Low Throughput

[Unca Avro]

I hav a satellite connection in the mountains and it is highly unreliable. My average is 5fps...would someone care to suggest what the optimal resolution settings would be for such a predicament? Thankyou.

[Love Zhaoying]

Your "resolution setting" is probably not as relevant as certain other settings such as "draw distance", "maximum # avatars to draw", etc.

Hopefully some others will chime in with better answers.

"If you have low 'throughput', try eating more fiber!" - Advice from a Nutritionist

 

[Quistess Alpha]

most viewers come with a "quality and speed" slider that automatically adjusts many other settings that might be a bit fiddly to adjust individually. You probably want it on the faster&low side (left).

draw distance between 32 and 96 is perfectly usable for most things. I keep mine at 64 even with higher graphics settingss.

"max number of non-imposters" low can help, or just set "maximum complexity" to its lowest value, which will cause everyone to be clouds until you decide manually to render them (right click -> render fully).

[Arielle Popstar]

41 minutes ago, Unca Avro said:

I hav a satellite connection in the mountains and it is highly unreliable. My average is 5fps...would someone care to suggest what the optimal resolution settings would be for such a predicament? Thankyou.

Really depends on where you spend most of your inworld time. It can vary if you mostly spend it in a skybox by yourself or a partner, if you go clubbing with a crowd of others, shop at busy stores, hang around on a private sim or Mainland, etc.

[IndigoBlue Tomorrow]

A 5 fps is very low and you are probably experiencing slow movement and even crashing at that rate. If you can get your fps rate to 8 or higher, all the better. You can lower your graphics levels such as complexity, draw distance, etc. in preferences. There are some heavily complex avatars out there that that can really suck up your bandwidth. You can select at what complexity limit you desire for avatars as well. That does help immensely. Also, check your own complexity. If you are too bogged down with huds and accessories/attachments, lighten that burden and you should see the fps rate move up rapidly. Have you tried doing a internet speed test of your computer? Download and upload speeds can also have an influence on your inworld experience. Good luck to you.

[Nalates Urriah]

Satellite connections are horrible for gaming. Until you can change the speed of light, there isn't much to be done.

An alternative is to consider using your cell phone as an access point. Whether it is better depends on the phone service you have. 5G would likely be usable.

[Wulfie Reanimator]

It should go without saying that an internet connection has nothing to do with FPS.

Not that I would expect a gaming computer getting paired with a satellite connection in the mountains. 😋

[Extrude Ragu]

20 hours ago, Unca Avro said:

I hav a satellite connection in the mountains and it is highly unreliable. My average is 5fps...would someone care to suggest what the optimal resolution settings would be for such a predicament? Thankyou.

Networking:

Network doesn't typically affect FPS to such a degree, but dropped packets can cause some lag which seems likely with a satellite connection.

I'd set your max bandwith very low in network settings. Like 250 or so.

Graphics:

On graphics settings side. Firstly just try moving the graphics slider towards Low.

Investing in a computer with a better GPU will get better performance at higher presets.

Advanced:

You can make the viewer render at half resolution

1. Preferences -> Advanced -> Show Advanced Menu
2. Up the top, Advanced -> Show Debug Settings
3. Search 'RenderResolutionDivisor' and increase it from 1 to 2.

This will half the rendered resolution. If your screen zooms into a corner, you need to turn off anti-aliasing in graphics settings.

 

[Nalates Urriah]

AN alternative connection is to look at Starlink, Elon's networking system. (PC Mag review) This is not cheap. US$600 for the basic equipment (dish) and something like $120/month for service.

Speed... mixed.

Average ping/latency for the reviewer was 40ms... which is similar to my fiber connection.

I would be asking around or looking for houses with a Starlink receiver and finding out how Starlink is working for them. I would also contact the SL support people and ask if they have any information about users coming on via Starlink.

While $600 is a good sized investment Starlink offers a 30 day trial, money back deal. Plus I found Starlink 'dishes on eBay for $200 and up.

This may be a viable possibility for you.

 

 

[HeathcliffMontague]

On 4/15/2024 at 9:55 PM, Nalates Urriah said:

Satellite connections are horrible for gaming. Until you can change the speed of light, there isn't much to be done.

An alternative is to consider using your cell phone as an access point. Whether it is better depends on the phone service you have. 5G would likely be usable.

Yeah, a even a decent 4G is better than satellite. I don't live in the mountains - I only visit. My neighbour up there has satellite, and it can actually be used for Netflix. SL? Maybe just to log on and have some IMs. If I need to to connected to the web for some reason I need to find me some 4G. 

[Nalates Urriah]

30 minutes ago, HeathcliffMontague said:

Yeah, a even a decent 4G is better than satellite. I don't live in the mountains - I only visit. My neighbour up there has satellite, and it can actually be used for Netflix. SL? Maybe just to log on and have some IMs. If I need to to connected to the web for some reason I need to find me some 4G. 

Netflix and SL have different requirements. Netflix uses a buffered stream. If you have a slow or high packet loss connection Netflix increases the buffer size. This gives it time to reload dropped packets and stay ahead of the play-head.

SL is interactive. It cannot anticipate what you will do next. So latency is a BIG problem. While we can cache things we can't buffer because SL has to wait on your typing and mouse inputs.

[HeathcliffMontague]

53 minutes ago, Nalates Urriah said:

Netflix and SL have different requirements. Netflix uses a buffered stream. If you have a slow or high packet loss connection Netflix increases the buffer size. This gives it time to reload dropped packets and stay ahead of the play-head.

SL is interactive. It cannot anticipate what you will do next. So latency is a BIG problem. While we can cache things we can't buffer because SL has to wait on your typing and mouse inputs.

Yeah, he still uses my gifted i3 from 2015 with 16 GB RAM and a GTX 790. And  an SSD  Actually a bit impressed how smooth streaming goes.