Jump to content
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 109 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

Lemme first start off by listing my hardware: I7 3770k OC to 4.5 GHz, GTX 1080 Strix OC to 2100hz with 8gb of video memory, 8gb of 1600hz ram, SL on my SSD, Windows 10, the other stuff not really relevant. Looking at my hardware granted some parts a little outdated you would expect decent frames, but not really the case in most sims, usually average between 20-30 frames with advanced lighting, ambient, shadows (Sun and moon only) turned down to 1 shadow quality. This game while widely known as very poorly optimized, only uses about 30% of my GTX 1080 sometimes even less. A lot of the graphic presets are stuck in the past where GPU's only had a max of 2gb-2.5gb of memory while good for its time, that time has passed becoming obsolete with the newer cards out on the market today, you can pick up a 6gb 1060 for fairly cheap prices. I love the slider bar but for the game's memory buffer but to only use 30% of a beastly card is absurd, to say the least, leaving a lot of possible headroom wasted. I know the code is old and would require a bit of rework but quite honestly with the advancements in technology ever growing at rapid paces I don't see this game lasting another 5 years if that, there are already more sims than players and most sims only house about 2-4 "Actual" people the rest usually bots just to drum up traffic a bit, this game in my opinion has a lot of potential. I know quite a few people that have left just do too the unbearable lag in many situations, be that through poor connection to the game or poor utilization of the hardware available. This game needs an update to support the newer tech that's come to the market. I doubt this will ever happen or see the light of day, it seems devs don't really care about updating the game with things that actually matter toward performance sadly, some of the code may require a major overhaul, but even if it took 6 months or a year or so to do, the results, in the end, would be well worth it. Perhaps as a bridge gap and allow the game to use more of the available memory on the newer cards.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Currently, the account that I'm on I've been on SL for 8 years and 1 month not that I see how that's relevant to the topic. My oldest account would be when the game first launched.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My ADOLaS kicked in before I

Did you know bitcoin mining costs more in energy usage than you make?  Maybe when people realize this all those 1080 cards will be dumped on ebay for cheap.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Belle Bouvier said:

Currently, the account that I'm on I've been on SL for 8 years and 1 month not that I see how that's relevant to the topic. My oldest account would be when the game first launched.

 

No offense, but I had guessed that you were new. Anyone in SL for a long time should probably be used to it by now. Was there something that “triggered” you in particular to write your post? I couldn’t see the forest, all the trees were in the way.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Belle Bouvier: Which game are you referring to in your OP? Linden Realms? Greedy? Or what? If you're referring to SL, that is not a game per se.

Gosh I have a GeForce 960 with 2 GB of RAM, and a cheap AMD 6100+ and 16GB RAM 1330GHz, and yet I get up to 50-60 fps in most places. So the bottleneck at your computer must be somewhere else.

Edited by ThorinII
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ThorinII said:

@Belle Bouvier: Which game are you referring to in your OP? Linden Realms? Greedy? Or what? If you're referring to SL, that is not a game per se.

Gosh I have a GeForce 960 with 2 GB of RAM, and a cheap AMD 6100+ and 16GB RAM 1330GHz, and yet I get up to 50-60 fps in most places. So the bottleneck at your computer must be somewhere else.

But do you play in 4k, ultra graphics and everything turned to max minus the shadow quality?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Game ? nvm

I cannot think of ONE online game (MMORPG), thats what SL is technically, that runs without lag and disconnects.

The difference on all this things is: Content is pre-rendered and doesn´t change much. In SL the avatars change, the world changes the buildings change ....

Some things could be changed and updated to make it less worse but think about people that cannot afford high-end machines or running SL on laptops ...

SL always had the benefit or running on "small" machines too, ugly slow less fun, but running.

Monti

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

 

 

 

1 minute ago, Monti Messmer said:

Game ? nvm

I cannot think of ONE online game (MMORPG), thats what SL is technically, that runs without lag and disconnects.

The difference on all this things is: Content is pre-rendered and doesn´t change much. In SL the avatars change, the world changes the buildings change ....

Some things could be changed and updated to make it less worse but think about people that cannot afford high-end machines or running SL on laptops ...

SL always had the benefit or running on "small" machines too, ugly slow less fun, but running.

Monti

You're misunderstanding my intent, I wasn't saying to adjust the game and push out the smaller PC's much like MMO's that host higher settings for those with better computers SL could very well do the same thing while allowing those with lower end PC's to accomplish the same tasks they have been.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Belle Bouvier said:

But do you play in 4k, ultra graphics and everything turned to max minus the shadow quality?

Gee, maybe you should, I dunno, turn it down. Or check your internet. Or the ping time to Linden servers. Just sayin’.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No matter what way you look at it, SL is a game while unique in it's own right and not the traditional type of game it still is what it is. Listed as both a game and chat program in most search engines. There are various things to do but it and even games too play but at the end of the day it's a game that is played wrapped in a virtual world created by the players. It's a sandbox open world game that is updated to some extents here and there though not at all to improve the performance. You can't improve the game with mesh and things of the like and continue to push the envelope without sorting out performance issues otherwise it's going to be like playing Skyrim with so many mods the game becomes unstable.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Belle Bouvier said:

But do you play in 4k, ultra graphics and everything turned to max minus the shadow quality?

I think you 're whining on a very high level. Such settings are absolutely exaggerated.

First: I don't "play" SL: I "enter" it, like a virtual hobby room. Second: I don't have a 4k monitor (yet), my HD monitor with a resolution of 1920 x 1080 is absolutely enough for SL. Third, my card runs mostly on Mid-high, 128m draw distance (which is more than enough), including shadows (set on optimized) and all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Believe me, going to 1080p or even 2160x1440p on a native 4k monitor gives you the quality of 720p. The frame gains aren't worth the quality loss in picture. Play in 4k sometime or another if you can push it that far, dunno what your rig is like thus why I said that.

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

 

 

4 minutes ago, ThorinII said:

I think you 're whining on a very high level. Such settings are absolutely exaggerated.

First: I don't "play" SL: I "enter" it, like a virtual hobby room. Second: I don't have a 4k monitor (yet), my HD monitor with a resolution of 1920 x 1080 is absolutely enough for SL. Third, my card runs mostly on Mid-high, 128m draw distance (which is more than enough), including shadows (set on optimized) and all.

You just answered my own question Thorin, playing on 1080p I can achieve frames up over 120 with everything turned too max including draw distance. The problem is having to downgrade a higher grade system to play a game at decent frames. Since when has asking for better performance been considered whining? 

Edited by Belle Bouvier
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've forgotten what I came in he...oh! - has anyone seen my glasses?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Belle Bouvier said:

 

You just answered my own question Thorin, playing on 1080p I can achieve frames up over 120 with everything turned too max including draw distance. The problem is having to downgrade a higher grade system to play a game at decent frames. Since when has asking for better performance been considered whining? 

Sometime in the first week after the invention of language.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps you could summarize for readers what you've learned about the Lab's ongoing work on the rendering pipeline and revamped use of graphics card-resident memory. You might start with project updates in the past year or so of Inara's blog, or Nalates'.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Belle Bouvier said:

I don't see this game lasting another 5 years

If I could just have a single $1 for every time I've heard something along this line in all my years here, I'd have have a nice pile of bills.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic has strayed so far from a simple request of utilizing better hardware that's its turned into a war with those with lower end systems that seem to be scared of the game becoming unplayable for them should they improve it. The only arguments I see are from those with lower end systems which is why I say that. I'm asking for performance increases, sliders, further optimization, performance in general yet everyone seems so intent on saying "it's fine" when the only thing I ever hear about the game is how poorly it runs. I'm suggesting upgrades to keep it current. How long do you think 1920x1080 systems are going to be around? how long do you expect them to be relevant with the advancements of technology in general? This is a good example of why people avoid posting on the forums, someone asks for something actually reasonable and everyone jumps in to attack them, a perfect example of the community that is SL.

6 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

Perhaps you could summarize for readers what you've learned about the Lab's ongoing work on the rendering pipeline and revamped use of graphics card-resident memory. You might start with project updates in the past year or so of Inara's blog, or Nalates'.

Why don't you take a look at graphic card utilization statistics? Performance in general, settings that tank frames for no reason whatsoever that should have been optimized ages ago. Instead of spouting off about that, none of that matters in the face of actual performance in the game. I'm calling for real results in the game Qie not theoretical or things they are "Trying" performance upgrades too the game that affect the player base a whole while in the actual game itself.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Belle Bouvier said:

in most sims, usually average between 20-30 frames with advanced lighting, ambient, shadows (Sun and moon only) turned down to 1 shadow quality.

Really? I have a long-in-the-tooth (6 years old) custom gaming rig running on a 6GB 1060GTX, no SSD, and I access SL via a crappy 8MB transatlantic ADSL connection that usually pings at around 190m/s. I run constantly on Ultra or (just a shade under it at busy events) with all settings maxed including sun moon and projectors, and all reflections at highest quality (the only things I have switched off are Avatar Cloth, and my AA is just 8 rather than 16), and my average framerates are much higher than that. More than double, in fact. Hell, I haven't even overclocked this thing. What are you doing to get such low results on a rig like the one you spec'd in your first post?!

1 hour ago, Belle Bouvier said:

I don't see this game lasting another 5 years

People were saying that ten years ago, as you will no doubt recall since you've been active and paying attention since "the game first launched".

39 minutes ago, Belle Bouvier said:

I was looking at the usage on my GPU and seeing the 30% usage was a bit depressing to say the least. 

Second Life always had a reputation in the past as being something of a GPU-killer. In the near-eleven years that I've been active inworld I've rarely had a GPU (NVIDIAs all, with the exception of one poorly-chosen Radeon which was easily the worst card I've ever used) run at full-tilt for more than three to four years before it started giving up the ghost. (The Radeon lasted less than two.) Pull that number down to a year and a half when I was spending all my spare time inworld and stressing my GPU to hell and back.

And here you are, complaining that SL doesn't work your GPU hard enough? O.o

Edited by Skell Dagger
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 109 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...