Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 02:43 Location: Raegquitting Spring on 04/24/12
No more than usual. I have a few (older, non-ssmf) maps with over 9000 (literally) features on them and those I take a performance hit. But on normal feature range (1k - 5k) I haven't noticed any dip in performance.
I have also noticed this, having high quality shadows and AA on will compound the effect. Forb could you please zoom in on a map (just enough to have the view full of trees) like the new Altored divide or Blindside? The maps use pretty low poly trees, yet cause a disproportionately large FPS drop (altored is nigh unplayable for me).
Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 02:43 Location: Raegquitting Spring on 04/24/12
O_O, no that doesn't happen to me at all. For posterity I'll check again...
Well I'll be damned... there is an fps drop. I'm still getting 70 fps (which is why I didn't notice before) but normally I would have 120 - 200ish. O_o, that's no bueno.
One problem is the `fading features` feature, it's bad implemented and makes feature rendering ~3x as slow as without it (16% cpu time versus 6-8%) . Also it isn't customizable anymore (iirc it was once) and it uses a fixed distance, so conflicts with fartextures. But I don't got the time to fix it, I would disable it as a whole, but better ask zerver what to do with it.
Nothing is free. I'm of the opinion that features popping out with zoom (without fade) would be horrible. But the point of the OP is that features, when zoomed in cause a very large FPS drop.
The main thing is that I am running: 16 gb of ram 280 nvidia(next thing that is getting replaced) 3.5ghz octacore(not that it matters)
and still struggle to keep higher than 45 fps with features displayed. If I am having THIS much trouble, I hate to imagine the goobers who are trying to run spring on 4 year old hardware.
Last time I tried (may 2009) covering the whole map with feature was expensive. I ended up drawing cubes with Spring OpenGL Lua, since anyway I needed them only for visual.
My own experiments (viewtopic.php?f=11&t=27938) lead me to believe features have an unusually high impact on the pathfinder. If you look at the debug screen (alt-b) and notice a high CPU usage on movetype::update you may be seeing this as well.
When I disabled the check for feature collisions in the source code the CPU usage dropped by about 80% for the same number of units and features. Note that this appears to be an issue whether your units are actually moving or not and strangely enough it doesn't seem to matter whether you reclaim all the features.
Joined: 24 Jan 2006, 21:12 Location: There is no god - and reality is his prophetess
Could we replace features on a certain zoom-level with 2 d planes? That way, even shadow could be still calced and stuff like forrests or stones could remain on the map.
Also its not a bug.. its a feature
Attachments:
File comment: i made this.. in paint.. with no mouse :( 2d is beautifull.jpg [391.07 KiB]
Downloaded 2 times
Do you have performance issues always with these maps, or only when many features are in view?
PicassoCT wrote:
Could we replace features on a certain zoom-level with 2 d planes?
FFS NO :), and the far-textures should be removed as well IMO. It is better to make a fully 2D minimap-like version of Spring instead for ultra-low-end systems.
I don't understand your post zerver or what you are suggesting.
Jools: so the engine should have features, which hurt higher end systems THIS greatly so older computers can run spring? It puts projects like mine in a hard spot. because either you run spring in really low settings OR you have to have a computer MORE powerful than mine? no, anything older than 4 years can gtfo.
Last edited by smoth on 12 Apr 2012, 18:59, edited 1 time in total.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum