Welcome to Keen Software House Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the KSH community.
  1. You are currently browsing our forum as a guest. Create your own forum account to access all forum functionality.

JakeJud's Polygon Optimization Mod Project. (not currently being worked on)

Discussion in 'Released and WIP Mods' started by Jakejud, Jan 11, 2014.

Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.
  1. Embershard Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,686
    Actually, I'm almost certain that the load Space Engineers draws is on a CPU, as it's trying to calculate deformation angles on all the polygons. SE is a physics heavy game. I have an above average GPU but a slightly below average CPU. Lights also play a very important part in the non-optimized draw on a rig, and I don't just mean reflector lights. Interior lights and thruster flames also draw very heavily on a system. These are where you get the GPU bottleneck from. Games like Skyrim and Crysis I can play on ultra with very little FPS reduction, because these games have optimized threading.
     
  2. joebopie Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    296
    well I absolutely certain its the other way around. (I have a reason) when I run SE I get about 25-40fps with my GPU on 100% always. I can turn of 3 of my 4 cpu cores and under clock it to 2.5ghz and I still get the same FPS. when you crash something yes I think its very cpu intensive but the rest of the time its the GPU that its the Framerate limiting factor. it least defiantly for me.
    the confusing thing is that The cpu Frame rendering is separate from the GPU rendering.
    so the CPU can be building 100+ FPS (like mine does) but then the GPU might only be able to show you 40.
    basically IF your GPU is rather good. then its probably showing you every frame the CPU is building. it seems that even a simple CPU can get around 40FPS if the GPU is good enough. (until you crash you ship of corse)
     
  3. Embershard Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,686
    (Sarcasm) You must be right, since I have a better GPU than most, and cannot build passed a certain limit without taking a big FPS hit, while clan members with half my GPU strength and twice my CPU strength can build structures twice as big. I have CPUcool, MSIKombuster/Afterburner, CPU-Z, all showing me massive draw on the CPU when Space Engineers is running. Even overclocking my GPU core and memory do nothing to mitigate the FPS hit and CPU draw. If you have a GPU bottleneck, it's not a definitive answer that Space Engineers is a GPU hog for everyone. Now, I am NOT saying that the amount of polys from a graphics standpoint will not contribute to a framerate drop, but a CPU bottleneck is the more likely scenario for everyone. And as a secondary test, I booted up my laptop, which has four times my desktops CPU power and only a 1/4 of my desktops GPU power, and I can build larger structures. When you test anything, you need a second benchmark. Testing on one system with one set of instruments will skew results.

    *Edit* And if your GPU is running at 100% when running SE, you need to get that crap checked out, somethings wrong. I've not had ANY game, EVER utilize 100% of any card.... EVER.
     
  4. voicesdark Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,208
    Tell that to the couple of cards that a few unfortunate backers of Star Citizen had that literally melted. lol
     
  5. Embershard Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,686
    You're talking about the 590 hype? He said it happened while playing around in the pre-alpha hanger, so no, Star Citizen wasn't the cause. It was a defective card. It probably would have died while playing Sims too. I've been following Star Citizen for a while, so I've seen the stories.

    *Edit* It just melted the VRM chip. 590's should have protection against that kind of thing, so if it burned, yeah, it was defective.
     
  6. voicesdark Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,208
    yeah there were a couple of others as well, but think that was more to do with their overclocking probably.

    Kind of surprised how many of us Star Citizens are playing this as well.
     
  7. Embershard Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,686
    Space, FTW.
     
  8. Micknator Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    27
    My CPU runs at 50-60% max while the game still struggles. When I look at my GPU, it's at a 100%. My CPU is an i5 2500K and my GPU a GTX550Ti.
     
  9. joebopie Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    296
    Micknator Has it almost exactly the same as me, Question is Embershard, is how good(expensive) have all your Graphics cards been? I have never spent over £60 on a GPU and the one I have atm its £40 card.
    it could also be the type of GPU I have just not having some extra bits yours doesn't. ive also tested a dedicated server and it never once went over 20% of my CPU. that's about 1 core going at 2ghz. that is not much power. (no rendering involved) yes when running the game it is using more but I belive that is because there is NO point trying to run a Server program at more that 25FPS(as it not updating any faster so it would be pointless) but the game it trying its best to get as many as possible. like I said before. say im getting 6 fps looking at a huge ship being hit by meteorites. all I have to do to get 100+ fps is get about 500m away and look away. physics are still being calculated the polygons are still being deformed (at 100FPS+) this to me shows that its not that CPU intensive.( at least not enough for most of us to worry about.

    O and Embershard you said " but a CPU bottleneck is the more likely scenario for everyone. And as a secondary test, I booted up my laptop, which has four times my desktops CPU power"

    if that is the case that must mean your Desktop cpu is (no offence) rubbish and must be old. so I really wouldn't take that to mean its CPU intensive, if you see what I mean.
     
  10. Embershard Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,686
    Again, you two need to get those issues checked out. If your GPU is running at 100% something is WRONG. My laptop is running an AMD quad, while my desktop is running an older dual core. "More powerful" is relative to its comparison, and as you had no idea what either of my PCs were running, concluding my desktop CPU is rubbish is an ignorant assumption. Saying your CPU is running at 20% does NOT, I repeat, does NOT mean you're only utilizing 1 core. When a computer multithreads, it means it's utilizing multiple cores at the same time to calculate more than one thing at a time. If you have virtual cores, it means they're calculating also. You clearly have little understanding of computers. Flying away 500 meters does REDUCE the load on a GPU, but if your CPU is already enough to handle whatever you've built then sure, you'll see an increase when you fly far enough away that is stops rendering lights and window reflections. What I can conclude from that little story of yours is that you have a more powerful CPU capable of handling more than mine can, but your GPU is either total and utter crap, or you broke it. I said "more likely scenario" not exclusive. The only thing I can conclude for you is that you have a (no offense) rubbish GPU. Take a look at the specs for the game. Minimum requirements for a graphics card is 512mb. Minimum requirements for the CPU is "Core2 Duo 2.0GHZ (Or AMD equivalent) and the recommended is a quad core. It says this game will run on a freaking HD 3870 for petes sake! CPU intensive.

    *Edit* by the way, here is a little fix for you. Turn the graphics down, reduce the FOV from 90 to 60, or even 40, and reduce the resolution to 1600 x 900. Reduce the amount of lights and windows you have in your ship.

    *Edit-Edit* Oh, and here you go. Advice directly from the developers.
    -Think about it this way: when two objects collide, they usually collide at multiple collision points. More collision points mean more computations.
    -A static, immovable grid requires a lot less computation that a dynamic space ship grid.
    -Armor blocks are cheap on performance. Other block types are a bit more expensive, especially blocks that have some sort of functionality and require electricity. In other words, a simple mother ship made of armor only is better for performance than the same mother ship with hundreds of reactors, thrusters, doors and other objects.

    ^ These performance advices straight from the devs lead me to believe that the game is computation heavy. Meaning CPU, not GPU.
     
  11. joebopie Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    296
    Deskdops are always more power full so if your laptop is better= desktop crap (for a desktop CPU)

    wow your a dumb ass so I'm not going to bother. manily because im talkng about thing when they are NOT crashing. o and there is NOTHING wrong with my GPU.

    "Minimum requirements for a graphics card is 512mb. Minimum requirements for the CPU is "Core2 Duo 2.0GHZ (Or AMD equivalent)""
    THIS is seriously Vague and doesn't tell anyone anything about HOW powerfull a GPU needs to be and yes "playable" on a crap gpu maby (NOT when big ships are involved)
     
  12. Embershard Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,686
    And as a final icing on this proverbial cake, I've provided a grammatical red pen to your last post.

    "Wow you're a Dumb ass, so I'm not going to bother, and there is NOTHING wrong with my GPU."

    You've been educated now. You're welcome.

    *Edit* Wouldn't an Alienware laptop beat most desktop rigs? Yes. Your point is moot. Quadcore is going to have better threading than a dual core. Your point is extremely moot now.
    Seriously man, Google some of this stuff before you type. You'd sound psuedo-intelligent at least.
     
  13. joebopie Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    296
    seriously u grammar Nazi. and NO laptops are basically half the power of most desktops.. (if everything was brand new)

    I would advise you to read up on computer parts and performance.

    here is one thing that show me you don't know much about computers "Quadcore is going to have better threading than a dual core."
    only if its faster and newer (better architecture)
     
  14. Embershard Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,686
    I'd suggest you also read my posts and look at key words. "Most" "Most Likely" I only use absolutes when a fact cannot be disputed, such as "Quad Core multithread will ALWAYS be able to handle more computations than a Dual Core multithread" Therefore, by this token, my Quad Core laptop WILL handle more computations than ANY Dual Core chip. Period. Cannot be disputed, ever. It does not matter if the PC it's encased in is a desktop or a laptop. And if you cannot wrap your head around that simple fact, I am sorry. Now, I've done as much educating as I have the patience for. It is now up to you whether or not you accept this CONCRETE information. Here is a small article that might help as it is from a credible source. http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2406293,00.asp I cannot force you to accept fact over fiction. So in conclusion, good day Mr. Bopie.
     
  15. joebopie Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    296
    well Mr know it all be happy being so sure of your self and lets just leave it at that. this isn't exactly the place to be having the discussion.
    id just like to leave you with one thing. by your "FACTS" a 4 core 1.7ghz cpu could do more than a 2 core 5ghz with hyper heading? think about it. (a virtual Thread is NOT a core its a Thread thus 2 core =4 threads. doesn't mean you have 4 cores.) o and if you REALY must reply just send me a pm instead of filling this thread anymore.
     
  16. Rulin Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    106
    Some screenshots of the new models would be nice.
     
  17. Xocliw Public Relations Staff

    Messages:
    2,615
    Pretty pointless now as the mod is now obsolete :/.
     
  18. NOTSTEVE_ Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    1
    Feel a bit stupid asking but how do I install? I need this mod as I have overclocked my gpu and i still get 10 fps.
     
  19. demonocolips Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    176
    first how big is the ship your working on because this game is not optimized whatsoever (veery little). second what part of obsolete not being worked on do you not understand. its not currently compatible with the modding structure in the game.
     
  20. Mithril Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    64
    It is still a good idea for a mod, something to make large projects easier to work on, disable it for screenshots ;)<div_prefs id="div_prefs">
     
  21. Mishka Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    862
    SE is more CPU than GPU related so you may need to overclock your CPU (I take no fault for you damaging your CPU or other components)
     
  22. notydino Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    3
    Hi guys, i'm not sure if i'm missing a point or everyone has failed to see the elephant in the room.

    I know you have problems with terminals blocks. But the majority of the blocks in use is amour blocks, interior walls, stairs etc. Couldn't Jakejud release a mod that just optimizes a handful of frequently used blocks? For a big ship, just optimizing the amour blocks alone would do wonders.

    e.g.

    Amour blocks- 8 per face = 64each ~ x1000 = 64000
    Jakejude amour block = 3 per face = 24 each ~ x1000 24000 = 62% savings!!!!!!
     
Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.