how to get Better FPS

[Mr G]

So i been playing with my nw Rig and on the Huge Maps when i have around 12 planets the FPS go down the drain and the game is barely using any resources, like the CPU never get above 20% and the GPU barely gets touch, could it be that the game uses a really weak engine to support that many planets and ships at the sam time.
Specs GTX 1080TI
Ryzen 7
16GB of DDR4 ram.

[Ceejay]

Omg, do people not read threads at all these days.

The game basically uses 1 core, which is why your cpu usage will basically show nothing. (you will show more than 1 core being used as windows/background programs will be getting spread across them. the faster you single core speed, the better the game will player.

For instance the ryzen 3 1300x will actually run the game just as fast as a ryzen 7 1700 as it has the same clock speeds, while its only a quad core, the extra cores make zero difference for this game.

Infact the i3 7350 will kill even a threadripper for this game, as its single core performace is way higher.

Even the lowly i3 - 4130 will outperform all the ryzen 7's for single core. so for this game will be faster. (That suprised me when I saw the benchmarks) https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

Bascially you need to stick to smaller maps/less ai.
(my poor amd fx 8350, does not put up much of a fight single core wise either)

[Mr G]

Originally posted by Ceejay:

Omg, do people not read threads at all these days.

The game basically uses 1 core, which is why your cpu usage will basically show nothing. (you will show more than 1 core being used as windows/background programs will be getting spread across them. the faster you single core speed, the better the game will player.

For instance the ryzen 3 1300x will actually run the game just as fast as a ryzen 7 1700 as it has the same clock speeds, while its only a quad core, the extra cores make zero difference for this game.

Infact the i3 7350 will kill even a threadripper for this game, as its single core performace is way higher.

Even the lowly i3 - 4130 will outperform all the ryzen 7's for single core. so for this game will be faster. (That suprised me when I saw the benchmarks) https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

Bascially you need to stick to smaller maps/less ai.
(my poor amd fx 8350, does not put up much of a fight single core wise either)

what's the point of your comment?? I dind't ask for benchmarks i ask for way to improve the game engine to get more FPS

[Fyst]

The game should not be slowing down like that for 12 planets. What does the log file look like? Is there a problem being reported behind the scenes?

[Ceejay]

Originally posted by Love:

what's the point of your comment?? I dind't ask for benchmarks i ask for way to improve the game engine to get more FPS

As you listed your specs, as well as wondering why the game was slowing down, when it did not seem to be taxing your system, I was simply explaining what was actually going on as it seemed like you thought your computer should not be slowing down, I was simply pointing out that even having a ryzen 7 will not make the game play great on larger maps as it only really uses 1 core, and AMD's have weak single thread performance, even the ryzens.

There is no real way of speeding the game up. the engine is limited and you do get slow downs with the larger maps, even smaller maps and big fleets will slow the game down. Even putting the graphics on minimum only helps slightly.

At the end of the day, if you want a fast game, stick to smaller maps and/or less ai.

Originally posted by Fyst:

The game should not be slowing down like that for 12 planets. What does the log file look like? Is there a problem being reported behind the scenes?

Possibly, but if he has all the ai on, and all the events, it could be the ai players have expanded massively and while he may only have 12 planets, the computer could have loads, and much bigger fleets, which would slow the game down alot. For instance I have hit my max fleet size before hitting 12 planets (depending on the map and what is going on etc)

[chaosbringer42]

1. Turn off empire icons for trading ships (you have to go into the .ini for this). Tons of trading ships can lag your game, but if they all have icons above their heads....it gets worse.
2. Dont fight Advent AIs if you have multiple AIs (they get more fighter squads, adding to lag, and if I remember right they also get ways of having more ships than the cap, making it even worse).
3. Get a better computer with multiple super powerful cores (so the single core the game uses is more powerful).

Hope the list I gave you helps.

[Včelí medvídek]

Hmm, reading those I am thinking what is possible "max" for playable game? Last time I played large map (about 80 planets) with 8 players (well none was advent..) and it was pretty good till end of game (was about 12 hours session) - so I am curious how much I can add for next game?

[chaosbringer42]

I do 10 player 150ish planet games all the time. I use E4X and Interregnum mods (most of the time), however E4X exacerbates the Advent = lag problem because E4X gives them even more fighters and more ways to bypass max ship cap. With the empire icons for trading ships off, it only tends to have slowdowns when there are 3-4 fleets in a fight at the same time (and they arent that bad of slowdowns). However if you have 2 or more Advent, expect a laggy as crap game with possible crashes.

[Mr G]

yeah it sucks tha the game can't support all those players, i normally play with 150 planets and 5 starts all players AI. im only 4 hours ina nd the game feels like crap. to me playing less than 60 planets is not worth it, i like to build massive fleets with planets full of defences.

[chaosbringer42]

Originally posted by Love:

yeah it sucks tha the game can't support all those players, i normally play with 150 planets and 5 starts all players AI. im only 4 hours ina nd the game feels like crap. to me playing less than 60 planets is not worth it, i like to build massive fleets with planets full of defences.

Amusingly, by that point you dont really need the trade ports. A good way to lessen slowdowns by then would be to decon all but 1 trading port in each planet and build something else. It would lower overall income, but by 4 hours in tax income should be far more than you need (normally by 3 hours in I have all research done, maxed defenses, a huge fleet, half a mil credits and 2-300k resources).

[Mr G]

Originally posted by chaosbringer42:

Originally posted by Love:

yeah it sucks tha the game can't support all those players, i normally play with 150 planets and 5 starts all players AI. im only 4 hours ina nd the game feels like crap. to me playing less than 60 planets is not worth it, i like to build massive fleets with planets full of defences.

Amusingly, by that point you dont really need the trade ports. A good way to lessen slowdowns by then would be to decon all but 1 trading port in each planet and build something else. It would lower overall income, but by 4 hours in tax income should be far more than you need (normally by 3 hours in I have all research done, maxed defenses, a huge fleet, half a mil credits and 2-300k resources).

Yeah but for me im in contant battle in many fronts because i like to use FFA and hard+ bots, so im contanly buying new ships, 75% upkeep is hard on Crystal on some maps that barely has it. I do turn off icons but i don't like it becuase it turns off the only icons i like to see The planet icons

[chaosbringer42]

Originally posted by Love:

Originally posted by chaosbringer42:

Amusingly, by that point you dont really need the trade ports. A good way to lessen slowdowns by then would be to decon all but 1 trading port in each planet and build something else. It would lower overall income, but by 4 hours in tax income should be far more than you need (normally by 3 hours in I have all research done, maxed defenses, a huge fleet, half a mil credits and 2-300k resources).

Yeah but for me im in contant battle in many fronts because i like to use FFA and hard+ bots, so im contanly buying new ships, 75% upkeep is hard on Crystal on some maps that barely has it. I do turn off icons but i don't like it becuase it turns off the only icons i like to see The planet icons

I tend to play Vicious/Cruel AIs, so I do understand. The real issue is, if you are having that much trouble late game with resources, you are losing far too many ships. One of the most important things fighting AIs is keeping your forces alive, because AIs get a HUGE income bonus on all fronts and can replace losses much more easily.

[SilencE]

To be honest it pisses me off also, medium map 4 players is ok, large map 10 players = disaster.
When against AI and you speed up the game it actually slows down.. It's sad that in this day and age with the computer hardware available to consumers devs don't 'fully' use it. How hard can it be to use more then 1 core.

[Ceejay]

Originally posted by SilencE:

To be honest it pisses me off also, medium map 4 players is ok, large map 10 players = disaster.
When against AI and you speed up the game it actually slows down.. It's sad that in this day and age with the computer hardware available to consumers devs don't 'fully' use it. How hard can it be to use more then 1 core.

Yes in this day and age your right, however, the engine is not a modern engine, when the game engine was originally developed, multicore was not a big thing. This has been discussed multiple times even by the Devs, The engine is not designed to just have multicore bolted on.essentially the engine would neet a total re-write to enable multicore support, which basically means new game.

So yes if the game was developed today, it would run on multiple cores, but it wasnt. It came out in 2008.

[Arakus]

Its very simple, the game engine is a 32 bit engine what was normal when the game was made.
Today we have 64 bit engine which can use much more ram.
Ram usage and its limitation is the main problem for sins, this problem can not be handled with the old game engine so our only hope for avoiding this lags is sins2!

[SilencE]

Originally posted by Ceejay:

Originally posted by SilencE:

To be honest it pisses me off also, medium map 4 players is ok, large map 10 players = disaster.
When against AI and you speed up the game it actually slows down.. It's sad that in this day and age with the computer hardware available to consumers devs don't 'fully' use it. How hard can it be to use more then 1 core.

Yes in this day and age your right, however, the engine is not a modern engine, when the game engine was originally developed, multicore was not a big thing. This has been discussed multiple times even by the Devs, The engine is not designed to just have multicore bolted on.essentially the engine would neet a total re-write to enable multicore support, which basically means new game.

So yes if the game was developed today, it would run on multiple cores, but it wasnt. It came out in 2008.

I know what you are saying however i was using a Dual Xeon X5450 back in 2007/8 (And they still work) (2 x 4 Cores) Saying it wasn't a 'big thing' it just wasn't that accesable to everyone.

Saying that at those times dual core and quad cores were available for consumers.
In 2005 you dual core was quite mainstream with the AMD Athlon 64 X2. (And the crap intel counterpart).

Both 64bit and dualcore, so saying 'Oh it's 32bit because..' or 'It was single core because...' Just doesn't make it right. I think they were just saving some money not having to (re)make an engine that worked on 64bit/x Cores.