i didn’t say single threaded. i said single core. i know zwift isnt single threaded.
no one has been able to answer me this yet. they just keep saying one core. they also say zwift is single threaded but it’s not.
are there any coders that can explain why my PC runs zwift on multiple cores yet people say zwift can’t do that?
all i want is evidence, so far i don’t see any in my experience that zwift runs only one core.
thanks!
The fact that several threads are active at one time is not evidence of the application utilising simultaneous multi-threading, it’s just the Windows scheduler breaking the process up for various efficiency reasons. This has always been the case, it looks exactly the same on every PC I’ve used including 2c/4t, 4c/4t and 4c/8t Intel CPUs, and 4c/4t and 6c/12t AMD CPUs. Exactly the same as your screenshots, with the process spread and jumping around. Watch it for a while and it sometimes sits on just one thread at 100% for a short while. Some people see one thread constantly pegged, but you don’t know what their config is and how it differs from yours. Patrick above isn’t even using the same processor architecture, let alone operating system.
If you add up the percentages shown in those HWiNFO screenshots they’re not a great deal over 100%, from a theoretical maximum of 800%. HWiFNO even tells you right there - the system is using 15-18% of the CPU’s true capacity which is what this entire post is complaining about. Manually restricting the process to just one CPU core or thread is ridiculous, and resultant performance being garbage proves nothing. ‘Zwift is single-threaded’ doesn’t mean the game can magically operate correctly when artificially limited in this way; it’s impossible to know how any or all of Zwift, the Windows scheduler and the Nvidia driver react to this experiment and what the impact is on the game. It doesn’t mean anything. When people say Zwift only uses one core, it’s not literal. It means Zwift doesn’t come close to utilising modern multi-core CPUs even though we’re all inexplicably dropping frames due to being CPU bound.
Nothing has changed, and the OP is not wrong. Zwift has not been quietly rewritten from the ground up purely to accomodate your extremely expensive CPU.
Anyway I have no intention of continuing this, you are free to believe whatever you like. 
5 Likes
Zackly so.
i couldn’t respond till next day because i was out of first day forum member replies.
well, thanks for editing your response because the initial response was only more confusion and frustration for me.
so now you say zwift is actually using multiple cores.
this is exactly the opposite of what you told me directly in response in other threads.
this is also the opposite from what others around you told me. they assumed like me that from your own words zwift only used one core, some really think that.
this lead me to much frustration as i saw my rig using multiple cores.
zwift does in fact use over 30 threads. so my bad for using the term multi-threading because as far as i knew since no one told me all these details you just did ( including you) that over 30 threads wasn’t called multi-threading.
true i ran zwift one one core not a thread. because this is what you kept saying and others assumed also and suggested i run zwift on one core.
a lot has obviously changed! i never said zwift re coded from ground up, you said that.
can zwift coders add parallel coding without redoing everything? i have no idea…
but i was right about hardware and software changes as you and others keep trying to say what i see must be just because of my rig setup.
people kept moving the goalposts though.
very contradicting you say one thing then change it later and say it was not meant literally. very confusing!!!
details matter…
people were trying to tell me there was no way i was running zwift on multiple cores now you finaly say “oh! thats normal.”
anyway… you keep bringing up cost also. my processor isn’t extremely expensive not even close!
its only $499. the next step down which i have the 12700k is only $299 and its the best bang of all the K. the 12600k which i just returned is only $249 sometimes cheaper $200. a non K cannot match these but only hope if able to overclock get near a 12600k.
a z690 MB is only $170 give or take here sometimes $20 less than that… thats huge performance for prices not at all too expensive here. i don’t live in the UK I’m sorry you have to deal with the higher inflation currently. i have no idea why you keep bring up cost with me. I’m not rich either.
you don’t need to respond to this. we can now leave this alone since you finally admitted zwift does use multiple cores that’s all i was asking since a month ago. i have no idea why it took that long.
if people want max performance from PC zwift i suggest 12600k-12700k with equivalent of 3070 and higher. i am still getting more FPS increases by just overclocking my 3070. I’m also about to experiment with a custom waterloop. I’ve only been using a AIO so far.
i haven’t even hit max IGPU frequency yet, Rember when you told me the igpu wouldn’t do much, then you saw that i hit 200 fps avg on non overclocked igpu.
i think some even might of been assuming i was cheating which did in fact offend me a little if it was indeed about me.
oh well…
this was as much fun as it was frustrating! i wanted to learn new things and i did.
You’re still missing the point that Dave has been trying to explain to you.
The key point is that Zwift has not been written to take advantage of multiple threads. So it only uses as much CPU at any instant as one core, so becomes CPU bound without using most of the CPU capacity of your system.
E.g. if you have eight cores then Zwift will still only use one core’s worth of CPU resource at any time, even if this is in several different threads spread across multiple cores (which is happening at a lower level in Windows).
Zwift is not optimised to take advantage of multiple cores because it hasn’t been designed as a multithreaded app.
4 Likes
But zwift is in fact using multiple cores and running over 30 threads.
This was not explained. Instead only ripping on people for their purchases and telling people they are silly for taking someone’s words literally.
Oh yeah, I got the point.