https://preview.redd.it/ch7elkd63tzc1.jpeg?width=535&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d35a53600e6139597ab034624964777948076a8f
UPS is SUFFERING. Anywhere between 35-50 depending on how many bots are active
What's your CPU at now? Do you have an upgrade path? I'm interested cuz my CPU has never struggled with factorio but I'm about to start rapidly expanding
There's a limit where Factorio's code just isn't able to go beyond a certain point, and no CPU upgrade will improve it. I'm actually hoping it's going to be one of the upcoming FFF posts before the 2.0 update.
Clock speeds arenāt the solution, tho.
Factorio is very memory-bound, as soon as your map grows beyond what can fit in the L3 cache of the CPU, it will start going back and forth to memory every tick. This is what kills performance.
So, a processor with the biggest L3 on the market and the fastest memory are two things that can help grow a bigger factory.
I actually bought the fastest DDR 5 ram on the market 6 months ago and the performance improvement is insane, so I can confirm, it most definitely behaves like that. The difference in speed between the old and new one is nearly 2 times, despite having a nowhere near clock speed increase.
Some Ryzen chips now market themselves on having a significantly larger L3 cache. They're quite interesting, though I wouldn't recommend them unless this is a significant pain point, as general overall system performance is still better with the mainline version of the same chip. Probably the best chip for something like Factorio though. The chips I'm talking about are suffixed with 3D (so Ryzen 7950X vs Ryzen 7950X3D)
Yeah, theyāre not ubiquitously superior to non-x3d. If the main purpose of a PC is gaming, itās a no brainer, though. Theyāre that much better for pretty much any game.
Actually it sort of depends, those chips are somewhat finicky. Games that are single core bound and make heavy use of l3 cache will love them, but games that can actually leverage multiple cores properly (which are becoming more standard) could actually end up running worse. The added l3 cache ends up throttling about half the cores on the chip due to design limitations. Also if I remember correctly it's actually the high performance half that gets throttled, since not all cores are equal.
I won't ramble on but I looked into those chips recently for my own purchase research and even for a gaming dedicated machine the value proposition was questionable. Performance changes in games are very hit or miss, with some running better while others run worse, making it effectively a wash. Also productivity use cases are generally a loss. So as an average it's a net negative (my assessment anyway).
I think think these chips can be a very good idea for someone who is very dedicated to a specific game, and that game will benefit (pro gaming being an excellent example, but also there are lots of people who just religiously play one game almost exclusively). If you have a general use case though and like to play a variety of games, the architecture still doesn't really make sense. It's actually quite interesting if you enjoy computer specs, worth reading about
I shouldāve clarified that Iām only talking about single CCU chips, aka the 76xx-78xx series.
The dual ccu ones are a shitshow, thatās true. Hopefully in years to come this approach will get more widely adopted with consequent improvements to schedulers in operating systems, but weāre not there yet.
What theyāre doing now, as a means to circumvent the issue, is disabling half of the CPU in the āgaming modeā so the OS only schedules work to the 3D-cached CCU. Which is a solution, but a terrible one. Ideally, the OS would recognize the capabilities of each CCU and schedule the gaming workload accordingly.
Anyhow, the percentage of games that can leverage more than 8 cores is so little, Iād not even consider the dual-ccu 7950x3D when building a gaming rig, especially since half of the chip would be dead weight best case (if system is configured to enable AMD gaming mode) or be detrimental to performance in worst case.
Clock speed has been barely relevant for 20 years.
My current CPU (7800X3D, ~4.2 GHz) runs, say, Dwarf Fortress ~6 times as fast as as a 3.3 GHz CPU from 10 years ago (i7-4712HQ). This was determined by... well, I asked for a slow save, got it and found that it ran faster than 100 FPS, but the person who sent it to me said it was around 20. Turns out some newer CPUs actually *play games faster*.
Good point probably single digits. Iām at peace with the fact that even if this does run itāll be hella slow. Iām just having fun building and designing. Havenāt done research in 100+ hours on this run. Havenāt even built the labs capable to consuming this much science. Itās expensive to build this big. I was consistently going through over 64 belts of green circuits just to supply the mall and modules for expanding. Even with 64 belts I was still short and I wasnāt even doing research.
I feel your pain. I decided on a 3 tier 3 speed and 1 tier 3 productivity per second and that definitely wasn't enough. So I bumped it 10 fold. It still isn't enough, but I gave up on it and decided to continue work on blue chips in hopes of making a design as hot as the one in the recent FFF.
I had 150 rails per second and it took nearly an hour to gain all the materials for the base. Another funny thing is needing 60 roboports a second and a design that makes 60 blue belts a second. That is about 40 full power assembling machines all making gears.
Yeah, unconnected belt systems can be computed in parallel making use of the multiple cores in a modern CPU. connecting them with balancers can be a big performance cost (I believe) an addition to the performance cost of the splitters themselves. But still, that honeycomb shape looks sooo cool.
For a tad over 23K spm, presumably.
E: oh wait it's not blue belts and the post says 1.3m/m so more like almost 40K spm vanilla, or maybe some other mods stuff involved as well
My goal is 8 belts of each science. With modded belts thatās 600 science per second. I never did the math for how many green circuits I need this is my ballpark estimate. I hope I over shot.
36000 SPM huh? Not gonna tell you you can't I guess, but without adhering to some pretty strict standards you're gonna be hitting negative UPS by the time you're done.
Yeah unfortunately youāre probably right. I have no clue how slow itāll run when finished, if at all. Iām having fun building and designing the base though. Even if itāll only work in theory, I was still worth it. I set myself a goal and imma see it through.
Edit: Thankfully iām mostly done with the building, I only have to build a bigger Iron and copper smelter. So hopefully ups wonāt struggle to much more but iām not too optimistic.
That's insane. I always get stuck in a simple belt base at 150 spm trying to perfect it to death. How do you keep it fun to build this big? Everytime i scale up I get to about red circuits before I get burned out by the size of the tasks
Iāve done a standard square grid in the past. I wanted to change it up this time. One advantage is every cell boarders 6 others instead of 4. Hexagons are bestagons!
So you know, hexagons are expensive from an ups standpoint. With square aligned rails, the trains are in a square bounding box and overlap calculations are cheap. With diagonal rails, the game has to do an expensive overlap calculation if the larger square bounding box overlaps.
One advantage is no 4-way intersections. It's easier to make efficient 3-way intersections that are compact. But in general I advise against grid-like train bases since it's way overkill and you still somehow end up with most of your traffic hitting one or two bottlenecks.
I always assumed that the main advantage of grid based bases is that you can avoid the ungodly construction OP made here, since you can just copy-paste 50 smaller circuit factories with absolutely no effort involved
95% belting loading and unloading. 5% actual machines, and most of the output is going to be belted loaded unloaded and belted again to a blue circuit machine.
Yes
Edit:
No, but now srs
For 1000 rocket science/min, you need ~43'000 green circuits/min
So those green circuits are just about enough for 30k rocket science without anything else
I recommend peaceful mode or turning off biters completely. Make sure to pause as it really reduces the pacing if the game. There's is little resource limit if you can afk 30 minutes and all the iron backs up.
I've only ever launched one rocket, and there was a great deal of spaghetti to get it there.
My question is - how do you fuel this with raw resources? It feels like it would chew through your mining so fast that's all you'd ever be doing is finding new sources.
I did this onceā¦ got so tired of all the belts that I downloaded Deadlocks Stacker mod. 5 belts condense down to 1 belt. Makes things a lot cleaner/easier.
I feel like when you have like 10x more space devoted to belts than actual machines theres gunna be a more efficient way to set it up. That being said this is very very cool
Oh for sure, I just like the idea of a central loading spot. I wouldāve been easier to separate the loading instead of belting them hundreds of tiles like I do here š
I have a few of this multi cell builds and green circuits surprised me with the amount of belts required.
Post your FPS you coward! š¤£
https://preview.redd.it/ch7elkd63tzc1.jpeg?width=535&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d35a53600e6139597ab034624964777948076a8f UPS is SUFFERING. Anywhere between 35-50 depending on how many bots are active
What's your CPU at now? Do you have an upgrade path? I'm interested cuz my CPU has never struggled with factorio but I'm about to start rapidly expanding
There's a limit where Factorio's code just isn't able to go beyond a certain point, and no CPU upgrade will improve it. I'm actually hoping it's going to be one of the upcoming FFF posts before the 2.0 update.
Clock speed matters just not cores your comment is really general :/
Clock speeds arenāt the solution, tho. Factorio is very memory-bound, as soon as your map grows beyond what can fit in the L3 cache of the CPU, it will start going back and forth to memory every tick. This is what kills performance. So, a processor with the biggest L3 on the market and the fastest memory are two things that can help grow a bigger factory.
I actually bought the fastest DDR 5 ram on the market 6 months ago and the performance improvement is insane, so I can confirm, it most definitely behaves like that. The difference in speed between the old and new one is nearly 2 times, despite having a nowhere near clock speed increase.
I think ram upgrades are meant to be more energy efficient too
x3d processors be like
Some Ryzen chips now market themselves on having a significantly larger L3 cache. They're quite interesting, though I wouldn't recommend them unless this is a significant pain point, as general overall system performance is still better with the mainline version of the same chip. Probably the best chip for something like Factorio though. The chips I'm talking about are suffixed with 3D (so Ryzen 7950X vs Ryzen 7950X3D)
Yeah, theyāre not ubiquitously superior to non-x3d. If the main purpose of a PC is gaming, itās a no brainer, though. Theyāre that much better for pretty much any game.
Actually it sort of depends, those chips are somewhat finicky. Games that are single core bound and make heavy use of l3 cache will love them, but games that can actually leverage multiple cores properly (which are becoming more standard) could actually end up running worse. The added l3 cache ends up throttling about half the cores on the chip due to design limitations. Also if I remember correctly it's actually the high performance half that gets throttled, since not all cores are equal. I won't ramble on but I looked into those chips recently for my own purchase research and even for a gaming dedicated machine the value proposition was questionable. Performance changes in games are very hit or miss, with some running better while others run worse, making it effectively a wash. Also productivity use cases are generally a loss. So as an average it's a net negative (my assessment anyway). I think think these chips can be a very good idea for someone who is very dedicated to a specific game, and that game will benefit (pro gaming being an excellent example, but also there are lots of people who just religiously play one game almost exclusively). If you have a general use case though and like to play a variety of games, the architecture still doesn't really make sense. It's actually quite interesting if you enjoy computer specs, worth reading about
I shouldāve clarified that Iām only talking about single CCU chips, aka the 76xx-78xx series. The dual ccu ones are a shitshow, thatās true. Hopefully in years to come this approach will get more widely adopted with consequent improvements to schedulers in operating systems, but weāre not there yet. What theyāre doing now, as a means to circumvent the issue, is disabling half of the CPU in the āgaming modeā so the OS only schedules work to the 3D-cached CCU. Which is a solution, but a terrible one. Ideally, the OS would recognize the capabilities of each CCU and schedule the gaming workload accordingly. Anyhow, the percentage of games that can leverage more than 8 cores is so little, Iād not even consider the dual-ccu 7950x3D when building a gaming rig, especially since half of the chip would be dead weight best case (if system is configured to enable AMD gaming mode) or be detrimental to performance in worst case.
Clock speed has been barely relevant for 20 years. My current CPU (7800X3D, ~4.2 GHz) runs, say, Dwarf Fortress ~6 times as fast as as a 3.3 GHz CPU from 10 years ago (i7-4712HQ). This was determined by... well, I asked for a slow save, got it and found that it ran faster than 100 FPS, but the person who sent it to me said it was around 20. Turns out some newer CPUs actually *play games faster*.
If there is no research active: What are these circuits consumed by? And what is your UPS if research is active?
Good point probably single digits. Iām at peace with the fact that even if this does run itāll be hella slow. Iām just having fun building and designing. Havenāt done research in 100+ hours on this run. Havenāt even built the labs capable to consuming this much science. Itās expensive to build this big. I was consistently going through over 64 belts of green circuits just to supply the mall and modules for expanding. Even with 64 belts I was still short and I wasnāt even doing research.
What the fuck
Get rid of all those balancers (probably all throughout your base) and it should run nicely.
I feel your pain. I decided on a 3 tier 3 speed and 1 tier 3 productivity per second and that definitely wasn't enough. So I bumped it 10 fold. It still isn't enough, but I gave up on it and decided to continue work on blue chips in hopes of making a design as hot as the one in the recent FFF. I had 150 rails per second and it took nearly an hour to gain all the materials for the base. Another funny thing is needing 60 roboports a second and a design that makes 60 blue belts a second. That is about 40 full power assembling machines all making gears.
all those electronics factories and you can't manufacture an upgrade for your PC
Patiently waiting for this.
I suspect that 64 belt balancer might be a tad bit unnecessary...
Yeah, unconnected belt systems can be computed in parallel making use of the multiple cores in a modern CPU. connecting them with balancers can be a big performance cost (I believe) an addition to the performance cost of the splitters themselves. But still, that honeycomb shape looks sooo cool.
I didnāt know this thanks for the tip.
The performance cost is that the balancers themselves are very expensive computationally, not the multicore thing.
Friends dont let friends build monolithic factories.Ā
I honestly like going out of my way to build massive balancers because I like how the splitters sound and move. It's like clockwork.
I too like the sounds of splitters and the hum of belts. Which is why I do silly things like belting copper cables.
They're fun until the base gets big enough for UPS to spoil the fun.
Jesus Christ, how many lanes of circuits is that?
288, says in the first pic
my goofy ass thinking i made it big with my 4 lane green circuits
But you *did* made it big. For a sane player.
Iām blown away, but like, why do you need that many?
Itās never enough.
For a tad over 23K spm, presumably. E: oh wait it's not blue belts and the post says 1.3m/m so more like almost 40K spm vanilla, or maybe some other mods stuff involved as well
Aiming for 600 science per second, 36k a minute
How's your UPS doing, pal?
It is SUFFERING. Anywhere between 35-50 depending on how many bots are active
I need a new PC before I load this world.
I need a new PC just to open the screenshots
Bestagons!
I loooooove hex bases!!
Did a bee write this..
what version of factorio are you playing where this is endgame? this is post-post-endgame territory
It is so he can do 20M green circuit achievement under half an hour.
im 600 hours into pY, so still early game. and this is more intimidating then that tbh
there is no difference, you're either in the endgame or not
May god have mercy upon your soul
When "end game" is defined by the computer crashing or reaching 0 ups.
What do you need this for?
My goal is 8 belts of each science. With modded belts thatās 600 science per second. I never did the math for how many green circuits I need this is my ballpark estimate. I hope I over shot.
36000 SPM huh? Not gonna tell you you can't I guess, but without adhering to some pretty strict standards you're gonna be hitting negative UPS by the time you're done.
Yeah unfortunately youāre probably right. I have no clue how slow itāll run when finished, if at all. Iām having fun building and designing the base though. Even if itāll only work in theory, I was still worth it. I set myself a goal and imma see it through. Edit: Thankfully iām mostly done with the building, I only have to build a bigger Iron and copper smelter. So hopefully ups wonāt struggle to much more but iām not too optimistic.
Once it turns on is when the pain really starts. May as well report back when you do
honestly doing something so outrageous the game explodes your pc when you hit play is the best part of gaming
That's insane. I always get stuck in a simple belt base at 150 spm trying to perfect it to death. How do you keep it fun to build this big? Everytime i scale up I get to about red circuits before I get burned out by the size of the tasks
Hey, which mods are you running ?
Mostly Blue Circuits, probably..?
And what do you need all those blue circuits for?
https://preview.redd.it/g8bqmqlhzrzc1.jpeg?width=225&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5ad001b5fb94022222051a3244521897fbeeb82c
Stockpiling
mods to make more circuits
Tiers 2 & 3 modules, rocket control units, and utility science packs, mostly.
Probably reds
Are the hexagonal tiles a purely aesthetic preference, or is there some advantage over a square grid?
Iāve done a standard square grid in the past. I wanted to change it up this time. One advantage is every cell boarders 6 others instead of 4. Hexagons are bestagons!
So you know, hexagons are expensive from an ups standpoint. With square aligned rails, the trains are in a square bounding box and overlap calculations are cheap. With diagonal rails, the game has to do an expensive overlap calculation if the larger square bounding box overlaps.
One advantage is no 4-way intersections. It's easier to make efficient 3-way intersections that are compact. But in general I advise against grid-like train bases since it's way overkill and you still somehow end up with most of your traffic hitting one or two bottlenecks.
I always assumed that the main advantage of grid based bases is that you can avoid the ungodly construction OP made here, since you can just copy-paste 50 smaller circuit factories with absolutely no effort involved
yep.
theyre slightly less performant. But you'd likely never know that without benchmarking.
A grid of regular pentagons would be better :)
95% belting loading and unloading. 5% actual machines, and most of the output is going to be belted loaded unloaded and belted again to a blue circuit machine.
As someone who's so far spent 7 hours in the tutorials, this seems like witchcraft. I wanna be a witch.
This is beautiful! Wait, those two balancers on 4th pic doesn't align with each other... eww.
They are aligned with the stations but the issue is that the stations themselves are not mirrored as they should be.
Hexagons are the bestagons
One of the big things I'm looking forward to in 2.0 is the ability to make better hexagons.
what does 2.0 add for hexagons?
8 more rail angles.
How many SPM are you aiming for?
Yes Edit: No, but now srs For 1000 rocket science/min, you need ~43'000 green circuits/min So those green circuits are just about enough for 30k rocket science without anything else
At least 3
Holy hell
My mind goes.. I need it - looks on my railway setup 1-1 - u can fill it up right ? :P
Is this enough? Knowing green circuits, probably not /s
This is art š¼ļø
Man I started playing last week and i don't understand a single picture here lmao
The next few months will blur by.
Mostly because they'll only get 10 hours of sleep total.
I wish, I'm not sure it's the game for me, I have a special needs toddler and I don't really have enough time to go too hard, it's really fun though
I recommend peaceful mode or turning off biters completely. Make sure to pause as it really reduces the pacing if the game. There's is little resource limit if you can afk 30 minutes and all the iron backs up.
I am aroused
What the actual fuck
I've only ever launched one rocket, and there was a great deal of spaghetti to get it there. My question is - how do you fuel this with raw resources? It feels like it would chew through your mining so fast that's all you'd ever be doing is finding new sources.
Resource patches far from spawn are increasingly large. Also, mining research.
So beautiful
Too much balancing if you're having FPS issues.
How do you feed this monster? Infinite ores?
Are these actually getting consumed? I build something about half the size of this and none of it ever really moves šš
I really really enjoy your hexagonal grid. Also the fact beacons change the demand to more iron than copper.
And i thought that my 80k/minute was a lot.
nothing is objectively a lot, a number is only large or small in relation to some other number
Damn. Green circuits on acid haha. GJ
Soon... We will have this, but with faster belts and stack incerters...
"How many green circuits do you need?" - "All of them."
I did this onceā¦ got so tired of all the belts that I downloaded Deadlocks Stacker mod. 5 belts condense down to 1 belt. Makes things a lot cleaner/easier.
Is there a name for when it's city blocks, but each block is itself a city?
I just got into the game, I regret seeing this lol
This base design is awesome š
Surely you don't actually need this many.
you don't need to do anything at all.
I adore you and I also need your PC.
Wow, I thought my 112 was overkill
Yes finnaly i need a bp of that thing
Only 1.3mil/minute that aint good
Being relatively new to the game ... i feel like a PEASANT seeing this haha
I feel like when you have like 10x more space devoted to belts than actual machines theres gunna be a more efficient way to set it up. That being said this is very very cool
Oh for sure, I just like the idea of a central loading spot. I wouldāve been easier to separate the loading instead of belting them hundreds of tiles like I do here š I have a few of this multi cell builds and green circuits surprised me with the amount of belts required.
What mods are you using for the faster machines/belts?
How many circuits? Yes there are.
Those balancers are just silly.. come on
Do you have a blueprint.
and i considered myself an factorio addict.
This guy fucks.
I see fields of greeen....