|
Troubleshooting - SpaceEngine 0.97
|
|
| chromatic9 | Date: Friday, 03.05.2013, 01:33 | Message # 76 |
 Explorer
Group: Users
United Kingdom
Messages: 166
Status: Offline
| Quote (HarbingerDawn) And I'm sure you probably did, but did you make sure to install 0.97 into its own folder, rather than over 0.96?
Yes it has its own folder.
I'll try those other things, thanks.
i7 930 3.8GHz, GTX 970, 6GB DDR3
flickr
|
| |
| |
| Jeroll3d | Date: Friday, 03.05.2013, 02:09 | Message # 77 |
|
Astronaut
Group: Users
Brazil
Messages: 54
Status: Offline
| HarbingerDawn
Yes, thanks 
|
| |
| |
| chromatic9 | Date: Friday, 03.05.2013, 03:53 | Message # 78 |
|
Explorer
Group: Users
United Kingdom
Messages: 166
Status: Offline
| Well I managed to get vsync to stay off by making sure the drivers don't allow it.
So with nothing hardly rendered its 100fps, if I get half distance to the planet it bogs down to 20fps, takes a very long time to render a simple planet doesn't seem to finish properly and is 20-30fps for many minutes, I then strafe out and in again slightly and the whole frantic loading/bogging down starts again on something it just moslty rendered. Seems like I'm fighting some brute force vsync. Turning it off in the main config does nothing. Would like some others to confirm that vsync can't be disabled in the config file.
The suggested changes for preloading shader and interleaved loading did nothing to help. The planet mipmap did the fix for square gaps in the render which I did set true in the hope it improved performance.
I really can't use 0.97 as of now, its just a constant struggle, chugging away like a mad machine.
i7 930 3.8GHz, GTX 970, 6GB DDR3
flickr
Edited by chromatic9 - Friday, 03.05.2013, 03:58 |
| |
| |
| HarbingerDawn | Date: Friday, 03.05.2013, 04:13 | Message # 79 |
 Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8717
Status: Offline
| Quote (chromatic9) Would like some others to confirm that vsync can't be disabled in the config file.
I confirm that vsync can't be disabled. However I'm not seeing the performance drops you're talking about, for me 0.9.7.0 performs as well as 0.9.6.1 and better than 0.9.6.2.
Try deleting the /cache/shaders folder.
All forum users, please read this!
My SE mods and addons
Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM
|
| |
| |
| Duke | Date: Friday, 03.05.2013, 07:38 | Message # 80 |
|
Space Pilot
Group: SE team
Antarctica
Messages: 88
Status: Offline
| Quote (chromatic9) I really can't use 0.97 as of now, its just a constant struggle, chugging away like a mad machine.
Try to disable Aurora Borealis. Even if you don't see it but planet have it performance would be reduced.
One more thing, try to set amount of video-memory which used by SE to nearly 2/3 of what you have. For example for 1.5Gb it would be 1152 and 100 percent.
|
| |
| |
| SpaceEngineer | Date: Friday, 03.05.2013, 08:34 | Message # 81 |
 Author of Space Engine
Group: Administrators
Russian Federation
Messages: 4800
Status: Offline
| chromatic9, Try set up PlanetTextureRes 256, like in 0.96. It will increase render performance, but reduce generating performance - you may have <10 fps while landscape is generating.
|
| |
| |
| jtmedina | Date: Friday, 03.05.2013, 18:10 | Message # 82 |
|
Space Pilot
Group: Users
Spain
Messages: 100
Status: Offline
| Quote (SpaceEngineer) Try set up PlanetTextureRes 256, like in 0.96. It will increase render performance, but reduce generating performance - you may have <10 fps while landscape is generating.
Is there any way to pre-generate the landscape of a planet or the entire solar system and store the data on the hard drive?. Or perhaps it's not efficient or it would take too much hard drive?.
|
| |
| |
| HarbingerDawn | Date: Friday, 03.05.2013, 18:24 | Message # 83 |
|
Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8717
Status: Offline
| Quote (jtmedina) Or perhaps it's not efficient or it would take too much hard drive?.
No there is no way to do it. Also it would take terabytes of space and many hours to generate that much information, so it's obviously not a good idea.
All forum users, please read this!
My SE mods and addons
Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM
|
| |
| |
| chromatic9 | Date: Friday, 03.05.2013, 20:29 | Message # 84 |
|
Explorer
Group: Users
United Kingdom
Messages: 166
Status: Offline
| Still no joy, planettextureres 256 just made things worse. 1152 mem at 100% had no effect..
Not sure how to turn off Aurora, I pressed F4 and unchecked it.
i7 930 3.8GHz, GTX 970, 6GB DDR3
flickr
|
| |
| |
| HarbingerDawn | Date: Friday, 03.05.2013, 20:34 | Message # 85 |
|
Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8717
Status: Offline
| Quote (chromatic9) Still no joy
Including after deleting the shaders cache?
All forum users, please read this!
My SE mods and addons
Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM
|
| |
| |
| jtmedina | Date: Friday, 03.05.2013, 21:08 | Message # 86 |
|
Space Pilot
Group: Users
Spain
Messages: 100
Status: Offline
| Quote (HarbingerDawn) No there is no way to do it. Also it would take terabytes of space and many hours to generate that much information, so it's obviously not a good idea.
Terabytes only in the case you wanted to store the entire universe. I am talking about one solar system to keep it cached on the hard drive. As far as I know that's possible. Perhaps most of the people prefer to enjoy the entire universe but If you planned to expend more time at a specific solar system, being able to store that system on your hard drive might be a good option after all.
|
| |
| |
| smjjames | Date: Friday, 03.05.2013, 21:08 | Message # 87 |
|
World Builder
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 913
Status: Offline
| Hm, I got a Runtime error "runtime has requested that the program be closed in an unusual way' and crash. I think I've had this problem before, but only after a LONG while. It was while I was above a procedural galaxy.
Going to check if the graphics card is up to date (it was updated in the last few months though).
Edit: The graphics card is up to date.
Edit2: Happened again, and while I was still way above the galactic disk.
Edited by smjjames - Friday, 03.05.2013, 21:29 |
| |
| |
| anonymousgamer | Date: Friday, 03.05.2013, 21:38 | Message # 88 |
 World Builder
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 1011
Status: Offline
| Quote (jtmedina) Terabytes only in the case you wanted to store the entire universe.
For a whole solar system rendered and stored it would easily take up terabytes.
There is no amount of memory on Earth that could store the whole SE universe.
Desktop: FX-8350 4.0 GHz, 8 GB DDR3 RAM, EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FTW 8 GB, 2 TB HDD, 24 inch 1920x1080 screen
Laptop: Core i5 480M 2.66 GHz (turbo 2.93), 8 GB DDR3 RAM, AMD Radeon HD 6550m 1 GB, 640 GB HDD, 17.3 inch 1600x900 screen
|
| |
| |
| HarbingerDawn | Date: Friday, 03.05.2013, 21:39 | Message # 89 |
|
Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8717
Status: Offline
| Quote (jtmedina) Terabytes only in the case you wanted to store the entire universe
No, terabytes just to store all of the landscape textures for one planetary system. Every single world has at least two maps - and often many more - at 10 meters/pixel resolution. To store just the surface and height textures for a small world the size of the Moon would by itself take about a terabyte of hard drive space. An Earth-sized terra with life with 3 cloud layers would require at least 20 times that much space to store, and there are even larger worlds out there. So terabytes was a conservative number, really it would take petabytes; whole rooms full of hard drives would be required.
smjjames, did you see everything that SpaceEngineer said concerning asynchronous and interleaved loading?
All forum users, please read this!
My SE mods and addons
Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM
|
| |
| |
| smjjames | Date: Friday, 03.05.2013, 21:48 | Message # 90 |
|
World Builder
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 913
Status: Offline
| Quote (HarbingerDawn) smjjames, did you see everything that SpaceEngineer said concerning asynchronous and interleaved loading?
No, I don't think so, I'll do a search about it.
Okay, did a search and yeah I see that there are problems with asynchronous. It was already set to asynchronous for some reason, so I changed that.
BTW, despite the fact that the beta testing board is hidden, the search function still shows threads in there. Portions of the posts anyway, not the whole thing, enough to get the idea that there are still problems with asynchronous.
Edited by smjjames - Friday, 03.05.2013, 22:01 |
| |
| |
ENG
New site
United Kingdom 
Brazil 
United States 
Antarctica 
Russian Federation 
Spain 