Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Nalates Urriah

How Fast is Your Viewer?

Recommended Posts

I'm curious what type of performance people are getting from their computers in Second Life. If your curious too, post your information here. It will be helpful for comparisons if we know which viewer and version and a bit about the computer.

In the viewer in Help->About is the viewer and system information.

Second Life 3.2.5 (245937) Nov 30 2011 13:43:09 (Second Life Development)
Release Notes

CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU 6600 @ 2.40GHz (2517.67 MHz)
Memory: 3070 MB
OS Version: Microsoft Windows Vista 32-bit Service Pack 2 (Build 6002)
Graphics Card Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
Graphics Card: GeForce GTX 560 Ti/PCI/SSE2

Windows Graphics Driver Version: 8.17.0012.8562
OpenGL Version: 4.2.0

Add which graphics setting you usually use, e.i., High or Ultra. And of course the FPS you are getting. Press Ctrl-Shift-1 to open/close  the Viewer Stats. The viewer FPS is at the top right. One has to guessimate what their average FPS rate is or give a range. With this developement viewer on Ultra I get 5 to may be 15 FPS. The longer the viewer runs the slower it goes.

If you want to know more about your system and what it is doing, check out the free programs CPU-Z and GPU-Z.

Edit: Several people have pointed out this is NOT a scientific or highly meaningful comparison. That is true. But, my hope is the information would be interesting and hopefully reveal some patterns. Most of all I wanted it to be easy for people to collect information and add it, so we would get lots of posts. I am not into asking people to change their settings, visit a location, look at whatever, report bandwith use and all the factors that affect render performance... that just seems too tedious. SL is mostly recreation. I think asking you to just copy your Help->About and tell us your FPS, is asking a lot.

I appreciate all the posts people have made. Thanks! :)

Ask your friends to post their information too.

Edit 2: Inara Prey recently wrote an article on Comparative Viewer Frame Rate performance. This is a handy reference and a more scientific comparison 'viewer-wise'. Using the same hardware Inara tested each viewer and provided the results. There are some interesting results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want your fps back I would suggest you go back to the 3.1 viewer as the viewer 3.2 have some bad rendering problems which are fps killers, I don't believe it matters what your hardware specs are.. Those viewers just do not work in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Phoenix Viewer 1.5.2 (1102) May 14 2011 18:19:22 (Phoenix Viewer Release)

CPU: Intel® Core2 Duo CPU     E8200  @ 2.66GHz (2666.71 MHz)
Memory: 3583 MB
OS Version: Microsoft Windows XP Service Pack 3 (Build 2600)
Graphics Card Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
Graphics Card: GeForce 8600 GT/PCI/SSE2
Windows Graphics Driver Version: 6.14.0011.8634
OpenGL Version: 3.0.0

34-36 FPS

-------

Second Life 3.2.1 (244864) Nov 10 2011 10:33:28 (Second Life Release)

Same Computer

14-15FPS

Edit: Both in same sim, with 10MB adsl connection

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't you require a bit more information for the results to be meaningful, like something about my graphics settings and connection details, and what sort of place I'm in when I check the fps?  For what it's worth,  yesterday I was using

Nirans Viewer 3.2.5 (8) Nov 30 2011 09:02:14 (Nirans Viewer)

CPU: AMD Athlon II X3 435 Processor (2893.66 MHz)
Memory: 3072 MB
OS Version: Microsoft Windows 7 64-bit (Build 7600)
Graphics Card Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
Graphics Card: GeForce GTX 460/PCI/SSE2

Windows Graphics Driver Version: 8.17.0012.8562
OpenGL Version: 4.2.0

On a quiet sim with a lot to render, but only two people about,  I was getting ~28 fps with my settings on Niran's defaults for Ultra (lights, shadows, ambient occlusion and the whole shooting match for high quality pictures).   Then, as an experiment, I tp-d to the busiest place I could think of, Old Lar's House, where there were 36 people in draw distance and it would be pointless to use those settings under normal circumstances, and I was getting ~10 fps.  

I'm in the UK and I've got a 30Mb cable connection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Second Life 3.2.1 (244864) Nov 10 2011 10:33:28 (Second Life Release)

 

CPU: Intel® Core2 Quad CPU    Q6600  @ 2.40GHz (2405.49 MHz) Memory: 8192 MB

OS Version: Microsoft Windows 7 64-bit Service Pack 1 (Build 7601)

Graphics Card Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation Graphics Card: GeForce GTX 280/PCI/SSE2

Windows Graphics Driver Version: 8.17.0012.7533

OpenGL Version: 3.3.0

 

my framerate on my platform 500 meter is ~80

in my Linden house ~65

Graphics on Mid

and with graphics on high in my Linden house ~55-60

 

and with

Second Life 3.2.4 (245106) Nov 14 2011 08:52:00 (Second Life Development)

the framerates are a little higher

in my Linden house 59-67 on high graphic setting

and 80-85 om my 500 meter platform on a high graphic setting

ps the platfom is on a full sim, not on linden land.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CPU:  Intel E5300 2.6GHz Dual-Core

RAM:  4GB DDR2 667

HDD:  320GB WD 7200RPM 

GRAPHICS:  Zotac Nvidia GTS-250 Eco 1GB

OS:  Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit (streamlined, no unnecessary services, nothing running in background when in SL)

CONNECTION:  High-Speed Cable (not sure about speed, but no waiting usually, so no complaints)

VIEWER:  Niran's Viewer 5b (latest iteration) running full-time in ULTRA.  Shadows, SSAO, 2xAA, DoF.

FPS:  18-25 on a good day in a sparsely-populated sim. 12-18 in a populated SafeHub.

Cheers! 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To do a technically accurate comparison, yes we would like to provide much more information. But, that is way too tedious.

May be adding one's graphics settings would not be asking too much. But, this is more casual curiousity than a scientific effort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have used most of the viewers available and have about 8 installed now. They do preform differently. But, I'm more interested in how hardware is performing. I expect to see some drastic differences based on CPU and video cards. Video card drivers may make a difference to.

Spread the word and get more people to add their performance information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On my gaming machine:

Second Life 3.2.4 (245931) Nov 30 2011 21:49:35 (Second Life Beta Viewer)
Release Notes

CPU: Intel® Core2 CPU         E8400  @ 3.00GHz (2983.02 MHz)
OS Version: Linux 3.0.0-13-generic-pae #22-Ubuntu SMP Wed Nov 2 15:17:35 UTC 2011 i686
Graphics Card Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
Graphics Card: GeForce GTX 460/PCI/SSE2

OpenGL Version: 4.1.0 NVIDIA 280.13

Custom settings, somewhere between high and ultra, render radius 96m, shadows, no DoF. ~40FPS on a sim with 15ppl, 60 on an empty sim. It's frame-rate limited to 60fps by vid driver, so nothing more than that will show. Runs all day without crashing, uUnless I trigger a bug that is (too lazy to report bugs)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hardware at the moment seems irrelevant. All 2/3 viewers above 2.7.4 perform terribly bad no matter what is what i understand inworld. Some seem to be lucky.

With 2.7.2, and all V1 based viewers i have 35 fps on average, 70 fps in an empty sim. Since 2.7.4,  Firestorm (v2/3 source based) and all other 2/3 based viewers it went to 10-15 fps, 25 fps in a total empty sim, draw distance 168.

I have all shadows off btw. And i always have HTTP turned off since HTTP on is seriously counter productive for me since its invention.

Duo core T9400, Vista Home SP2, Nvidia 9800MGT 512, ddr3, 4 ddr3 gig main mem, video 256 bits bus width, OpenG 3.0.

It doesn't matter much how i set all settings in SL preferences, low, ultra, advanced tweaking, upgrade my graphics driver and set 3D performances in the Nvidia 3D settings, but that's what i understand inworld as well. Pretty much nothing helps to improve.

At this moment V2/3 viewers perform much worse than V1 iterations. Only top machines seem to be able to have a reasonable performance is what i see and hear confirmed inworld. But is that so? i7 core, nvidia 500-like-top-version... they perform the same like my machine, really nothing helps other than lucky combinations one has the magic specifications for SL.

I have reported this to LL making certain first they have nothing to "shoot" at to me... it remains silent from HQ till now, except a few automized/mechanical like replies which made no sense at all, lol.

Interesting, because the actual graphical output hasn't changed since 2.7.2 if shadows are turned off and without the new lighthing shaders and DOF. Texture rendering seems ok if i turn off HTTP, however just nothing helps to cranck up basic fps to a playable level.

Avatar physics and mesh, it pretty much has ruined SL for many... since a major part in SL is still on an older viewer because 2/3 based viewers kills their performance.

I skipped V3.1 btw. I read that it has a better performance. Perhaps i will test it, but i fear the worst already,

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"All 2/3 viewers above 2.7.4 perform terribly bad no matter what is what i understand inworld. Some seem to be lucky."
"At this moment V2/3 viewers perform much worse than V1 iterations. Only top machines seem to be able to have a reasonable performance is what i see and hear confirmed inworld."
"...since a major part in SL is still on an older viewer because 2/3 based viewers kills their performance."

????

Did you even read the above posts??? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not in a position to comment directly, since I've been unable to use the latest viewers with an up-to-date driver until very recently because my graphics card (Nvidia GTX 460) was affected by the OpenGL bug.   But I am told by people whose cards weren't affected -- and I don't think yours was -- that in the process of updating the viewer code to get rid of the deprecated OpenGL calls, LL have speeded the viewer up markedly for everyone (which makes sense to me).    

Certainly all the fixed viewers run far faster on an up-to-driver than they did on the year-old-one I had to use!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 460 cards have a built in problem that nVidia was not able to resolve before release. The fix from nVidia was to disable part of the card. The 560 series cards have the 460 problem fixed.

However, 460's are not 'broken'. They work. nVidia's design problem and solution just meant the card never attainted the performance level they designed for. But something in the OpenGL of the drivers for 460's does not work with SL...

See: nVidia Driver GTX 460 Problems - The 260.99 driver seems to work for running SL on 460's.

Please, lets not divert the thread into how to fix 460's. Stick with telling us how well or poorly your sustem is performaing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I have found is that somewhere around V3.0 of the SL viewer something changed.

I have a fast CPU (Intel I7), and with earlier viewers it would push my video card (NVidia 260) to 95% utilization and I'd get over 110 fps. The viewer was using 100% of the core it was running on.

Now, however, on V3.1 and 3.2, CPU utilization has dropped considerably, the video card utilization has dropped to about 45%, and my frame rate has dropped to about 40 fps. This is with my custom settings somewhere between high and ultra.

This is a sticky wicket you've brought up, there are just so many variables at play.

Second Life 3.2.1 (244864) Nov 10 2011 10:33:28 (Second Life Release)
Release Notes

You are at 285,210.0, 270,621.0, 22.7 in Dobinson located at sim9105.agni.lindenlab.com (216.82.42.41:13006)
Second Life RC BlueSteel 11.11.19.245570
Error fetching server release notes URL.

CPU: Intel® Core i7 CPU         950  @ 3.07GHz (3064.54 MHz)
Memory: 6143 MB
OS Version: Microsoft Windows 7 64-bit Service Pack 1 (Build 7601)
Graphics Card Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
Graphics Card: GeForce GTX 260/PCI/SSE2

Windows Graphics Driver Version: 8.17.0012.8562
OpenGL Version: 3.3.0

libcurl Version: libcurl/7.21.1 OpenSSL/0.9.8q zlib/1.2.5 c-ares/1.7.1
J2C Decoder Version: KDU v6.4.1
Audio Driver Version: FMOD version 3.750000
Qt Webkit Version: 4.7.1 (version number hard-coded)
Voice Server Version: Not Connected
Built with MSVC version 1600
Packets Lost: 4/42,237 (0.0%)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just got a new, much improved l top.

I am using the latest Firestorm release version 3.2.2 on both machines.  In a sim with lots of active devices, and about 15 people in front of me, with my alt on one laptop and me on the other:

Old computer: (graphics default to medium)

CPU: Pentium® Dual-Core CPU       T4200  @ 2.00GHz (2000 MHz)
Memory: 3584 MB
OS Version: Microsoft Windows 7 32-bit Service Pack 1 (Build 7601)
Graphics Card Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
Graphics Card: GeForce GT 120M/PCI/SSE2
getting about 5 to 6 fps
------

new computer (graphics default to high):

CPU:       Intel® Core i7-2670QM CPU @ 2.20GHz (2195.09 MHz)
Memory: 16362 MB
OS Version: Microsoft Windows 7 64-bit Service Pack 1 (Build 7601)
Graphics Card Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
Graphics Card: GeForce GTX 560M/PCI/SSE2

getting about 50 -60 FPS
---------------
I took the new one to the most crowded sim I could find, and with high graphics and a screen full of avatars, got about 20 FPS. If I go to an empty platform up high in the sky I get >120 FPS with the new one, unless I have on some hair with flexy and alpha parts, then the frame rate drops to about 60. But the hair does not have a noticeable impact on my frame rate in even a moderately crowded sim



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Triple. You are right, it is a complex issue and I am trying to keep it simple. Runitai in the Content Creation group spoke a bit about viewer changes prior to the meeting in impromptu discussion. More changes are working their way through.

I find the Firestorm-Release (3.2.1) much faster than the SLV Dev's. (3.2.4 & 5). On Ultra with shodwos in both FS averages 15-20 FPS and SLV 5 to 10. 

My hope is that once the OpenGL chanegs wind through QA we will see a speed up.

My Duel Core2 seldom drives my 560 over 40%. I think I need a new CPU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Firestorm 3.2.2 (24336) Nov 27 2011 17:05:37 (Firestorm-Release)
Release Notes

You are at 258,631.0, 272,843.0, 33.2 in Orpheum Island located at sim7006.agni.lindenlab.com (216.82.32.8:13000)
Second Life Server 11.11.09.244706
Release Notes

CPU: AMD Athlon II X2 250 Processor (3013.71 MHz)
Memory: 3072 MB
OS Version: Microsoft Windows XP Service Pack 3 (Build 2600)
Graphics Card Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
Graphics Card: GeForce 9500 GT/PCI/SSE2/3DNOW!

Windows Graphics Driver Version: 6.14.0012.8558
OpenGL Version: 3.3.0
libcurl Version: libcurl/7.21.1 OpenSSL/0.9.8q zlib/1.2.5 c-ares/1.7.1
J2C Decoder Version: KDU
Audio Driver Version: FMOD version 3.750000
Qt Webkit Version: 4.7.1 (version number hard-coded)
Voice Server Version: Not Connected
Settings mode: Phoenix
Viewer Skin: firestorm (grey)
Font Used: Deja Vu (96)
Draw distance : 128
Bandwidth : 1500
LOD factor : 4
Built with MSVC version 1600
Packets Lost: 81/430,732 (0.0%)

 

fps = 24 on a good day. Meter just touching 20 at the moment. :manwink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cool VL Viewer 1.26.2 (7) Nov 26 2011 13:32:17 (Cool VL Viewer)
Release Notes

Built with MSVC version 1400

You are at 145273.9, 357582.3, 2502.2 in Loring Park Place located at sim20264.agni.lindenlab.com (216.82.27.39:13003)
Second Life Server 11.11.12.245070
Release Notes

CPU: AMD Athlon 64 Processor 3200+ (2009.14 MHz)
Memory: 2816 MB
OS Version: Microsoft Windows XP Service Pack 3 (Build 2600) compatibility mode. real ver: 6.0 (Build 2900)
Graphics Card Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
Graphics Card: GeForce 8400 GS/PCI/SSE2/3DNOW!
Windows Graphics Driver Version: 6.14.0012.8558
OpenGL Version: 3.3.0

libcurl Version: libcurl/7.20.1 OpenSSL/0.9.8j zlib/1.2.3
J2C Decoder Version: KDU
Audio Driver Version: FMOD version 3.750000
Qt Webkit Version: 4.7.1
Packets Lost: 8/594 (1.3%)

FPS: ranges from 29-40, average around 33
I have been experimenting with various viewers on different hardware, none of the hardware up to date, but dirvers usually current.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OS: MS Windows 7 64-bit SP1

CPU: Intel C2D E8500 @ 3.16GHz

VC: EVGA NVidia GTX560 Ti 1GB

RAM: 8GB

Viewer: V3 or Firestorm Official Release

FPS: V3 = 20fps (busy jazz club), 90fps (quiet static build region) on high settings with draw distance set to 160m, AA set at 4 and LOD set at 4.00.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Second Life 3.2.5 (246213) Dec  6 2011 01:14:40 (Second Life Developer)

CPU: AMD Phenom II X4 965 Processor (3411.31 MHz)
Memory: 7965 MB
OS Version: Linux 3.0.0-14-generic #23-Ubuntu SMP Mon Nov 21 20:28:43 UTC 2011 x86_64
Graphics Card Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
Graphics Card: GeForce GTX 560 Ti/PCI/SSE2

OpenGL Version: 4.2.0 NVIDIA 290.10

Simple areas such as just a few buildings around, I get 70 FPS with 'Lights and Shadows' on, ambient occlusion off, shadows off, depth of field off and a DD of 128. Everything else is on and at full with the exception of non-imposters which is set to 12 (default). These are also my most common settings as it provides a very good balance between performance and graphics quality.

Shadows and ambient occlusion on in the same scene, 48 FPS.

In more demanding scenes such as a few avatars being around or a more-built up area, usually between 35 and 50 with the same settings I got 70 FPS before.

In demanding scenes I can't enable shadows due to a bug that occurs in any viewer that has Runitai's changes. (https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SH-2652)

In very demanding scenes, such as 30+ avatars in view, usually around 20-30 FPS with again, same settings without shadows being on.

Right now, shining-fixes is the only viewer that is this fast on my system. All others are slower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Firestorm 3.2.2 (24336) Nov 27 2011 17:05:37 (Firestorm-Release)
Release Notes

You are at 257,364.0, 263,824.0, 190.9 in Brocade located at sim9222.agni.lindenlab.com (216.82.42.158:13001)
Second Life RC KT 11.11.12.245070
Error fetching server release notes URL.

CPU: AMD Phenom II X4 965 Processor (3411.37 MHz)
Memory: 8191 MB
OS Version: Microsoft Windows 7 64-bit Service Pack 1 (Build 7601)
Graphics Card Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
Graphics Card: GeForce GTX 480/PCI/SSE2

Windows Graphics Driver Version: 8.17.0012.8562
OpenGL Version: 4.2.0
RestrainedLove API: (disabled)
libcurl Version: libcurl/7.21.1 OpenSSL/0.9.8q zlib/1.2.5 c-ares/1.7.1
J2C Decoder Version: KDU
Audio Driver Version: FMOD version 3.750000
Qt Webkit Version: 4.7.1 (version number hard-coded)
Voice Server Version: Not Connected
Settings mode: Hybrid
Viewer Skin: starlight (silver_blue)
Font Used: Deja Vu (96)
Draw distance : 256
Bandwidth : 1000
LOD factor : 4
Built with MSVC version 1600
Packets Lost: 832/350,413 (0.2%)

Draw distance 256M

Ultra setting with shadows, reflections and lights

~12.5fps once everything is drawn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These results are from my Phoenix viewer. With FPS hovering around 36 this is just about 50% better than the latest Firestorm I have been using. Go figure.:matte-motes-sunglasses-3:

Phoenix Viewer 1.5.2 (1185) Jul 31 2011 18:58:23 (Phoenix Viewer Release)
Release Notes

Built with MSVC version 1400 (LAA)

You are at 258631.2, 272845.0, 33.2 in Orpheum Island located at sim7006.agni.lindenlab.com (216.82.32.8:13000)
Second Life Server 11.11.12.245070
Release Notes

CPU: AMD Athlon II X2 250 Processor (3013.72 MHz)
Memory: 3072 MB
OS Version: Microsoft Windows XP Service Pack 3 (Build 2600)
Graphics Card Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
Graphics Card: GeForce 9500 GT/PCI/SSE2/3DNOW!
Windows Graphics Driver Version: 6.14.0012.8558
OpenGL Version: 3.3.0

libcurl Version: libcurl/7.20.1 OpenSSL/0.9.8j zlib/1.2.3
J2C Decoder Version: OpenJPEG: 1.4.0.697, Runtime: 1.4.0
Audio Driver Version: FMOD version 3.750000
Qt Webkit Version: 4.7.1
Vivox Version: Unknown
Packets Lost: 0/31610 (0.0%)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CPU: Intel® Core i7 CPU 920 @ 2.67GHz (2672.78 MHz)
SSE Support: SSE2
Memory: 24568 MB
OS Version: Microsoft Windows 7 64-bit Service Pack 1 (Build 7601)
Graphics Card Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
Graphics Card: GeForce GTX 480/PCI/SSE2
Windows Graphics Driver Version: 8.17.0012.8562
OpenGL Version: 4.2.0

 

Switched to Singularity Viewer getting about 99 - 120 fps,running High graphics 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the information from Niran's video on Youtube showing off Global Illumination in his modification of Kirsten's S20(7). See 

FULL HD Test of Kirsten S20 in Global Illumination Mode and Custom Settings ,Sky Preset and some of my newest Menu Mods (Graphic Menu)
Sys:
XFX GTX 260 (192 Shader Units)
4GB 1033mhz RAM (Kingston)
AMD Phenom II X4 965 Quad Core (3810mhz) OC
avg FPS 20
Recorded FPS 25 (Real ~15 during record)

Newegg is selling a Gigabyte made GTX 260 for US$99. So, high end 400's and 500's are not needed for SL to get good performance.

I also have information indirectly from Runitia that the SL render process is a single thread. But, the viewer uses a number of threads. The trick to speed is getting a CPU core devoted to the SL render process that is not interrupted by other threads.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...