http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=59027
Zeb Figura z.figura12@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |z.figura12@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from Zeb Figura z.figura12@gmail.com --- (In reply to FoX from comment #1)
After trying to figure this out for months I've just stumbled on a massive breakthrough: it appears that all sync methods in both wine and proton are severely crippled by threading - the more cores they get, the worse they perform but they always try to get all cores.
In place where I get 24-26 fps with NTsync on current wine-staging, I've tried:
- WINE_CPU_TOPOLOGY=2 wine-proton FP2.exe
- taskset -c 2-3 wine FP2.exe
- WINE_CPU_TOPOLOGY=4 wine-proton FP2.exe
- taskset -c 2-5 wine FP2.exe
This doesn't make any sense. Sync methods don't, by themselves, "try to get all cores". Applications might, but that shouldn't make ntsync worse.
I also can't reproduce these results. I have a fairly high-powered computer, and with ntsync I reach even the highest FPS limit available (288 FPS). But without ntsync, performance gets worse, and if I limit it to 2 cores with taskset, performance gets worse still. That's more or less what I'd expect.
Can you please test with unmodified upstream non-staging wine, in a fresh prefix, without any external components including dxvk?