AE Molecular Assembler Chamber

[Infallible83]

Hi all,

Very quick question.

Does anyone know if there is an optimum number of CPUs to have in any given set up?

I have built a 7x4x4 (Because that is the space I had in my room) but I dont know whether to go with 19 CPUs and 1 pattern or half and half etc.

Is there a point when the number of CPUs starts to become insignificant or diminishing returns kicks in?

Any info is appreciated.

Thanks

 

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Well, there's a linear progression with respect to how many actions per three ticks it provides. Without any, it has one action per three ticks.

Therefore, the first one gives you a 100% rate of return. The second one, however, adds another 1 action per three ticks, to make it an even 3 actions per 3 tics, or a 1:1 ratio, but it only adds an additional 50% computation speed, from 2 to 3. From there, the percentage of return continues going down. Where the break-even point is? Is up to the individual user. I've known a few who wanted 63 of them just so they could have a stack every three ticks. I've known some who don't really need more than two CPU's for 1 combine per tic. Where you lay on this sliding scale is your personal preference.

 

[Saice]

it realy all depends on how much crafting you want to do at one time.

You 1 crafting step every 3 ticks base and 1 more for every CPU.

So unless your the sort that wants to queue up a lot of builds or have some high volume automation/processing you most likely only need a few.

But if you want to say auto processes the stuff coming off a quarry you would want something like 1 CPU for every thing you need to do so that it does not back log. So if your are going to turn everything to dust and then smelt it you would need 2 CPUs for every ore type. Plus a few extras for your own on demand use.

 

[CapturetheBomb]

Is there a limit to the size of the Chamber?

 

[BlackFire]

Is there a limit to the size of the Chamber?

Not that I've found, I've made a 4x26x4. Don't ask me why I made that.

 

[Netherus]

it realy all depends on how much crafting you want to do at one time.

You 1 crafting step every 3 ticks base and 1 more for every CPU.

So unless your the sort that wants to queue up a lot of builds or have some high volume automation/processing you most likely only need a few.

But if you want to say auto processes the stuff coming off a quarry you would want something like 1 CPU for every thing you need to do so that it does not back log. So if your are going to turn everything to dust and then smelt it you would need 2 CPUs for every ore type. Plus a few extras for your own on demand use.

Actually this is incorrect grinding and smelting etc isn't done by the MAC so cpus don't have any affect on that it is limited by how fast the export / interfaces are
Cpus only affect recipes that are learnt to the MAC, it doesn't even include interface recipes

Holland says hi!

 

[Saice]

Actually this is incorrect grinding and smelting etc isn't done by the MAC so cpus don't have any affect on that it is limited by how fast the export / interfaces are
Cpus only affect recipes that are learnt to the MAC, it doesn't even include interface recipes

Holland says hi!

Well then that makes it easier. I avoid large amounts of automation when I can so I have not done the auto MAC quarry. Thanks for pointing that out.

 

[namiasdf]

There aren't any diminishing returns. Gains are linear. The computational power of a single CPU does not decrease as you add more of them. It is similar to adding another output valve onto your tank. It does not effect the output of the other valves (unless the tank is empty, but that's besides the point).

7x4x4 gives 5x2x2 or 20 spaces. If you're just starting, go with 4-6 pattern providers as that's already 200-300 patterns. Unless you aren't planning to expand the size of your chamber (and thus do not want to create redundant blocks), then plan to have more pattern providers so you don't have extra CPU blocks lying around.

It's really up to you though. I use a lot of patterns, I've only had my AE system for a few days now and I've filled one CPU chamber. Keep in mind that my chamber is only 5x3x3 atm. I have space to expand it to 7x5x5, or 5x3x3 = 45 CPUs/providers.

 

[Infallible83]

Thank you very much everyone for all the info.

I think I will put 10/10 and use this MAC to handle all the more CPU intensive patterns. (I assume the MAC that the pattern sits in determins its speed)

Infallible

 

[namiasdf]

Well not necessarily true. I was under the assumption that the total computational power of your AE system would include all the CPUs contained in every MAC. Though I don't really plan to have more than 50 CPUs/providers, I would assume that you can build additional, smaller MACs. Instead of one huge 10x10x10. 9^3 =.... 81x9 = ... 729.

Well if you need that many.

Well...

 

[Juanitierno]

You can think of crafting CPUs and friends helping you craft in paralell.

if you have a single one he will craft 1 item every 3 ticks, if you have 10 friends (cpus) you can craft 10 things every 3 ticks.

It does become wasteful tho, because in many cases you arent crafting that many items at the same times, and even on intensive jobs, items generally have a requirement.

Example with 10 CPUs (you ask for a generator):
CPU1: Crafts furnace
CPU2: Crafts copper cables
CPUs 3-10 are IDLE.

CPU1: Crafts iron furnace
CPU2: Crafts battery
CPUs 3-10 are IDLE.

CPU1: Crafts generator
CPUs 2-10 are IDLE.

You would only make use additional CPUs if you didnt have the refined iron for example, and you had a processing partern in an interface next to a furnace.


The example would be different in other cases, for example if you had the copper wires, refined iron and redstone already in your network, and requested 10 circuits (with 10 CPUs) they would all craft in a single 3 tick step as each CPU would perform an operation in that time.

Its just like having 16 cores in your RL computer processor... unless you (or your OS) are actually doing 16 tasks at a time 10 or 12 processors will be totally idle.

Hope it helps!

 

[Infallible83]

You can think of crafting CPUs and friends helping you craft in paralell.

Thank you this is a very helpful post. It means I will rework some of my automation of certain materials to ensure crafting can be as fast as possible.

Much appreciated.

Im from Argentina and english is not my main language.
Grammar/spelling errors should be expected and hopefully forgiven.

I forgive you for not giving English a capital letter.

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Infallible

 

[Juanitierno]

Should it go with a capital E?

Didnt know

 

[Infallible83]

Yes.

Sorry, I am an arse.

 

[Mirality]

The way I've been using AE so far, I haven't seen the point of adding more than one CPU to the chamber. There just aren't enough times when I'm crafting big orders that only use crafting table recipes.

 

[AlanEsh]

The way I've been using AE so far, I haven't seen the point of adding more than one CPU to the chamber. There just aren't enough times when I'm crafting big orders that only use crafting table recipes.

Then you are under-utilizing your MAC
Also consider this... If you put a steam engine recipe in your MAC, and also put in patterns for all of the components to make that steam engine, every time you make an engine your MAC will be doing multiple crafts at once. So it doesn't have to be a big order to make use of multiple CPUs, just a moderately complex one.

 

[Juanitierno]

Then you are under-utilizing your MAC
Also consider this... If you put a steam engine recipe in your MAC, and also put in patterns for all of the components to make that steam engine, every time you make an engine your MAC will be doing multiple crafts at once. So it doesn't have to be a big order to make use of multiple CPUs, just a moderately complex one.

Yes and no, it will craft faster, but regardless how many CPUs you have it wont take a single step.
Assuming many CPUs:
step 1: piston + 2x wood gears (3 CPU used)
step 2: 2x stone gears (2 CPU used)
step 3: engine (1 CPU used)

Edit: Confused steam engine with stirling engine, the example is still valid tho.

 

[AlanEsh]

I am not sure what you are saying was wrong with my post. My point was more CPUs makes complex recipes faster because it will multitask and make the sub-recipes in parallel (as you pointed out in step 1 and step 2).

/edit:
Also, in your example, the piston would also be a recipe that the MAC would craft.

 

[Juanitierno]

I am not sure what you are saying was wrong with my post. My point was more CPUs makes complex recipes faster because it will multitask and make the sub-recipes in parallel (as you pointed out in step 1 and step 2).

Sorry if i explained myself poorly.

I tried to show a difference between your statement:
" My point was more CPUs makes complex recipes faster because it will multitask and make the sub-recipes in parallel (as you pointed out in step 1 and step 2)."
and this:
"My point was more CPUs makes complex recipes faster because it will multitask and make SOME sub-recipes in parallel (as you pointed out in step 1 and step 2)."

The first sentence, i feel, it implies if a recipe has 40 steps and you have 40 CPUS it will craft in a single step, which is not the case because of the crafting chain requirements.

Sorry if this is just a confusion on my part (quite likely!)

 

[namiasdf]

It's also helpful for when you craft say... 10 ME export buses.