Performance optimization - post your saves

[totallymeyou]

Can your save run without the mods? They make it difficult to look at performance with the API changes between 0.15 and 0.16.

Yes as the mods are nearly all just quality of life mods, BUT you have to keep Advanced Solar active, otherwise the saves power supply will be wrecked. So unless you use an infinite power command, the base won't run, obviously.

I had the power supply run on vanilla solar before, but hoped to gain fps by using a mod to concentrate the power in a much smaller area.

Ah, yeah solar panels are O(1) cost so the count has no impact on game performance

I did find one small thing so far with requester chests to improve performance. I'm looking at other things still.

Well, guess i could rebuild the around 700k solar panels if that would yield any useful results for you guys

There are still a few things not running smoothly in the factory, hoping to have fixed everything by tonight (EU), so that you could also do a long term test, if that would help at all^^

*Edit: Just found out something that is probably a mistake / bug: A silo will still launch the rocket, even if the silo's inventory of Space Science is full (2k), and then doesnt have space to store the new Space Science - it basically just evaporates. You may want to change that As in simply stop the rocket from launching if there still are Space Science packs in the silos inventory. Obviously there are ways to stop this from happening from the players side (Circuit Network for the input of Satellites, but such expensive Science packs just disappearing can probably upset some people

[Rseding91]

*Edit: Just found out something that is probably a mistake / bug: A silo will still launch the rocket, even if the silo's inventory of Space Science is full (2k), and then doesnt have space to store the new Space Science - it basically just evaporates. You may want to change that As in simply stop the rocket from launching if there still are Space Science packs in the silos inventory. Obviously there are ways to stop this from happening from the players side (Circuit Network for the input of Satellites, but such expensive Science packs just disappearing can probably upset some people

That's intended. You're meant to clear the science packs out yourself.

[totallymeyou]

That's intended. You're meant to clear the science packs out yourself.

Interesting. Seems counter intuitive in a game in which you're meant to automate everything. But i can understand the decision to implement it like this.

[Rseding91]

That's intended. You're meant to clear the science packs out yourself.

Interesting. Seems counter intuitive in a game in which you're meant to automate everything. But i can understand the decision to implement it like this.

You automate the removal of the science packs

[totallymeyou]

That's intended. You're meant to clear the science packs out yourself.

Interesting. Seems counter intuitive in a game in which you're meant to automate everything. But i can understand the decision to implement it like this.

You automate the removal of the science packs

Fair enough^^

Here's an updated version of the save, now running smoothly at 5k sp/m over the long term as well. Are my 21k beacons helping with troubleshooting of the tick slowdown?

https://www.dropbox.com/s/q1tsc3wlvqzvp ... 1.zip?dl=0

And would rebuilding the vanilla solar field be worth anything for you guys / me?^^

[Rseding91]

Beacons have a constant incredibly small performance impact so they don't even show up in the top 70% of the profiler.

[Xaik0n]

Hi,

this is my Megabase in 0.1537.
The low fps make the game soon impossible. I have been looking for a long time to help increase my fps.

It is noticeable to me of my processor only 1 core largely from the game is used?

Has anyone an idea which hardware could bring the greatest possible increase?

My FPS Drops to 20-13 -.-

Here is my System:
CPU: i5-3550 CPU @ 3.30GHz
RAM: 8,00 GB
System : 64 Bit
Windos 7 Home Premium
Grafik: Nvidia Geforce GTX 1050 Ti
SSD Drive

Here are some screenshots:

Stromnetz:
http://www.directupload.net/file/d/4879 ... sl_jpg.htm

Aktuelle FPS :
http://www.directupload.net/file/d/4879 ... nn_jpg.htm

Produktion:
http://www.directupload.net/file/d/4879 ... 7w_jpg.htm

Produktion Flüssigkeiten:
http://www.directupload.net/file/d/4879 ... p9_jpg.htm

Thanks for Help

[Oktokolo]

I am not sure whether optimizing for playing on a virtualized linux is considered a worthy target. My main gaming rig has not enough CPU power to handle 60 UPS but the server has...

I play the x64 linux version on that qemu-virtualized Arch for some months now and Factorio works surprisingly well without any GPU (so software rendering only). It eats an insane amount of CPU power - but that is fine and expected. I still get the constant 60 UPS because of plenty of otherwise unused CPU power and RAM.
But FPS are around 16 FPS standing in my base at reasonable zoom levels that are comfortable for building by hand (around 24x20 tiles). Clouds, smoke and decorations are disabled. Sprite quality settings do not seem to have any impact. But the count of visible objects on screen seem to matter.
I get 28 FPS standing on grassland without any objects (still 24x20 tiles visible) and around 8 FPS standing in a arather dense forest at same zoom level.

Good thing is: You do not need any save games for optimizing that use case (that is rather special, i know). Just needs a testing environment with software rendering only.

[posila]

Just needs a testing environment with software rendering only.

Our minimal requirement is dedicated GPU, preferably from last 5 years, but we also try to make the game playeble on integrated Intel/AMD GPUs. I am sorry to disappoint you, but nobody will be assigned to optimize the game for software rendering nor I don't think anyone will choose to look into it as their side project :/

What makes you to play the game in virtualized environment?

[Zavian]

Steam does not indicate that the minimal requirements include a dedicated GPU, just

Graphics: 512MB Video Memory

.

Factorio runs just fine on my 2012 Mac Mini with Intel HD4000 integrated graphics, although I do suffer from dropped frames, especially if there is a lot of trees or other items on screen.

[Oktokolo]

I am sorry to disappoint you, but nobody will be assigned to optimize the game for software rendering nor I don't think anyone will choose to look into it as their side project :/

You do not disappoint me at all. The game is in a better state and of better quality now than most AAA titles will ever be. I already spent hundreds of hours playing and still have a lot of fun with it even on 16 FPS (just ended another ten hour session).
I do not know any other enjoyable game featuring any sort of pixel graphics that is playable in a VM. I would not had dared to even try if i had not read the dev blog and therefore knew about the heavily optimized special-purpose 2D engine exclusively made for the game.
No worries. I am still a happy customer even if you do not optimize it for my corner case of GPU-less gaming

What makes you to play the game in virtualized environment?

My actual gaming rig is an old core2 quad from ten years ago. It was pretty capable back then and i swapped the GPU twice. It still runs most games (including Fallout 4 and Skyrim) quite well.
But Factorio is not a game like any other. It needs more CPU power and RAM throughput than the old core2 can give. So i got UPS drops that caused disconnects in multiplayer and stutter in singleplayer. Therefore i put it into a VM on the server and get constant 60 UPS since. The server has plenty of unused RAM and CPU power. Running Factorio without a GPU gives low FPS (as expected). But i can live with that until i can upgrade the gaming machine.

[Jesus8000]

i play with 15 fps/ups
i also played this save without mods 20 hours before>>> same fps
https://www.pic-upload.de/view-34138416 ... o.jpg.html
i try to not use op mods... but in last 5 hours i decided to use the atomic robot mods....because i dont wanna wait the hole game on my construktion robots anymore:P

save:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/5ofa57ol1et5n ... s.zip?dl=0

mods:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/9rjguw349qv8 ... kIOha?dl=0

[Rseding91]

i play with 15 fps/ups
i also played this save without mods 20 hours before>>> same fps
https://www.pic-upload.de/view-34138416 ... o.jpg.html
i try to not use op mods... but in last 5 hours i decided to use the atomic robot mods....because i dont wanna wait the hole game on my construktion robots anymore:P

save:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/5ofa57ol1et5n ... s.zip?dl=0

mods:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/9rjguw349qv8 ... kIOha?dl=0

There's nothing in there to optimize. You've simply built far past what any computer can handle.

[Jesus8000]

i play with 15 fps/ups
i also played this save without mods 20 hours before>>> same fps
https://www.pic-upload.de/view-34138416 ... o.jpg.html
i try to not use op mods... but in last 5 hours i decided to use the atomic robot mods....because i dont wanna wait the hole game on my construktion robots anymore:P

save:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/5ofa57ol1et5n ... s.zip?dl=0

mods:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/9rjguw349qv8 ... kIOha?dl=0

There's nothing in there to optimize. You've simply built far past what any computer can handle.

My 6 Year old I72600k is only at 25-35 %...... i hope someone can optimize it for 4 cores or maybe raizen:(^^
and i have already seen some post here in this thread with 16and more GW (the guy before).
i think the game is made for exaggerations:P >> alone on this fact that the map is endless generated^^

[Rseding91]

My 6 Year old I72600k is only at 25-35 %...... i hope someone can optimize it for 4 cores or maybe raizen:(^^
and i have already seen some post here in this thread with 16and more GW (the guy before).
i think the game is made for exaggerations:P >> alone on this fact that the map is endless generated^^

Core count means nothing. It's limited by RAM latency which is limited by the speed of light and the distance between the CPU and RAM sticks on motherboards.

[Jesus8000]

My 6 Year old I72600k is only at 25-35 %...... i hope someone can optimize it for 4 cores or maybe raizen:(^^
and i have already seen some post here in this thread with 16and more GW (the guy before).
i think the game is made for exaggerations:P >> alone on this fact that the map is endless generated^^

Core count means nothing. It's limited by RAM latency which is limited by the speed of light and the distance between the CPU and RAM sticks on motherboards.

thats mean, we need more RAM bandwith instead of calculation power?

[Koub]

Not bandwidth, latency.
Bandwidth is "how much data you can get from memory into CPU in a given time (usually 1s) ?"
Latency is "whenever CPU asks for one piece of data in the memory, how much time does it have to wait for the answer ?"

[Jesus8000]

Not bandwidth, latency.
Bandwidth is "how much data you can get from memory into CPU in a given time (usually 1s) ?"
Latency is "whenever CPU asks for one piece of data in the memory, how much time does it have to wait for the answer ?"

thx for the answer:)
i wanna learn somthing:P
: but why should a bigger base increase the latency?
the latency of my RAM doesnt chance over time? right? only the mass of data who needs to transfer from cpu to ram increases?

[Koub]

You're correct, base size doesn't have any effect on your RAM latency.

However, the bigger your base, the more the CPU needs to get information in your RAM. High latency means your computer can handle less "requests to the memory" per second. So it will become a choking point, and you will start to lose UPS.

It's like at work : you need information from other people to do your job. If the people you ask things email you the answer within 10 seconds, you don't have downtime waiting for information. If they take 1 day to answer, you'll be less productive, because spending most of your time waiting

[Jesus8000]

You're correct, base size doesn't have any effect on your RAM latency.

However, the bigger your base, the more the CPU needs to get information in your RAM. High latency means your computer can handle less "requests to the memory" per second. So it will become a choking point, and you will start to lose UPS.

It's like at work : you need information from other people to do your job. If the people you ask things email you the answer within 10 seconds, you don't have downtime waiting for information. If they take 1 day to answer, you'll be less productive, because spending most of your time waiting

but my cpu is at 30% so he could handle more from ram>>> so the game isnt perfect optimized. right?
or in your words: i have 100 workers but only 30 emails to work on:P and the emails comming all time in the same days after request / latency
it would be faster if 3,33 worker , work on 1 email

and to come to the starting pont of these discussion:
[/quote]

Core count means nothing. It's limited by RAM latency which is limited by the speed of light and the distance between the CPU and RAM sticks on motherboards.[/quote]

i dont think that our computers are even nearly limited by the speed of light