About a year ago, CPU load always was about 50%, now on v75.8a, CPU is always loaded at almost 100%. Nevertheless, the overall performance has improved compared to the older versions. Run DX12_64 or 64 doesn't matter. Is there any way to reduce CPU load? CPU: i5 6600 GPU: GTX 1060 6GB RAM: 16GB Windows 11 23H2 Game settings: CPU load: Thanks.
That's what people were complaining about TSC, that it's not using your hardware. Now it does, there's nothing wrong with using all power available imho - that's what it's for.
They are. This is still the old code, but recompiled and cleaned up, making better usage of the CPU. Let's see what next years's phase 2 of the code rework will bring.
Checking mine, it's not got much to do. FPS capped at 75. But then, the OP's got an i5 which has to work harder as an i9 of course. I see on mine clock speed is increased, and then the load.
I have the same thing. Of the four cores, one is 100% loaded, and the other 3 are less than 50% loaded. At the same time, the CPU temperature is as if all 4 cores are loaded at 100%. That's what worries me the most.
Pardon sir. Checking, CPU0 is at 100%. It's a single core program with 30 threads as I see it. As expected. I've heard of AMD processors having heat issues, but I've always avoided these. They may be cheaper but never convinced me. Maybe the knowledgeable Peter Hayes can share some thoughts on why RailWorks64.exe seems to run on all cores for the OP?
The newest range of AMD processors, do indeed run hot, but they are designed to. They will increase power draw until they reach 90C when running flat out. They will do this no matter how good your cooling is, so basically, the better your cooling, the better it will run, as it will just keep increasing power draw until it hits 90C. So use a rubbish cooler and it will throttle sooner than using a good one.
NERD/GEEK alert. When I first did my tests just after the 64-bit version I found as many simmers say above, that on a quad-core machine Core0 (Where Windows OS is primarily located) TSC20XX/TSC runs at close to 100% with Cores1, 2, and 3 having varying percentages of usage, as the code is processed. IMO Pookyhead's post above shows typical CPU core usage using 64-bit TSC. Now if the software is conducive to it - it is Windows that allocates CPU core usage after Core 0 has been allocated. You can allocate these cores, priorities, affinities, etc via Task Manager, but this needs to be performed after every reboot of the PC, so I use Process Lasso (free and subscription variants) to do this automatically on every reboot. For many years I was under the impression that allocating a single core other than Core 0 would improve performance - I soon found that I was wrong and that the allocation of any single or multiple Core(s) could enhance performance. RSC/DTG did issue a post stating that TS20XX was multicore capable way back around 2013 but many simmers thought that this was just propaganda. One of the advantages of having partial use of all cores (quad-core) is that each core can have a single thread running, so with a quad-core CPU that is 4 threads are being processed simultaneously making the TSC operation possibly better optimized. (Care is needed using hyperthreading as the venerable code used by TSC may result in thread collisions). To be fair I have not seen any performance changes (good or bad) when I have run TS20XX using a single Core or using any permutations of all 4 Cores). IMO TSC code is poorly optimized and probably creates too many soft page and or hard page faults to use multiple cores efficiently. If I remember correctly Pookyhead wrote a very good post on performance vs core usage. 100% usage of Core0 is fairly normal and will not cause any damage to your PC it's just the way Windows works. This is about Intel Quad-Core systems - AMD PCs can be a little different.
