Tried to explain that to several people, and was asked for 100% conclusive evidence.
Despite giving them the Notice directly from Intel’s website for 12 Gen+ CPUs.
Windows 10’s Scheduler doesn’t distribute work properly to e-cores, and it will never be patched… lol.
Yup. This game never ends. I recall the day I said I’d never need more than 1gb of memory or a HD larger than 256MB - and I was pretty convinced of it. Yes, a long time ago.
LOL I remember my first “I’m never going to win the Hardware war” when I finally convinced my father to buy another 4Mbyte of RAM for our 486, bringing it to a whole whopping 8Mbyte and reading the next day in a Games Magazine that the upcoming Armored first 3 would require ‘at minimum’ 16 MByte of RAM to run.
It has been quite the bean stalk…
I remember these milestones, each of which I thought would be a culmination:
Amiga 500
Pentium CPU
3dfx add-on card
If you look up Naive or Gullible, in a dictionary it will say also see: Troll.
I think the Amiga 500 was a good call.
I admit that my music composing skills definitely culminated with Amiga 500.
at least we dont need HiMem boot disks anymore…
The Commodore Amiga was before its time. Back then it set the bar high, possibly too high. I couldn’t afford one but I used to hang out at a local PC shop where guys would demo animation and music. They were a small but close-knit group.
Most of the people I knew who were into the Commodore brand opted for the 64. I suspect they saw the Amiga as specialized and more computer than they needed. I remember it having an impressive catalog of games and productivity, but I think people couldn’t figure out where it fit (at least in my circles). I read that poor marketing and the inability to grow technologically killed it.
Still, I would have loved to have gotten my hands on one.
As the culmination of Commodore, yes.
As the pinnacle of computers and gaming… Well? 
It was a huge success in europe, at least. Commodores efforts from there was what killed the company though.
Well I remember thinking that my Atari 1200 was the greatest thing on Earth. Then I read an interview in Computing magazine with the creator of a game for the Commodore that involved music and a screen full of colorful sprites. It was so weird that the article gave up on fully trying to explain it. And the game designer was so weird that the article was only partially successful in describing him. The whole thing highlighted how impressive the sound generation system in the Commodore was. I am not a musical person. But I was so jealous after reading. (I wonder whatever happened to that guy 
)
I remember when I got a Pentium 3 and an Nvidia graphics card (from a store, off of a shelf no less!) and 512mb(!) of ram and knew that now there was no game I could not play! 
So, stubbornly and despite others claiming better performance because of it, I’ve been staying with the MT executable and trying to eek out performance with some success by messing with cores. Today I finally tried the non-MT executable. Way better! Night and day improvement in FPS. Less stutters also.
Yup, latest update seems to fix the stuttering in ST as well. No more messing with cores affinity to fix the stutters. Next I will need to test MT as I haven’t yet on the latest build.
The difference between the two is striking. MT yields me about 1/2 to 2/3rds the FPS of ST. Which means that when ED figures this out, just as they did a few months after MT was originally introduced, multithreading DCS will rock.
Yep, MT has potential, When the 15E came out i ran MT for the A/G radar, It ran better then ST.
When 2.9 dropped MT became a stutter fest, Switched back to ST and smooth sailing.
Curious as to how long they will keep ST honestly.
It’s got to be solely for support until the MT fork is stable enough and well understood, there’s just so many benefits to MT.
Just look at the way a lot of us used to fly complex missions: run the mission on the dedicated server and join using the (singlethreaded) client, thus offloading the AI and some of the scripting to a different thread.
Ghetto multithreading?
On the DCS thread, there’s plenty of chatter about airplane systems logic behaving differently between the MT and non-MT versions of the game. If that is true then the complexity of sorting it all out must be off the charts.
A few years ago (3?) I threw in the NTTR range targets mission to test the difference - there are nothing but static objects in there, but a lot of them (I may have even removed all non-static ones, don’t recall) == 12 FPS at the most. 
Then I did the dedicated server thing and got a whopping 20-ish. Got high 40’s with my ‘normal’ missions (SP). But still, there was nothing really going on. It was like [way back then anyway] the engine was going through everything, every pass, no matter where it was [how far away and it’s contribution].
Tracking down real-time issues in a multi-threaded environment was my forte, but with the same hardware. Here, you’re dealing with foks having different cpus, video cards, memory, or a mix. Trying to find the common denominator to isolate - THEN attempt to duplicate and fix.
God help them.