Limit of the numbers of cars in BeamNG now?

No, it tells you the maximum amount of vehicles you can run in realtime, which is to say before the physics engine has to slow down - you can continue to spawn vehicles but the game will be running slower than real times passes so besides the abysmal framerate, timers won't be accurate. As long as the game doesn't crash, you can have up to 64 vehicles.

 

Oh. Ok thanks for clarifying. So if you run at 100 times slow-mo, you could get many more?

 

Not really - slowing down time doesn't explicitly allow for more vehicles - it just makes the game more stable and alleviates lag so that the game can run realtime with more vehicles. You can continue to add vehicles until the either game crashes or until you have 64 vehicles.

 

or in my case the game crashes at the 5th pigeon

 

My game kill it self at:
- 5 cars (laptop)
- 16 cars (PC)

 

What are your specs?

 

Bad
Seems BeamNG does not like triple core athlons. Yes, triple.

 

Doesn't the game crash when you spawn the 65th vehicle anyway? May as well just say that a person can add vehicles until the game crashes.

@SixSixSevenSeven - was your BeamNG experience with a Haswell Xeon on a borrowed rig? ... also, now that I think about it - does your game crash with similar errors to the ones posted by myself and others in this thread?

 

Well, the "crash" I'm refering to is an instability in the game with large amounts of vehicles, seemingly arbitrary but influenced by hardware, system load, method of spawning, vehicle spawned, etc. My point was these crashes are not a hard limit, the 64-vehicle limit seems to be. That's all, I suppose you're right.

 

Uni workstations are all xeons+quadros that had no issues with 90fps paused, major tanking when running a single D series, major issues with banana bench. No issue in other CPU bound workloads though. Also not the only one to report issues with the game on xeon.
And game full on quits to desktop for me

 

Interesting stuff for sure. Too bad it's not a PC where you have more direct access to tune BIOS settings and install things like the Intel XTU. It seems clear that if Haswell Xeon works for some people then it is likely possible to get it to work for others.

When the game crashes to the desktop it leaves a log file at Documents\BeamNG.drive\beamng.log which can be examined to see what the game was attempting to do when it crashed. In this case the error is often in the last 25 lines or so.

 

XEON is the same cpu core as all the desktop chips, generations are different, but there's always the best binned chips go to XEON form, lesser ones lose cores or become i7s, i5's, i3's, pentium (or celeron) series as yields worsen.
XEON's only differ by supporting more features like ECC memory (error-checking memory, simply put), MORE memory, more processors (some have extra 'QPI' links), and the chipsets/boards are generally supported longer than the desktop counterparts (As was the case with wolfdale/conroe XEON series).
It's the same x86/x64 core with more features to it. If a program runs on x86 or x64 it'll run on a XEON. There should be no incompatibilities here, beyond the drivers packages and the software setup on the system. If you have any issues, it would likely be down to the video backend or your motherboard chipset drivers.

On another note, i7 4790k benchmark with the system having been running for DAYS and everything including a web browser and many other windows open... NO OVERCLOCK but DOES have 2400mhz ram 16gb dual channel. Hyperthreading on, Intel Enhanced SpeedStep (IEST) on.
While I do have a fancy air-cooler for this thing (solely for looks) the crap thermal paste inside the cpu-package under the metal lid of the chip prevents a meaningful overclock. Next fall when this hits 3 years of age I'm taking the chance of taking the lid off it for a de-lid.

][ Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4790K CPU @ 4.00GHz | 8 cores | 4000 MHz
*** pickup ***
# | Dynamic Collision ON| Dynamic Collision OFF
+----------+----------+----------+----------+
| MBeams/s | % Realt | MBeams/s | % Realt |
---+----------+----------+----------+----------+
1 | 27.558 | 354.67 | 62.859 | 808.99 |
2 | 51.616 | 332.15 | 121.886 | 784.34 |
3 | 73.220 | 314.11 | 176.603 | 757.63 |
4 | 66.587 | 214.24 | 162.770 | 523.71 |
5 | 76.390 | 196.63 | 169.947 | 437.45 |
6 | 96.385 | 206.75 | 201.984 | 433.26 |
7 | 106.009 | 194.91 | 232.321 | 427.14 |
8 | 85.169 | 137.02 | 251.993 | 405.39 |
9 | 81.887 | 117.10 | 195.834 | 280.04 |
10 | 84.687 | 108.99 | 204.038 | 262.60 |
11 | 88.204 | 103.20 | 208.971 | 244.50 |
12 | 91.554 | 98.19 | 212.859 | 228.29 |
Max Mbeams/s: 106.009 Mbeams/s

BANANAA!!!
.______,#
\ -----'/
`-----'
Press any key to continue . . .

I often got crashes when RESPAWNING existing vehicles around the 11~12th vehicle, not so much spawning them in the 1st time. I will edit/change this if there's an issue otherwise.

*above I mentioned binning, it's the 'classification' process at the factory that determines how good a cpu is for those that don't already know. Some cpu's are awesome and a true winner of the silicon lottery, some just make the cut, others do NOT and get down-marketed (laser-cut usually to a lesser chip), and sold for still-a-profit. A better binned quad core will do 4.8ghz on 1.2v where a PIG of a chip will struggle to do 4.5ghz on 1.3... and it can get more drastic than that.
Some chips also get down-marketed on purpose to fill niches as demand calls for, like the Q6600 G0 SLACR "GO SLACKER" chips from the core-2-quad series (Q6600 and Q6700 were good up to atleast 3.3hz on a crummy nvidia board and sometimes closer to 4ghz on an intel board with a good OC).
There's also the wolfdale core Pentium E5200/E5300 (down-marketed 2nd gen 45nm core2duo) that would SCREAM up to and sometimes past 4ghz when overclocked on a higher bus speed, though dual core, would match an i7 that had a ddr3 triple-channel advantage on math work core-per-core up to the difference in # of cores on the chip (meaning, up to two full cores of utilization).
I won't even bring up beyond a glance what dropping a XEON W35xx / 56xx series (quad and hexa core respectively) does for an X58 system, bios supported ofcourse (do check).

 

13 D-Series, can't spawn the 14th one.

Spoiler: Other minor things

Settings I used:

FPS:

Specs:
Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM) i3-2120 CPU @ 3.30 GHz
Ram: 4.00 GB (3.87 GB Usable)
Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 64-bit
Intel(R) HD Graphics 2000

 

@bob.blunderton - I think generally we're on the same page RE: Xeons except for one thing. I doubt that the best bins go into Xeon parts. Intel is so conservative with Xeon's specs there's no reason to put top performers there. Those can go to top end desktop parts, low-power mobile parts, and any other segment that actually needs the best Intel can do. Xeons simply need to meet spec and not die. While the profit margin may be greater on Xeon parts they don't push the envelope. Put your resources where you need them.

RE: your spawned vehicle count... other posts in this thread indicate that you can do better than that!

Hmm, that's interesting. Possibly the most interesting post so far due to your i3-2120.

 

That's a bump:|
Well.... I post this thread to just ask why cars are limited to 10 on mine, I used to can do a lot more. Here are some screenshots back in late v0.4.x

And "my garage" in v0.5.x before this problem started bother me

 

19th pickup spawned on gridmap causes a crash in the app. So it works with 18, 19 causes a crash-on-spawn. Was down to 10~12fps on 18 vehicles though.

Remember, Xeons sell for the most money to corporations filling rooms of servers with low-power-usage, cool-running chips. You need a good yield for this.
They're much, much more interested in finding the best chips to sell for 2000~3000$ a pop to big corporations in batches of 100~2000+ then they are to OEM's paying max 130$ for that 2c/4t mobile i5. This is the way it's been for a long time. Your best chips always go into server farm customers, THEN they go to the very-low-wattage folks, the high-clocking-but-power-hungry ones usually end up going out as i7's or i5's, model dependent on which power envelope they meet. I had a friend who went to work for Intel and he and I have kept intouch periodically now and then.
Right now in the corporate market, clockspeed isn't king, it's power usage. The speed-race kinda died out when AMD fell off the boat a few years back with FX... yeah, that. The folks that pay the most have the most at stake from having a high-capacity cool-running chip. An extra grand is nothing compared to what you'd pay to keep 1000 less efficient chips crammed into one big room cool AND powered over a year or two.
Let's hope AMD get's back on the boat with ZEN, for everyone's sake, even if they don't buy an AMD chip.

Intel is just biding it's time sitting in first place. There's no breakthroughs in the last few years (like when they repurposed pentium III tech for conroe core 2 series) besides integrating ddr4 and upping DMI to 3.0 (pci express 3.0 interconnected drive controller on skylake = higher SSD top-out for raid = double bandwidth even compared to x99), one of the last ones that means anything to us beam users is the Intel 4xxx series and up 256bit FPU.
Intel isn't doing much with CPU's beyond a few % a generation of improvement IF THAT because it has NO COMPETITION. That's why desktops are still quad cores (with or without hyperthreading). It's not like Conroe, Wolfdale, Nehelam, Sandy Bridge - the last of which DUSTED AMD, like a scorned child to the corner of the room. Let's hope they come back so we can all have an affordable 8-core cpu that will run a dozen beam vehicles reasonably for a REASONABLE PRICE.