I actually found some additional things right after I said that so now in 0.16 it's around 280% faster. In 0.15 it takes 10 MS of prepare time and in 0.16 it takes 3.5 MS of prepare time.sillyfly wrote:Wube's optimization philosophy - saving 50% is only a slight improvementRseding91 wrote: ... it may help slightly ... takes half the time ...
Keep up the excellent work guys.
Performance optimization - post your saves
Re: Performance optimization - post your saves
If you want to get ahold of me I'm almost always on Discord.
Re: Performance optimization - post your saves
280% faster ! We are now able to reverse time \o/Rseding91 wrote:I actually found some additional things right after I said that so now in 0.16 it's around 280% faster.
Koub - Please consider English is not my native language.
Re: Performance optimization - post your saves
Thanks, that sounds goodRseding91 wrote:I actually found some additional things right after I said that so now in 0.16 it's around 280% faster. In 0.15 it takes 10 MS of prepare time and in 0.16 it takes 3.5 MS of prepare time.
Re: Performance optimization - post your saves
Not this again... it all depends how you calculate %. If it's current time / old time or old time / current time.Koub wrote:280% faster ! We are now able to reverse time \o/Rseding91 wrote:I actually found some additional things right after I said that so now in 0.16 it's around 280% faster.
10 MS / 3.5 MS = you can do 3.5 MS 2.8 times (280% of the work that's done now could be done before it reaches the time spent before) or you calculate it as 3.5 MS / 10 MS = it takes only 35% as much time as it did before.
No matter which is used someone expecting the other form makes some joke about it not being possible to get that number.
If you want to get ahold of me I'm almost always on Discord.
Re: Performance optimization - post your saves
I was simply mousing over the blueprint in the quickbar with the show-time-used debug option enabled.JamelBF wrote: Thanks.Very useful.
If 0.16 it takes 3.5MS.
How you think about 0.17?Can you share your test please
If you want to get ahold of me I'm almost always on Discord.
Re: Performance optimization - post your saves
But isn't it 180% faster then? Or 280% as fast?Rseding91 wrote:10 MS / 3.5 MS = you can do 3.5 MS 2.8 times (280% of the work that's done now could be done before it reaches the time spent before) or you calculate it as 3.5 MS / 10 MS = it takes only 35% as much time as it did before.
Re: Performance optimization - post your saves
And now place the blueprint. You get a nice "Server is not responding" message while the server places the blueprint.Mimos wrote:Factorio 15.37
I encountered significant slowdowns when using large blueprints. Both just mouseovering the blueprint item and also moving the ghost over the map. It causes a lot less slowdown if it is built and in operation.
Single player, empty map:Multiplayer, big, slow factory, me being the server:
- Mouseover zoomed in: fps drop (60 to 50), ups ok.
Mouseover zoomed out: fps drop (60 to 40), ups ok.
- Render preparation/Gui render preparation going up to 13 from 0.5/0.1
Render/Gui render going up to 6/5 from 0.5/0.1Placing it zoomed in: fps drop (60 to 40), ups ok.
- Render preparation/Gui render preparation going up to 14 from 1.5/0.1
Render/Gui render going up to 9/5 from 3.8/0.1Placing it zoomend out: fps drop (60 to 30), ups ok.
- Render preparation/Game render preparation going up to 21 from 0.5/0.3
Render/Game render going up to 3.7/3.5 from 0.8/0.7
- Render preparation/Game render preparation going up to 24 from 1.6/1.4
Render/Game render going up to 6.8/6.7 from 3.7/3.6Maybe you can somehow speed up blueprints to have about the same speed as real buildings.
- for me: fps and ups drop from about 40 to 20.
other players (having faster pcs): unplayable, hardly reacting to inputs.
By the way: Why does other peoples client become unresponsive, not starting to move when you press a key, not stopping when you release a key, when one players system is busy with something? The client should send something like this to the server: "Player pressed w at tick X, player released w at tick Y." The client should not become totally unresponsive just because the FPS/UPS dropped a bit.
Re: Performance optimization - post your saves
Hi,
I really like my game but this is now significantly dropping on FSP.
Do you know what I can do to keep going with this save ?
Thanks a lot.
I really like my game but this is now significantly dropping on FSP.
Do you know what I can do to keep going with this save ?
Thanks a lot.
- Attachments
-
- Game post 0.15 avec Gab.zip
- (40.05 MiB) Downloaded 339 times
Re: Performance optimization - post your saves
Gnark wrote:Hi,
I really like my game but this is now significantly dropping on FSP.
Do you know what I can do to keep going with this save ?
Thanks a lot.
You simply have a ton of belts. There's nothing new in that to optimize - if you want it to run faster you just can't build that much.
If you want to get ahold of me I'm almost always on Discord.
Re: Performance optimization - post your saves
Thanks for looking at it. If I replace somme belt with underground one ... will it help ?Rseding91 wrote:Gnark wrote:Hi,
I really like my game but this is now significantly dropping on FSP.
Do you know what I can do to keep going with this save ?
Thanks a lot.
You simply have a ton of belts. There's nothing new in that to optimize - if you want it to run faster you just can't build that much.
I want to keep a belt factorie and not a robot one.
Re: Performance optimization - post your saves
That will help. There are also tons of belt optimizations in 0.16.Gnark wrote:Thanks for looking at it. If I replace somme belt with underground one ... will it help ?Rseding91 wrote:Gnark wrote:Hi,
I really like my game but this is now significantly dropping on FSP.
Do you know what I can do to keep going with this save ?
Thanks a lot.
You simply have a ton of belts. There's nothing new in that to optimize - if you want it to run faster you just can't build that much.
I want to keep a belt factorie and not a robot one.
There are 10 types of people: those who get this joke and those who don't.
Re: Performance optimization - post your saves
Found something new that absolutely tanked my FPS/UPS today.
I am making a 'Coal Bunker' which has a ton of storage chests - when I hold the blueprint in hand ready to place it my FPS/UPS takes a massive hit. It seems the slow down is caused under "Game Render Preparation".
The map otherwise works at 60/60.
I am making a 'Coal Bunker' which has a ton of storage chests - when I hold the blueprint in hand ready to place it my FPS/UPS takes a massive hit. It seems the slow down is caused under "Game Render Preparation".
The map otherwise works at 60/60.
PIC
BP STRING
Re: Performance optimization - post your saves
Blueprints have to check every entity to see if there is something beneath it that conflicts or needs to be deconstructed (with shift pressed). It can probably be optimized (e.g. pre-compute a single mask where trees need to be deconstructed instead of checking per entity) but as is a render slowdown isn't surprising.Xeteth wrote:Found something new that absolutely tanked my FPS/UPS today.
I am making a 'Coal Bunker' which has a ton of storage chests - when I hold the blueprint in hand ready to place it my FPS/UPS takes a massive hit. It seems the slow down is caused under "Game Render Preparation".
The map otherwise works at 60/60.
Re: Performance optimization - post your saves
That part of the logic is actually minimal. It's the copying of the blueprint in hand, adjusting it to the correct world position, rotating every entity, setting each entity up, and then destroying each one after it's rendered that takes the majority of the time.mrvn wrote:Blueprints have to check every entity to see if there is something beneath it that conflicts or needs to be deconstructed (with shift pressed). It can probably be optimized (e.g. pre-compute a single mask where trees need to be deconstructed instead of checking per entity) but as is a render slowdown isn't surprising.Xeteth wrote:Found something new that absolutely tanked my FPS/UPS today.
I am making a 'Coal Bunker' which has a ton of storage chests - when I hold the blueprint in hand ready to place it my FPS/UPS takes a massive hit. It seems the slow down is caused under "Game Render Preparation".
The map otherwise works at 60/60.
If you want to get ahold of me I'm almost always on Discord.
Re: Performance optimization - post your saves
Rseding91 wrote:That part of the logic is actually minimal. It's the copying of the blueprint in hand, adjusting it to the correct world position, rotating every entity, setting each entity up, and then destroying each one after it's rendered that takes the majority of the time.mrvn wrote:Blueprints have to check every entity to see if there is something beneath it that conflicts or needs to be deconstructed (with shift pressed). It can probably be optimized (e.g. pre-compute a single mask where trees need to be deconstructed instead of checking per entity) but as is a render slowdown isn't surprising.Xeteth wrote:Found something new that absolutely tanked my FPS/UPS today.
I am making a 'Coal Bunker' which has a ton of storage chests - when I hold the blueprint in hand ready to place it my FPS/UPS takes a massive hit. It seems the slow down is caused under "Game Render Preparation".
The map otherwise works at 60/60.
Do you really have to do that every tick? Would it be possible to only destroy and replace the items if you move the blueprint, and only change the orientation if you rotate the blueprint?
There are 10 types of people: those who get this joke and those who don't.
Re: Performance optimization - post your saves
I know large blueprints cause performance problems however I thought I'd post this one in particular because for whatever reason it seems to absolutely nuke FPS/UPS compared to other ones. I obviously have no idea how this is all done and whether it's based off the entity count or not but I can blueprint builds that have 3-4 times the number of entities without such a performance drop. Perhaps it's something to do with the storage chest entity or something?Rseding91 wrote:That part of the logic is actually minimal. It's the copying of the blueprint in hand, adjusting it to the correct world position, rotating every entity, setting each entity up, and then destroying each one after it's rendered that takes the majority of the time.mrvn wrote:Blueprints have to check every entity to see if there is something beneath it that conflicts or needs to be deconstructed (with shift pressed). It can probably be optimized (e.g. pre-compute a single mask where trees need to be deconstructed instead of checking per entity) but as is a render slowdown isn't surprising.Xeteth wrote:Found something new that absolutely tanked my FPS/UPS today.
I am making a 'Coal Bunker' which has a ton of storage chests - when I hold the blueprint in hand ready to place it my FPS/UPS takes a massive hit. It seems the slow down is caused under "Game Render Preparation".
The map otherwise works at 60/60.
Re: Performance optimization - post your saves
Patch notes 0.19: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.
- The speed of light was causing a lot of performance issues but we found a workaround to increase it 180%.
Re: Performance optimization - post your saves
Only 180%? Man, the devs must be starting to get lazy.bobucles wrote:Patch notes 0.19: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.
- The speed of light was causing a lot of performance issues but we found a workaround to increase it 180%.
There are 10 types of people: those who get this joke and those who don't.
Re: Performance optimization - post your saves
Light is slowed down by gravity and you can make your CPU only have so much lighter with helium cooling.Jap2.0 wrote:Only 180%? Man, the devs must be starting to get lazy.bobucles wrote:Patch notes 0.19: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.
- The speed of light was causing a lot of performance issues but we found a workaround to increase it 180%.
-
The Eriksonn
- Fast Inserter
- Posts: 230
- Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2016 6:16 pm
- Contact:
Re: Performance optimization - post your saves
Or you can use quantum entanglement on the cpu and the ram to have no delay in the communication, and then have infinite speedup and not worry about optimations ever again...mrvn wrote:Light is slowed down by gravity and you can make your CPU only have so much lighter with helium cooling.Jap2.0 wrote:Only 180%? Man, the devs must be starting to get lazy.bobucles wrote:Patch notes 0.19: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.
- The speed of light was causing a lot of performance issues but we found a workaround to increase it 180%.
