|
|
Post by akavari4 on Feb 6, 2015 15:31:54 GMT
Computer specs:
Intel i5 3570 clocked to 4.2GHz
8GB RAM
2GB AMD HD 7870 GHz Edition
I'm aware this game is still very early alpha, and that there has been a few other threads on framerate, but I have a build that can easily play Kerbal Space Program with ships that contain huge amounts of parts, yet gets 15 frames on 150 blocks on Besiege. All the answers on the other threads have been 'we only expected machines of about 50 parts', 'it only uses the CPU', 'people are going crazy with their machines! It wasn't meant to handle it'. This game seems great so far so I'm just logging this as a bug report now because on the other bug reports it almost feels like the users are being blamed for doing what is most enjoyable with this game, building huge machines and testing the limits. It even says on the official website "Limitless Build Mode can be activated in any campaign level". The almost 0% GPU use is definitely the most glaring bug that needs to be addressed immediately as the game becomes unplayable after a certain point, which you're obviously meant to push or there'd be no sandbox or option to turn off the bounding box.
Congrats on a truly amazing game, a very well polished one in alpha as well, but please address the optimization bugs before moving further as it ruins the core gameplay for anyone wanting to be creative with the builds, and so far all I've seen from the community is crazy, fun builds that they want but can barely run. Or at least update the minimum specs for now, 1GB ram and a Core 2 Duo? I wish.
|
|
|
|
Post by Praesumo on Feb 6, 2015 16:53:24 GMT
Lol. I have a 5 year old laptop with an integrated Intel HD Graphics 3000 chipset and 64mb of dedicated vram... and I don't see stutter till 200 parts. You must have some other problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arlekin on Feb 6, 2015 18:07:24 GMT
Well i also encountered performance problems, i wonder how it is it works just fine for you Praesumo ? I assume we are talking all shadows etc on.
|
|
|
|
Post by akavari4 on Feb 6, 2015 20:13:05 GMT
Lol. I have a 5 year old laptop with an integrated Intel HD Graphics 3000 chipset and 64mb of dedicated vram... and I don't see stutter till 200 parts. You must have some other problem. I was exaggerating a bit, I'd say 250+ is where it gets low, but still a drop at 100% speed at 200. Either way, the fact that it is completely random with which CPUs and GPUs it can utilize is my point, why will it stutter on my powerful rig and not on yours? Needs optimizing across the board, I should be getting 50/60fps on big builds. No other problems, checked everything, just ran a 9 stage rocket on KSP at ~65 fps, much more demanding than any of my builds on Besiege. |
|
|
|
Post by Von on Feb 6, 2015 20:47:17 GMT
Lol. I have a 5 year old laptop with an integrated Intel HD Graphics 3000 chipset and 64mb of dedicated vram... and I don't see stutter till 200 parts. You must have some other problem. I was exaggerating a bit, I'd say 250+ is where it gets low, but still a drop at 100% speed at 200. Either way, the fact that it is completely random with which CPUs and GPUs it can utilize is my point, why will it stutter on my powerful rig and not on yours? Needs optimizing across the board, I should be getting 50/60fps on big builds. No other problems, checked everything, just ran a 9 stage rocket on KSP at ~65 fps, much more demanding than any of my builds on Besiege. Please understand that Besiege was designed to work with relatively small machines, around the 50 block mark. We are looking into optimizing performance but Besiege is very different from KSP and may not ever match it in terms of large machines. That being said we're in an extremely early alpha stage, who knows what the future holds.  |
|
zerp
Peasant
Posts: 1 
|
Post by zerp on Feb 6, 2015 20:47:35 GMT
Games been wonderful up until level 5 with a 180 block machine i get a massive fps drop. Will update once I progress further into the Stage. Have uploaded a DxDiag of my system. 'TLDR' I have 32gig RAM and Dual GTX 780's huge fps drop once play button is hit.DxDiag.txt (39.28 KB) Mac. |
|
|
|
Post by akavari4 on Feb 6, 2015 20:50:59 GMT
I was exaggerating a bit, I'd say 250+ is where it gets low, but still a drop at 100% speed at 200. Either way, the fact that it is completely random with which CPUs and GPUs it can utilize is my point, why will it stutter on my powerful rig and not on yours? Needs optimizing across the board, I should be getting 50/60fps on big builds. No other problems, checked everything, just ran a 9 stage rocket on KSP at ~65 fps, much more demanding than any of my builds on Besiege. Please understand that Besiege was designed to work with relatively small machines, around the 50 block mark. We are looking into optimizing performance but Besiege is very different from KSP and may not ever match it in terms of large machines. That being said we're in an extremely early alpha stage, who knows what the future holds. I do understand that, and thanks for the response, I'm just saying the most noticeable bug is how it doesn't work well over 50 blocks yet that's what all the players are looking for. |
|
|
|
Post by jcdenton on Feb 7, 2015 0:34:27 GMT
I was exaggerating a bit, I'd say 250+ is where it gets low, but still a drop at 100% speed at 200. Either way, the fact that it is completely random with which CPUs and GPUs it can utilize is my point, why will it stutter on my powerful rig and not on yours? Needs optimizing across the board, I should be getting 50/60fps on big builds. No other problems, checked everything, just ran a 9 stage rocket on KSP at ~65 fps, much more demanding than any of my builds on Besiege. Please understand that Besiege was designed to work with relatively small machines, around the 50 block mark. We are looking into optimizing performance but Besiege is very different from KSP and may not ever match it in terms of large machines. That being said we're in an extremely early alpha stage, who knows what the future holds. Have the devs considered using GPU procesing for physics? I am a Computer Science student, and made some GPU computing stuff myself. |
|
|
|
Post by dutchy on Feb 7, 2015 9:05:09 GMT
havent had any problems until the 350-400 block mark with everything on except smooth camera. and i'm not exactly running a top end system either.
|
|
|
|
Post by zodium on Feb 7, 2015 22:53:22 GMT
I, uh, just use the time scale feature. Anything down to 20-25% feels pretty good, and I've yet to build a large enough machine that it still lagged at that point. If they optimize it more, great, but let's focus on the fundamentals while the version number says 0.0x :v
|
|
|
|
Post by dutchy on Feb 7, 2015 23:09:31 GMT
I, uh, just use the time scale feature. Anything down to 20-25% feels pretty good, and I've yet to build a large enough machine that it still lagged at that point. If they optimize it more, great, but let's focus on the fundamentals while the version number says 0.0x :v Agreed |
|
|
|
Post by oddity on Feb 9, 2015 23:38:53 GMT
My understanding is that PhysX is supported by nvidia drivers on Linux since October last year (2014) and that Unity and Unreal3 and Unreal4 all support this on the platform. Perhaps it's conceivable to have that do some of the computation in the future.
|
|
|
|
Post by junit151 on Feb 10, 2015 3:30:38 GMT
I run this game with a GTX 980 and an i7 4790K 4.8GHz. I would LOVE to see the engine leveraging all of the power I am giving it. But it just doesn't.
|
|
|
|
Post by alekbd on Feb 11, 2015 16:29:15 GMT
I have a laptop with 8gb ram, i7 and nvidia 850m and i can't create (fps drastically drop) a small machine with two plans or a medium catapult (50 blocks). I hope the future update resolves this problem |
|
|
|
Post by oddity on Feb 11, 2015 22:38:27 GMT
I dont think it's a "bug".. it's a "feature" of how the engine is capable of running and actually not developers fault. Unity 5 is supposed to address some multithreading issues I believe.. not that I know much about it
|
|
