(07-08-2013 08:11 PM)Pixel Perfect Wrote:  It's just a suggestion but you could try profiling your code to see what's eating the time and reducing your FPS.

I'm not sure what "profiling" means, care to explain?

I experimented with a palyer in a cmpletly empty world and I get 40 fps.
As for my settings, they're in the Main initPre, I think that is the right place for them

Well its a form of program execution analysis which returns stats on the frequency of instruction/function calls and their duration. It allows you to see where your code is spending its time and optimise it as a result.

You use a tool called a Profiler, many IDE's provide basic profiling tools but there are external Profilers too. I suggest you Google it to get more information. Very useful tool to have in your armoury.

Thanks, it sounds quite useful indeed, I'll check it out.

So I worked a lot on improving my FPS lately, and I did manage to get myself a little upgrade, but I am still quite displeased.

I removed the most consuming parts of my code (like checking if the player is under water), and I worked on a lot of tiny improvements - like call update on gui objects only when they are visible, set other guis only when I know for sure a change has occured and things like this. I completely removed shadows (which greatly displeases me, but I wanted to see how high i can get my FPS), I play in a one-area world surrounded by water with no reflection map, I only have ONE player character and one bridge static object.

I get 42 FPS, and I am quite sad/worried about it. I'll have to test it on some friends' computers also, but since I get 60 fps on the esenthel MMO, I don't think it's my pc to blame.

What other settings can I tweak to improve my FPS? I'm currently playing aroung with materials options: detail power, alpha, roughness, bump, reflection and stuff. What are the best material settings from performance point of view?
And what else can I play with to improve things?

---

Bold test: No player in world, just camera: no FPS improvement. So it's not my code. At least not my player code, but i'm not willing to give up moving the sun around.

I may have missed it but I don't think you've stated your hardware .. what graphics card are you using? Did you try the profiling?

I think I mentioned it somewhere. Anyway.
NVIDIA GeForce GT 540M, 2GB VRAM,
6GM DDR3 RAM Memory, i3-2330M processor.
I'm really expecting more from this laptop. I have games like Skyrim and Witcher 2 running perfectly well on medium settings.

I played with graphic settings a lot too, but I'm not sure what exactly you mean by "try the profiling". I'm not really good at this part.

(08-26-2013 11:38 AM)AndrewBGS Wrote:  I think I mentioned it somewhere. Anyway.
NVIDIA GeForce GT 540M, 2GB VRAM,
6GM DDR3 RAM Memory, i3-2330M processor.
I'm really expecting more from this laptop. I have games like Skyrim and Witcher 2 running perfectly well on medium settings.

I played with graphic settings a lot too, but I'm not sure what exactly you mean by "try the profiling". I'm not really good at this part.

You gotta know Andrew that MMO is simply considered as an empty map so you're getting this high fps with it

on the contrary we have no idea how big is your world how many objects do you have in the scene

are you using frustum for every object in the scene because it helps a lot specially when you are no seeing this object I wish I could help

I did mention it several times....
I'm using a ONE AREA world with 2 objects. The player, and a static object (a bridge)
Actually forget the player, turns out he makes no difference. It's 42 FPS just looking at the water.

I'm not sure what you mean by "using frustum for every object". I was a 7 out of 10 student at graphics in university :|. Would you please detail a bit more for me?

(08-26-2013 12:05 PM)AndrewBGS Wrote:  I did mention it several times....
I'm using a ONE AREA world with 2 objects. The player, and a static object (a bridge)
Actually forget the player, turns out he makes no difference. It's 42 FPS just looking at the water.

I'm not sure what you mean by "using frustum for every object". I was a 7 out of 10 student at graphics in university :|. Would you please detail a bit more for me?

Sorry I didn't see your description about the world

I thought you have custom objects in the scene and using frustum when drawing them is useful because it will not be drawn on the screen until it's in your camera angel

Sorry I'm trying to help only I will repeat what the guys is telling you try any profiler to know which functions are taking so much time , drawbacks etc I'm pretty sure you will improve the fps it's only about time

Ok, sounds useful; So how would I work with that frustum? (although in my particular case it probably won't make any difference, but it's great to know for future notice)

I could use that program, but I doubt it will help. It's not my code (I improved all I could in my code, and now it's not even called anymore; I just look at the world with the camera and I don't get 60).

(08-26-2013 12:20 PM)AndrewBGS Wrote:  Ok, sounds useful; So how would I work with that frustum? (although in my particular case it probably won't make any difference, but it's great to know for future notice)

I could use that program, but I doubt it will help. It's not my code (I improved all I could in my code, and now it's not even called anymore; I just look at the world with the camera and I don't get 60).

Andrew when making custom objects by inheriting current object or making exactly new ones when you make then in the draw function you must check if it's
in the camera angel or not because why would you draw something that it's not in your angel



Please revise game objects that comes with the engine

drawPrepare(){
if(mesh && frstum(mesh)){
mesh.drawPrepare(MatrixIdentity);
}

Sorry because I'm at work


}

Ah, I got it. Thanks. It won't solve my problems, but it sure helps!

My suggestion would be to disable 1 thing at a time to find out what is eating your FPS. You can try with objects and graphics options.

The GT 540M (258 Gflops) is not a very high performance GPU and about equates to a Desktop GT 430 card (268 Gflops). To put this into perspective a GT460 card, which is about the minimum you'd look at for a gaming PC these days, is about 3 times as powerful (900 Gflops).

I'm not saying this is solely the reason for your lower frame rate but it's probably a big contributer if you are using the deferred renderer.

Again I advise you look at using a profiler to analyse the time spent in each of your routines, this is a much more direct route to getting to the cause of any inefficiencies in your code. You can find all you need to know about Profiling by searching the net.

I like to think it's my graphics card to blame, I really do. Can't wait to test on my new pc. Should be about 3 weeks.

I don't see how the Profiler can help. I removed 90% of my custom code, and I'm not willing to give up what's left even if it's the problem. Really, all that's left of my code is moving the sun around, colouring the sky at night, drawing the water and waves and default camera handling. Absolute minimum.

I hope a new Pc will get this fixed.

But for my professional curiosity, could someone explain why a game like skyrim runs with 60 FPS and an esenthel world with water, ground and a rock has only 42 (no shadow, no characters). I'm genuinely curios.

---

(also, I'll re-state my question about what are the optimial material settings;
I'm going for RGBA 1 for all, no bump, nu specular, no "detail power", no reflection, 4 detail sclae, cull checked, 0 for all ambient values;
Is this optimal or are there any better values i can use?)