Test server: aura from buildings cause low fps

Development
1

On test server, the buildings have an aura. This aura causes my fps drop from 76 to 24 (or less, depending on how many buildings).

My hardware: laptop with integrated intel graphics.

My guess: this aura uses some OpenGl that is not supported by my old hardware.

2

@GPF There is a command to turn off the auras but I don’t remember it, but in the options menu, you can see a Range and Markers sub-menu, there you can turn them off too.

3

Those are range marker for builders, they indicate the range of power, creep, defensive buildables, etc
 Try playing around with their setting to see if that can improve the performance, You can find the settings by hitting escape, then go to “Options”, then to “System”, and then to “Range Markers.” If you prefer, the range markers can also be completely disabled from that menu.

4

Thank you and Sparky for fast reply. I turned them off in ‘Range and Markers sub-menu’ 
 my fps are normal again :smiley:

5

you’re welcome GPF :slight_smile: . Instead of turning them off completely, you should also try playing with some different settings for the range markers to see if that helps.

6

I also find auras annoying sometimes, although other times they can be useful. How about we bind them to a key or they only show when you go into build mode?

1 Like
7

There was (at least) 2 problems here:

  • The models for the range markers were too high poly.
  • The geometry for the models is still there even if the range markers are turned off.

(just now) I’ve uploaded new lower-poly models for these on the test server, which should improve performance. A minor change to the source will probably be needed to completely remove the models if not enabled.

@GPF try re-enabling the range markers and see if your FPS is any better now.

1 Like
8

By a real computer, not a WW2 machine

9

the drawing of frontlines and intersections make up a great deal of graphical requirements. also, on some graphics setups, they’re (incorrectly) not drawn at all. surfaces don’t impact performance much. try enabling only those, ie.:

  • Draw Surface: Yes
  • Draw Frontline: No
  • Draw Intersection: No

WRONG.

WRONG.

that’s a [color=red]triple fuckup[/color]. because:

  • the original models were specifically designed to be „just sufficiently” smooth, and were tested to have neligible impact on performance, so even a greater polygon count would have been acceptable.
  • u hardly made any changes to the polygon count.
  • most importantly, u used non-ico spheres (which is, ofc, worse).

next time, do not attempt to fuck with things u don’t understand.

again, WRONG.

10

I just tested the altered range markers on test test7341 server, and the previous range markers on my local server.

For both tests I spammed rets in the same location on the map utcud and enabled all range markers to be displayed. (Note that with my current settings without any range markers my frame rate is generally at a steady 90 FPS). I got the same results for both sets of range markers which was as follows:

When “Draw Surface”, “Draw Frontline”, and “Draw Intersection” were all set to yes, in some potions and view orientations my frame rate would drop to around 40 FPS. When I set both “Draw Frontline” and “Draw Intersection” to no and leave “Draw Surface” set to yes, then my frame rate raises back to a steady 90 FPS.

So we should consider changing the default settings for the range markers to:

  • Draw Surface: Yes
  • Draw Frontline: No
  • Draw Intersection: No

I disagree, playing around with things you don’t understand is a good way to obtain a better understanding of those things. That approach has worked very well for me.

1 Like
11

Dang @GPF, I got the option names all wrong, it was late and I was sleepy, sorry about that, sparky was more precise with the explaining. Glad you figured it out anyway.

12

DevHC pointed out the options, I just tested and confirmed what he said.

13

I think you are confused on what I said @dGr8LookinSparky . I was talking about the explanation on the correct path to turn off range markers to GPF

14

i was specific to @cron fucking with things. because he has the admin/developer-power and tendency to do shit, coupled with an attitude of often convincing himself that he’s right about a diverse array of things, despite often being WRONG and DICKBUTTery.

i am not against intelligent ppl fucking with things they don’t yet understand.