[FEEDBACK][6.0 BETA] SSE 4.1 makes my CPU sad

[BobbyBeeblebrox]

My AMD Phenom II 965X Black Edition can't handle SSE 4.1. So sad I won't be able to join y'all in Kingdom End. So long and thanks for all the maja dust.

[Imperial Good]

Unfortunately this seems to be very much an AMD problem. Intel processors of a similar age and some even older do support SSE 4.1, including some Core2 processors. That said, X4 will have quite poor performance on such processors, especially with all DLCs enabled.

From what I can tell it is unlikely there is an upgrade path for your AM3 motherboard to a processor model that supports SSE 4.1. If you want something cheap that can run X4, you can try looking for some recycled workstation with an old, but more modern and likely Intel, processor that can support your existing GPU. If you want something new and low price that will run X4 very well then something like a 13th generation Core i5 or Ryzen 5 7600 is what to look at. If you do not mind something older but still new that runs X4 well then last generation 12th generation i5 or Ryzen 5 5600 is where to look. In all cases I recommend at least 16 GB of memory for a good X4 play experience, although it may still run with just 8 GB.

I am not sure why there is a move to require SSE 4.1. Usually vector instruction usage is guarded by conditionals based on instruction set availability with slower fall-back routines, potentially even to non-vector instructions. This way code can take advantage of the latest AVX vector instructions while still supporting older processors. Maybe the compilers used now assume all processors have SSE 4.1? Or perhaps one of the dependencies is built to require SSE 4.1 for performance guarantee reasons?

[Scoob]

Might it be worth exploring some AM4 options? I know the platform is EoL from a CPU perspective now, but with Zen 3 hex cores and DDR4 RAM being available relatively cheaply, it might be something to consider. Could well be some good second-hand deals from people upgrading to AM5 out there.

I did do a quick search, but it seems that none of the AM4 CPU's support SSE 4.1. If you could stretch to an upgrade, you'd be getting quite the boost!

[juergen111]

I did do a quick search, but it seems that none of the AM4 CPU's support SSE 4.1. If you could stretch to an upgrade, you'd be getting quite the boost!

Sorry but that is not true. My Ryzen 7 2700X supports SSE 4.1 and it's an AM4 CPU.

[Scoob]

You're right. Sorry, error on my part - I typed "AM3" but as I more frequently type "AM4" (cos that's what I have, 3900X) and I accepted the "you've made a spelling mistake" correction without thinking, it "corrected" it to what I more frequently type *sigh* Technology! lol.

[CBJ]

I am not sure why there is a move to require SSE 4.1. Usually vector instruction usage is guarded by conditionals based on instruction set availability with slower fall-back routines, potentially even to non-vector instructions.

The move is because Jolt performs better with SSE 4.1 enabled. Jolt doesn't offer fallback to non-SSE 4.1 instructions at run-time; the decision has to be made at compile-time.

Anyway, we are going to see how Jolt performs without it in the next beta, and would also appreciate the OP's feedback on whether it then works correctly for them. Please note, however, that if performance is significantly adversely affected for players with CPUs that do meet the minimum requirements, we may have to restore the SSE 4.1 requirement for release.

[BobbyBeeblebrox]

Wow, did not expect such feedback thanks! I no longer get the sse 4.1 error, alas now I get an illegal instruction error. As it has been said, I know my kit is old and hope to upgrade at some point. Here's the terminal log, for fun. I hope I didn't do this too poorly. Thanks again, I love the X Universe and the care you all (devs and community) put into it.

ExecuteSteamURL: "steam://rungameid/392160"
GameAction [AppID 392160, ActionID 2] : LaunchApp changed task to ProcessingInstallScript with ""
GameAction [AppID 392160, ActionID 2] : LaunchApp changed task to SynchronizingCloud with ""
GameAction [AppID 392160, ActionID 2] : LaunchApp changed task to SiteLicenseSeatCheckout with ""
GameAction [AppID 392160, ActionID 2] : LaunchApp changed task to CreatingProcess with ""
GameAction [AppID 392160, ActionID 2] : LaunchApp waiting for user response to CreatingProcess ""
GameAction [AppID 392160, ActionID 2] : LaunchApp continues with user response "CreatingProcess"
/bin/sh\0-c\0/home/bobby/.local/share/Steam/ubuntu12_32/reaper SteamLaunch AppId=392160 -- /home/bobby/.local/share/Steam/ubuntu12_32/steam-launch-wrapper -- '/home/bobby/.local/share/Steam/steamapps/common/SteamLinuxRuntime_soldier'/_v2-entry-point --verb=waitforexitandrun -- '/home/bobby/.local/share/Steam/steamapps/common/SteamLinuxRuntime'/scout-on-soldier-entry-point-v2 -- '/home/bobby/Games/steamapps/common/X4 Foundations/testandlaunch'\0
Game process added : AppID 392160 "/home/bobby/.local/share/Steam/ubuntu12_32/reaper SteamLaunch AppId=392160 -- /home/bobby/.local/share/Steam/ubuntu12_32/steam-launch-wrapper -- '/home/bobby/.local/share/Steam/steamapps/common/SteamLinuxRuntime_soldier'/_v2-entry-point --verb=waitforexitandrun -- '/home/bobby/.local/share/Steam/steamapps/common/SteamLinuxRuntime'/scout-on-soldier-entry-point-v2 -- '/home/bobby/Games/steamapps/common/X4 Foundations/testandlaunch'", ProcID 63681, IP 0.0.0.0:0
chdir /home/bobby/Games/steamapps/common/X4 Foundations
ERROR: ld.so: object '/home/bobby/.local/share/Steam/ubuntu12_32/gameoverlayrenderer.so' from LD_PRELOAD cannot be preloaded (wrong ELF class: ELFCLASS32): ignored.
GameAction [AppID 392160, ActionID 2] : LaunchApp changed task to WaitingGameWindow with ""
ERROR: ld.so: object '/home/bobby/.local/share/Steam/ubuntu12_64/gameoverlayrenderer.so' from LD_PRELOAD cannot be preloaded (wrong ELF class: ELFCLASS64): ignored.
ERROR: ld.so: object '/home/bobby/.local/share/Steam/ubuntu12_32/gameoverlayrenderer.so' from LD_PRELOAD cannot be preloaded (wrong ELF class: ELFCLASS32): ignored.
GameAction [AppID 392160, ActionID 2] : LaunchApp changed task to Completed with ""
ERROR: ld.so: object '/home/bobby/.local/share/Steam/ubuntu12_32/gameoverlayrenderer.so' from LD_PRELOAD cannot be preloaded (wrong ELF class: ELFCLASS32): ignored.
ERROR: ld.so: object '/home/bobby/.local/share/Steam/ubuntu12_32/gameoverlayrenderer.so' from LD_PRELOAD cannot be preloaded (wrong ELF class: ELFCLASS32): ignored.
pid 63802 != 63798, skipping destruction (fork without exec?)
pid 63807 != 63798, skipping destruction (fork without exec?)
Game process updated : AppID 392160 "/home/bobby/.local/share/Steam/ubuntu12_32/reaper SteamLaunch AppId=392160 -- /home/bobby/.local/share/Steam/ubuntu12_32/steam-launch-wrapper -- '/home/bobby/.local/share/Steam/steamapps/common/SteamLinuxRuntime_soldier'/_v2-entry-point --verb=waitforexitandrun -- '/home/bobby/.local/share/Steam/steamapps/common/SteamLinuxRuntime'/scout-on-soldier-entry-point-v2 -- '/home/bobby/Games/steamapps/common/X4 Foundations/testandlaunch'", ProcID 63850, IP 0.0.0.0:0
/home/bobby/Games/steamapps/common/X4 Foundations/testandlaunch: line 14: 63850 Illegal instruction (core dumped) ./X4 "$@" 2>&1
Game process removed: AppID 392160 "/home/bobby/.local/share/Steam/ubuntu12_32/reaper SteamLaunch AppId=392160 -- /home/bobby/.local/share/Steam/ubuntu12_32/steam-launch-wrapper -- '/home/bobby/.local/share/Steam/steamapps/common/SteamLinuxRuntime_soldier'/_v2-entry-point --verb=waitforexitandrun -- '/home/bobby/.local/share/Steam/steamapps/common/SteamLinuxRuntime'/scout-on-soldier-entry-point-v2 -- '/home/bobby/Games/steamapps/common/X4 Foundations/testandlaunch'", ProcID 63850

[Falcrack]

I see about a 40% drop in fps between 6.0 beta 3 and 6.0 beta 4, probably due to dropping SSE4.1, so hopefully BobbyBeeblebrox and a few others in his situation can agree to make the personal sacrifice to upgrade their CPU so that the rest of us can enjoy the vastly better performance that enabling SSE4.1 offers!

[BobbyBeeblebrox]

Personal sacrifice? Ha ha I just reported an issue for the beta, as the devs asked us to do. I have no power over anyone to make choices in this game. No need to be a jerk to people who place other priorities in their life than a new luxury toy.

[CBJ]

This isn't the place for personal remarks (nor, indeed, is the rest of the forum), and I'm pretty sure Falcrack's comment was tongue-in-cheek anyway.

Rest assured that the feedback provided is useful information, and we are actively following it in order to make our final decision on this matter.

[ZeroAffex]

I think this explains a lot. If a 15 year old CPU made back in 2007 is working now with Jolt, then that probably means users are relying on old SSE3 or SSE4A instruction sets which is not great news if you're an Intel user or probably AMD as well which have been using SSE 4.1/SSE 4.2 since basically 2010 and onwards. The other complication in supporting a CPU this old is that it's essentially locking out the latest generation of Intel's (Alder Lakes) from being able to gain the most benefit from 6.0 as I reported in another thread with the heavy reduction in FPS and stuttering in open space and frame by frame stuttering when docking that appeared with Beta 4.

I believe the reason for this is the Alder Lake's are using a hybrid architecture with the combination of Golden Cove Performance cores and Gracemont Efficient Cores. I am guessing for players with newer CPU's, we'd need to disable our E Cores as there's been some complications with them and older software applications. I have no interest in doing this and most gamers aren't going to even bother digging to this amount to figure out they may need to disable their E Cores, a selling point for these new CPU's--essentially gimping their new CPU to be able to play X4 which frankly doens't make much sense and is mildly insulting.

If this remains in place, may as well state in recommended spec's, the game no longer supports current gen Intel's. I am a bit salty that I spent the last 2 weeks trying to solve why my performance tanked and the reason was right here in this thread all along. To fall back before SSE 4.1 is one thing but to fall back so a CPU from 2007 is supported means we are most likely using very outdated instructions for our CPU's now like SSE3 or SSE4A like I said but who's to say unless a Dev wants to clarify as to which. When I read SSE 4.1 was removed, I was optimistic it meant for SSE 4.2 or AVX or something of that nature. Now it's clear it's for much older instruction sets. Anyone with a Alder Lake CPU will no doubt suffer compatibility issues without having SSE 4.1 which honestly in itself is pretty dated and anyone with a CPU in the last 10 years will probably lose a good chunk of performance period or very least, fail to fully see the extent of optimization that 6.0 brought.

I think if X4 wasn't so demanding, rolling back on removing SSE 4.1 for older instructions would not make as big an impact but this is a modern game, a simulation at that with lots of calculations in play just on the CPU side of things not even touching the graphical capabilities it has. It's not like removing SSE 4.1 on older X games that are far less demanding where we probably would barely notice it. I'd say if anything, support should be going the other direction and ensuring people with newer PC's and hardware can get the most benefit out of the performance increases 6.0 brings since they are most likely running much higher settings than someone who is playing the game with 10 or 15 year old technology. It seemed like that was the goal and then Beta 4 happened and everything went up in smoke in terms of optimization and performance gains for some of us. But that's just my opinion. That or again, make it very clear on the store page that 6.0 is not intended for new CPU's if it remains this way so those of us with them won't get upset when we learn we may have to disable features we paid good money for that typically show positive impacts in demanding games like X4.

As to OP. I am sorry I am bringing this forwards and if you love X4 as much as I do, I sympathize for you as I know too well what it's like to not be able to enjoy 6.0 since Beta 4 stopped me from playing in my tracks and has me back playing X3. However, you do have a 15 year old CPU. Even if upgrading to a modern CPU is beyond your budget, you can still buy a CPU that supports SSE4.1 super cheap on Amazon/Ebay, for like less than $50.. I beg you, please just upgrade your CPU so those of us with new hardware can reap the rewards 6.0 brought. I'd even consider donating you some cash on PayPal if it comes down to it even though I am on a fixed income. If devs don't add back SSE 4.1 so you can continue playing, a lot of the community is going to suffer and future players will also suffer.

Plus, what happens when you do upgrade down the road? Will your stance change? Will you come back here and demand support is brought back? I would think you should be encouraging X4 to move forward technologically, not stagnate or in this case, go backwards. That's just me though. I mean heck, I waited since 2019 to fully enjoy playing X4 and nearly 10 years just to play Crysis 1. Primary reason I had built this PC (i 7 12700k/3080) was just so I could get the most out of X4 as my i-7 6700K/1080 GPU struggled with it, so I saved up and built new a PC with a strong CPU and great GPU. First thing I did when I completed my build last October was boot up X4 and have been playing every day since Beta 4. Now I feel empty inside and frustrated as I am sidelined playing X3. I would rather my favorite game get better and better, even if it meant I had to upgrade (which I did for this game!). That's all.

Sorry to say, really hope 4.1 comes back so I can enjoy this game again and current and future players can get the most out of 6.0. One thing is sure if it doesn't, I'd feel like a major idiot building this PC. I would of been better off not upgrading my hardware

[Scoob]

Speaking personally, Beta 4 is the first of the Beta updates that has presented a marked reduction in performance for me. Looks like it might be linked to the SSE 4.1 changes as I have a 3900X. Beta 1 was a mixed batch for me, and I didn't immediately see the performance gains many were reporting. However, by Beta 3, the improvements in performance were very noticeable.

[BobbyBeeblebrox]

Clearly, if the game is better with 4.1, it should be used. I will happily continue to enjoy the legacy 5.x game until I can upgrade.

[adeine]

Depending on how much work/specific optimisation goes into it, another option might be to add a legacy executable to the compilation pipeline and have a separate .exe for those with incompatible CPUs. That's how a lot of older games around the time new instruction sets were introduced did it (you'd select the version in the launcher, or run the other file manually as necessary).

If it's basically adding a flag at compile time it shouldn't be too hard. If there are major changes that need to be done to the code to adjust for either case on the other hand, the overhead might not feasibly allow this solution.

[CBJ]

How many times do I have to remind people of the forum rules? This is for feedback on your experience of the beta, not for discussion of the development process.

Not only that, but I have specifically addressed this point, repeatedly.

It's not "faff", it's a lot of extra work each time we release an update. We already have to build at least 6 different versions for each build, and this would double that.

Now, as per the forum rules, this is not the place to discuss the development process. If you have feedback on your experience with SSE and/or performance, then please provide it. Otherwise please keep the discussion elsewhere, so that it doesn't waste the time of people who are trying to read and analyse the feedback.

[RoverTX]

70 FPS to 55 FPS here

Also FPS is a lot more all volatile.

[RoverTX]

Almost forgot Intel 10900k

[Panos]

My AMD Phenom II 965X Black Edition can't handle SSE 4.1. So sad I won't be able to join y'all in Kingdom End. So long and thanks for all the maja dust.

What is your motherboard model?
If can upgrade the BIOS to get a Bulldozer/Piledrive etc, can see where is my old AMD FX to send it to you.

[Falcrack]

Was SSE4.1 reintroduced with patch 5? I didn't see anything in the 6.0 b5 patch notes, but the line in the 6.0 b4 patch notes about removing SSE4.1 as a requirement seems to have been removed.

[LameFox]

Was SSE4.1 reintroduced with patch 5? I didn't see anything in the 6.0 b5 patch notes, but the line in the 6.0 b4 patch notes about removing SSE4.1 as a requirement seems to have been removed.

Also curious about this. I was away for a few updates... coming back now my performance doesn't seem decisively different? However it has a pretty broad range just flying around. Maybe I missed this change entirely. Are there any particular circumstances I should be comparing?