Cities: Skylines CPU maxing out

[ProdigyXXI 0]

While playing on a custom map from Steam workshop I noticed that after reaching a population of around 80k, even on 3x speed that game runs slowly (but no lag, I have a fps counter). Later on I found out that my CPU maxed out and that it was using all of it's power to run it and it wasn't keeping up. Is there anyway to stop it from maxing out without buying new hardware? 

Currently using i5 1.7 GHz cpu, 8gb ram. 1tb harddrive (I know low spec right? but im poor AF) 

[MushyMushy 3,618]

Because of the kind of game it is (city sims are more reliant on your CPU than any other hardware), I'd imagine the only real solution that doesn't involve new hardware is to not build particularly big cities. Games usually don't have settings that affect CPU usage; settings usually only affect graphics-related things. Looking at the Steam Store page for C:S, 1.7 GHz (I'm assuming it's a dual core?) is quite a bit below the minimum requirements, so that's probably why you're experiencing trouble.

Provided you're not on a laptop and the system isn't super old you could get a pretty decent current model i5 that's around the minimum/recommended specs for under $100 (a 3.0 GHz dual core showed up on my search for $75). That would probably warrant a new CPU fan but those can be had for probably less than $20 since they aren't pricey unless you need a powerful one, which a dual core wouldn't need.

[rsc204 21,809]

C:S eats PC's alive. Sure my mid-range GTX 750ti card is hardly top of the line, but the rest of my PC on release was about as good as anything you could buy. Top of the range i7, SSD, 16GB RAM all the trimmings. But, 25fps is the best I can manage, that's before mods start to eat into performance.

So yeah, a 1.7 Ghz i5 probably isn't going to cut it, that's a mobile chip, right? Since most desktop i5s are much quicker. So you probably have a system designed for low power consumption, which again is just going to make the problem worse. Mods are more likely to use RAM, vRAM and your GPU performance than CPU runtime. So short on having smaller cities (to lessen the impact of simulating all the agents), you won't be able to do a lot about it.

5 hours ago, MushyMushy said:

You could get a pretty decent current model i5

The problem with that is the sockets on the mainboard. Intel core CPUs change the socket type every two years. So unless you can find an old model for sale, which will be a rip off, you're stuck buying second hand.

[ProdigyXXI 0]

Actually even with my low spec pc I can get off atleast 25fps (on low graphics)..... so either I build smaller cities or go for more hardware? Well thanks anyways.... back to the coal mines for me (untill i get more money that is) 

[rsc204 21,809]

9 minutes ago, ProdigyXXI said:

Actually even with my low spec pc I can get off atleast 25fps (on low graphics)..... so either I build smaller cities or go for more hardware? Well thanks anyways.... back to the coal mines for me (untill i get more money that is) 

Yeah you can always reduce the resolution, which makes the GPU load considerably less.

In my case, having spent a lot of money on a PC that was 6 months old upon Skylines Release, I just kind of expected better than 30fps. Even if my GPU wasn't the worlds fastest. I get the feeling the game engine is not the worlds most efficient or well optimised either. That's the problem with using a third party engine (unity) that wasn't really intended for this type of game. Although I totally understand why a custom game engine wasn't really an option for CO. That said, I'm sure programmatically speaking, there are optimisations that would severely reduce the load if it was coded better.

[hbn 244]

A lot of games (via game engines) use CPUs for physics computing and logic processing whilst GPU does all the graphical duff. Has been that way for ages. Since sim games require a large amount of logic to run, CPUs for these are just as important as GPUs. Having more RAM on the otherhand just allows the game to load more mods, assets, etc rather than having a direct effect on performance. Until recently when I got a new GPU (GTX1060 6GB) I did have to turn down the settings for some of the larger cities I had. The main city of mine currently has a population of 100,000 and lags a bit here and there. The new one I've just started has a population of sub 1000 atm. I am still running a Phenom II X4 (owing to budget constraints on recent upgrades, and now because AMD has a new socket, I will require a new motherboard, depending on what they offer). Given how most citizens are actually given a life, the game tracks them, their vehicle, residence and place of work meticulously, I don't think the developers have taken into true account how much the modding community would build upon this game in the drive for realism. They implemented a modding community well (even if Workshop tends to be a bit annoying from time to time), I think they just underestimated things a bit that's all. They do have hard caps in the coding though, probably because through testing they realised there is a limit before it all goes wrong. EA did the same with land on Sim City 2013. We were all annoyed at the time but seems there is some truth in having larger maps and performance.

Nvidia tries to use CUDA cores to take some of the physics computing onto itself. Whether that actually works or is just a marketing gimmick it's hard to say since PC games on more than one occasion tend to just be console ports that aren't full optimised.

I'm sure CO would've loved to have had a custom engine built for the purpose and speciality of running this game but give their team is still small, they turn to third-party engines. Unity has given them the ability to make the game customisable. That said, the engine does seem easier for things to go a bit odd at times and it isn't really well optimised for these types either.

There is a balance they have to look for, between realism through features and offering as massive a map as possible for the humongous sprawl on a 1:1 scale (though given the graphical style and that of the game they've put it in 1:15 iirc). It isn't possible to have both because computers aren't powerful enough to do it. I'm sure SC4 nowadays with some updates to it's engine (further optimisations, cleaned up coding, whatnot) could now do a full scale city, through absorbing the region into one massive map. Skylines can't. Cities XL fails at both because that game isn't very well coded.

[ProdigyXXI 0]

On 1/31/2017 at 11:41 AM, hbn said:

A lot of games (via game engines) use CPUs for physics computing and logic processing whilst GPU does all the graphical duff. Has been that way for ages. Since sim games require a large amount of logic to run, CPUs for these are just as important as GPUs. Having more RAM on the otherhand just allows the game to load more mods, assets, etc rather than having a direct effect on performance. Until recently when I got a new GPU (GTX1060 6GB) I did have to turn down the settings for some of the larger cities I had. The main city of mine currently has a population of 100,000 and lags a bit here and there. The new one I've just started has a population of sub 1000 atm. I am still running a Phenom II X4 (owing to budget constraints on recent upgrades, and now because AMD has a new socket, I will require a new motherboard, depending on what they offer). Given how most citizens are actually given a life, the game tracks them, their vehicle, residence and place of work meticulously, I don't think the developers have taken into true account how much the modding community would build upon this game in the drive for realism. They implemented a modding community well (even if Workshop tends to be a bit annoying from time to time), I think they just underestimated things a bit that's all. They do have hard caps in the coding though, probably because through testing they realised there is a limit before it all goes wrong. EA did the same with land on Sim City 2013. We were all annoyed at the time but seems there is some truth in having larger maps and performance.

Nvidia tries to use CUDA cores to take some of the physics computing onto itself. Whether that actually works or is just a marketing gimmick it's hard to say since PC games on more than one occasion tend to just be console ports that aren't full optimised.

I'm sure CO would've loved to have had a custom engine built for the purpose and speciality of running this game but give their team is still small, they turn to third-party engines. Unity has given them the ability to make the game customisable. That said, the engine does seem easier for things to go a bit odd at times and it isn't really well optimised for these types either.

There is a balance they have to look for, between realism through features and offering as massive a map as possible for the humongous sprawl on a 1:1 scale (though given the graphical style and that of the game they've put it in 1:15 iirc). It isn't possible to have both because computers aren't powerful enough to do it. I'm sure SC4 nowadays with some updates to it's engine (further optimisations, cleaned up coding, whatnot) could now do a full scale city, through absorbing the region into one massive map. Skylines can't. Cities XL fails at both because that game isn't very well coded.

So having a literal metric ton of mods and playing on a map filled with forest and mountains on a  "potato"

pc is a bad idea? just saying at this point would mods decrease the lag (even by a little?)

[MushyMushy 3,618]

Playing the game with no mods and the visual effects turned down as much as possible will give the best performance on a "potato."

That aside, you'll still hit the limits of your CPU eventually (no matter how powerful or not it is) because as your city grows the simulation has to keep track of more and more stuff. Turning the graphics down will help if one's GPU isn't the best and using few or no mods helps if you don't have heaps of RAM, but CPU load is pretty much dependant on the size of the city.

[ProdigyXXI 0]

Well thanks for the info guys, Im going to look into uprading my "potato" into a big of chips (maybe doritos?) but for now im just gonna play on minimum without mods. 

[Lot Creator 304]

I have a "top of the line" rig with an Intel 6700k and well, FPS kind of sinks and stays around 24 - 30 FPS even at that level. GPU power really has nothing to do with it and RAM can only save your computer from crashing and toasting your OS. This is all when you bite the mod bullet and with a sizable city. My recommendation for a 'potato' build would simply be to keep an eye on your RAM use and city complexity. Your city calculations can dramatically change when you have a lot of industry in the city and imports/exports. 

[ProdigyXXI 0]

On 2/13/2017 at 5:44 PM, ProdigyXXI said:

Well thanks for the info guys, Im going to look into uprading my "potato" into a big of chips (maybe doritos?) but for now im just gonna play on minimum without mods. 

I never knew what i was and still am doing, and I will continue as such