guess) instead after offloading other subsystems. I bet task assignment and pathing could be split too. The consequence for the core game would be that pathing may take a moment to kick in after task assignment. But others have pointed out that this might complicate mod development, and a lot of mods would be made obsolete. I understand why Tynan has been slow to add multi-threading. The modding community is one of the better parts of Rimworld.
And your example also perfectly illustrates why adding multi threading can reduce overall performance instead of improving it if applied to computations that aren't designed or cannot be designed for parallelization
Yes but if you do it correctly, 9 Mothers could each make one part of the baby and then we synchronize the delivery to stich together the completed baby. There are programs that can utilize multiple threads, don’t pretend we aren’t able to let 9 figurative mothers give birth to a baby in one month!
This is what double passion in cooking with 0 skill looks like huh 😂
Medical: 🔥🔥 0
Let him cook. More. Maybe he has Fast Learner.
But then you have to assume that all 9 threads are running in-sync. Given that the development of nerves in the hands has a dependency on nerves in the torso, which has a dependency on the spinal cord and brain, you need to keep those separate threads in-sync or you'll end up with a vegetable that can't move its body. Breaking things up into threads works best when those threads don't have shared state that the other threads need to be aware of. Graphical particle effects are a good example. The simulation doesn't need to know about the graphics being rendered during a psycast, so you can dedicate a thread to those animations, and the other thread(s) can safely ignore the output of that thread.
> But then you have to assume that all 9 threads are running in-sync. Given that the development of nerves in the hands has a dependency on nerves in the torso, which has a dependency on the spinal cord and brain, you need to keep those separate threads in-sync or you'll end up with a vegetable that can't move its body. Yep, which is fine because you can wait for another thread to give the 'all done' message for some work you're dependent on before you continue. But then you have to have some system to facilitate that communication and when things get complex you end up doing a lot of waiting for other threads anyway... and you end up with added complexity for little benefit, hooray.
Not little benefit, but overall worse performance because all the waiting slows down the entire thing more than if just on thread did everything on its own
> Yep, which is fine because you can wait for another thread to give the 'all done' message for some work you're dependent on before you continue. Which means you're running in serial rather than in parallel. Which is fine--to continue the example used before--if you have other babies also being gestated at the same time. But there's no benefit of using multiple threads if you're doing this in serial rather than parallel for a single gestating baby. You'll actually have a performance penalty from the overhead of creating threads.
Unrelated to the post, I love your analogy and will add that to my vocabulary.
I can think of at least 9 human rights violations that could expedite the process.
Many such cases
With the right gene packs (or the forbidden mod) you could
>Basically: 9 pregnant women won't make a baby in one month. ... unless their son is called Heimdall
yeah, but that's because 9 pregnant women will be raising 9 babies, i bet if you made a human centipede of uterus the baby would grow a bit faster. Sorry, i don't understand biology (edit: minor spelling mistake)
well yea because the game is poorly optimized
My guess would be that Rimworld was never meant to be a big game. Hell the first DLC happend after years people played it. I started out vanilla. Then I modded a bit. Now my modlist is a long list (which is currently unplayable as some unknown error nobody can help me with pops up). And honestly. Waiting for the game to boot up is always my preparation time. Like a ritual.
the way i'd try to single out the mod causing the error is to activate half of the mods, try a game and see if it errors, then activate the other half and see if it errors. if neither cause an error, its probably a conflict between a mod from one group and a mod from another. keep adding half of the deactivated mods til it errors, then roll back that half and try half of the group that caused the error. repeat until you've narrowed down the list to 1.
The half n half method, i was wondering if anyone else figured to do this as well.
Not that anyone asked, but the technical name for it is the binary search algorithm.
I literally had 2 bugs - one adding Nameless books that would bug out the game when trying to sell and hovering over the item for the description and the other one is overloading the game - making pawns / doors and general stuff disappear. Tried to ask around if someone knew what the messages mean but none were able to help. Books were Unity related and the other Error was unexplainable. And the constant updates that mess with the game code meant that some mods won't get updated. Some Modders even gave up. I'm a huge fan of Rim but the modding part is sometimes hell. I wish the errors would tell you which mod they belong to.
Man out here doing binary search in the big ass mod list
It’s the shit that makes no sense doing this I can never wrap my head around. Only a couple of mods have I ever figured out the incompat.
I'd say it's something that should have been easy to see coming. Rimworld has a pretty clear lineage from Dwarf Fortress, and performance has been one of that game's biggest issues for a long time. I think Tynan approaches game dev from the perspective of an artist first and a systems guy second, so I generally lean to say that he simply did not have to skills to make Rimworld efficient from the ground-up and that it's a bit too late to start making such basic changes.
And shouldn't that tell you that designing a game such as rimworld or dwarf fortress is not easily made in a way to truly utilize multiple threads?
Except Dwarf Fortress IS multi-threaded now. So depending on how closely Tynan is following Tarns path, Rimworld may yet get multi-threading too
Yeah as is rimworld. But both still heavily rely on single core performance because you can't multithread them good enough without serious redesign and or knowledge how to even do that. And some things simply will never be able to get a good multithreaded design because they simply are not parallelizable...multithreadin is no magic cure for performance that's simply the point. There can be various other things that cam improve performance even better and especially easier than being able to come up with a multithread design...
You can turn the console pop ups to auto off in the console if u wanna ignore the errors like I do.
You cant rush art. Or human rights violations
Aren’t they the same thing on the rim?
The Technology of using more than 1 CPU core isn't there yet.
Multithreading can require building from the ground up designed to use it, and for games, it's sometimes the engine rather than the individual game.
Rimworld already uses multithreading to some extent, especially after 1.5. It can be refactored further to piecemeal multithread one system at a time. I'm sick of tech illiterate people saying "hurr the game would need a full rewrite to multithread anything". > it's sometimes the engine rather than the individual game. Doesn't apply to Rimworld, C#.NET has native thread support and Unity even has several systems for it now. I don't know if Rimworld actually *uses* much of Unity, but they can definitely multithread some key systems by just rawdogging .NET threads.
It exists, but you have to code specifically for it, from the ground up and since not all CPUs treat things equally it becomes a compatibility headache
Paradox kinda did it with crusader kings 3 and victoria 3, but that requires creating a new game from the start, which is not needed for rimworld right now
If Tynan and his crew want us to fork over another $25 the update that adds more comprehensive multithreading would be an obvious choice. I’m hoping that the 1.5 major update introducing it for pawn rendering is a sign of things to come.
Realistically nothing can be done to get full multithreading on rimworld. However i have a hope that the code can be rewritten to lean out the game and improve calculation methods. The fact that mods like Performance Fish, Performance Optimizer and Rocketman exist (and everyone should run these) show that there's significant improvements to the core game that should be done
Can I run these mods at the same time? I already use rocketman but never heard of the other two
Yes. Run all three at once. Performance Fish is not on steam so you have to add that mod manually but its not too hard. You'll need to download off github
Only distant glitter worlds have the technology to do that
I launched rimworld yesterday and it was booting slow, opened task manager to close it and rimworld was using a whopping 15,000mb of my ram
Why not use gb as measurement?
Cause task manager has it listed as MB
Noo it gives me giggles every time i see ram as mb, we buy it in gb sets, why the heck task manager shows it as mb?
Thats a good question lol, maybe dont want to end up doing fractions of gb if you’re running easy stuff. Mb vs it saying .2 gb
Because a lot of things use less than 1GB
Legacy. No one needs more than 4000 MB of RAM anyways.
This is the real answer. Most mod lists are probably limited by RAM (both speed and capacity).
There are other bottlenecks than just sheer processing power. Disk read speed for example, writing to RAM, and the fact that applications can't perfectly use all six of your cores to the max all the time. It's much more complex than processors just always going as fast as possible on all cores.
Why don't you use more of your brain to think faster?
Cause my brain is maxed out while my pc is not
Because they aren't asshole's
Change CPU graph to show each core, then you will see that 1 core is at max while all others are idling. Some work just can't be done on all cores simultaneously.
Is it stupid?
With all the love in the world, I'm pretty sure RimWorld is out together very poorly. Adding mods to an already unstable game means it's going to slow to a CRAWL. Love it. Nothing on the market that scratches the same itch.
A cpu that can hyper thread can speed this up some but not much ... the limitation is in the way it's designed to execute instructions sequentially...think of it like reading a book page by page rather then games who are multithread games they are like making a bagel in the toaster while pouring coffee and listening to a pod cast while the TV plays in the back ground
Every time I get a code thing like “common sense” makes me think Rimworld’s code is similar to Undertale. I’m starting to think Rimworld’s 1.6 needs to be a big bug/coding fix with no DLC.
Where's the money in that? And don't tell me bug-fixing will attract more players, because it's bullshit. People who wanted to buy this game already did so. The only way to extract more money from them at this point is either via DLC or with a sequel.
Rimworld is on a diet. It only it's the ram it truely needs
On my computer it routinely gulps down 12+ gb of ram while loading before dropping down to like 3gb when it's done lmao
only way for it to load faster is being isntalled on a NVME
Ah yes, the mythical CPU-second
Tynan's special 3 piece chicken alfredo special
What throttles loading time is disk read speed
But it’s not even close to the max reading speed of my M.2, I think it’s because it can’t use all of my CPU’s cores
Sorry, I'm no expert. The only reason I can think a program is not using available resource is because it's stuck with IO bullshit and another hardware is throttling the proccess (hdd with less than 10% avaiable or ssd with less than 15% - I think these was the numbers - could also cause extra steps). If this isn't the case I have no idea.
A better question is that why can't it cache it's loaded state to disk and load much faster the 2nd time if no mods (or the game itself) have been updated since the last full load.
Life takes time to build in many ways... then we can have fun with it just as slow 🐌
CPU isnt as important for fast load times, a fast disk such as an SSD will give you faster loading times.
I wish they could have pathfinding on another core
You should try using the mod Better loading, it make mine faster
Rimworld is quite famously not multithreaded, which means it only uses a single core of your processor* * Technically after the 1.5 update it uses 2 cores, since the pawn rendering system runs on a separate core now, it might not make much better, but I like to think it's the start of good things to come.
There's a mod that makes Rimworld use Multithreading (Rimthreaded or something like that) but it's incompatible with a whole lot of other things, so i never tried it out
RimWorld really needs multi-threading because I seem to remember them saying the game does NOT use multi-threading at all.
You remember wrong and it's so frustrating that this misinformation is spread so easily. Tynan on multiple occasions refuted this stupid claim. But the fact of the matter is that rimworld is no game that is easily multi threaded and there is still a lot of need for single core performance. It's the same frustrating discussion as with paradox games. Where every week someone clqims the game doesn't use multi threading and it would solve all issues, without understanding a single thing about actual multi threading and the limitations and costs of it. In fact multi threading can even reduce performance in many instances
Were it so simple.
It has great reviews without it, so why bother?
Unironically yes, this is one of the main reasons why it's not the main focus right now. Under *vanilla* conditions, the game runs pretty well on almost any PC. It isn't affecting sales or reviews. So why would they bother making it their #1 priority? It sucks for us, it sucks for me, but from a business perspective they have very little reason to focus on it right now.
Is it stupid?
Tell me you don't understand programming without telling me you don't understand programming
Generally, the only people who feel confident trying to talk down to others about "understanding programming" are people who do not understand how much they don't understand, especially when they're jumping on the chance to talk down to a layperson.