Please understand how obsolete my processor is, a comparable chip can be purchased for $30 today which is practically the bottom of the market. At the high end of the market such as Intel i7 are 4-5 times faster then my CPU in a multi-threaded benchmark.
I only activated my defective 3rd and 4th core for brief testing to confirm the sequential bottleneck and it's elimination, I do all the rest of my development and testing on 2 cores and extrapolate what the quad core performance would be. I expect my own system to be the lowest machine spec the game needs to be tested on and my testers will have access to higher end machines which can show what the performance curve is on better machines. I set the ultimate performance goal for a quad core (only twice my systems normal performance) because the goal is SO high, each game second is actually 12 logical slices within-which things can happen, so running at 4,000 times real time is actually 48,000 logical slices per second.
Such levels of performance are astronomically high and what's been achieved so far already blows everything else in the genre out of the water. The iteration by a simple loop over all objects would never have gotten this far, I've been using a Heap sorted by the future tick on which an object needs an update, and even that wasn't fast enough so added a circular queue based on tick modulus for the fastest updates.
I intend to squeeze as much performance as possible out of the code in the long run (as I really like the development of path-finding code) and if this exceeds my goals then all the better, but the current speed is adequate for building the basic game-play around, once the game content gets high enough that a real late-game emerges then it would be time to attack performance again.