Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

DarkBASIC Professional Discussion / Spheres are faster than cubes?!?!

Author
Message
Hamish McHaggis
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Dec 2002
Location: Modgnik Detinu
Posted: 12th Sep 2003 20:57 Edited at: 12th Sep 2003 20:59
PLEASE EXCUSE THE TITLE, I CHANGED THE TOPIC WHEN I DISCOVERED THAT DBC ALSO HAS THIS ODD PROPERTY, ALTHOUGH IT WOULD BE GOOD IF SOMEONE COULD EXPLAIN IT TO ME.

Any hoo ....

I have just recieved my version of DBPro in the post. I downloaded DX 9 and U5. Then the first thing I noticed is that a spinning cube is slower than I would have thought (all of the tests I talk about are in windowed mode 640x480). 260 fps, that is exactely the same as the same code in DBC, I expected a big increase.

I tested all the primitives in sets of 100 and these are my results...

DBPro
100 Cubes = 20fps
100 Spheres = 33fps
100 Plains = 34fps
100 Cylinders = 42fps
100 Cones = 43fps

DB Classic
100 Cubes = 43fps
100 Spheres = 51fps
100 Plains = 34fps
100 Cylinders = 42fps
100 Cones = 43fps

This is the code...



I get a max of 50 cubes before the frame rate drops below 40. This is too low, and that is without any game code.

I don't know why this is but I don't think it is right. Has anyone else experienced this?

Brains are for idiots.

Athelon XP 1400 Plus - Nvidia Geforce MX400 - 256mb RAM
Trowbee
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Apr 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 12th Sep 2003 21:03
640 x 480 windowed
patch 5
2.1GHz
1GB DDR RAM
Pro (not Classic)
mouse & keyboard (lol)


cube = 110
sphere = 169
cone = 237
cylinder = 245
plain = 196
Rob K
Retired Moderator
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Sep 2002
Location: Surrey, United Kingdom
Posted: 12th Sep 2003 21:18
Odd. Almost certainly a bug.

My results, cube = 110, everything else = faster, 100 of each type of object on screen at once = 40.

Trowbee
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Apr 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 12th Sep 2003 21:20
Oh yeah...compared to DBC (same specs again)

cubes = 63
sphere = 64
cone = 63
cylinder = 64
plain = 64
Hamish McHaggis
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Dec 2002
Location: Modgnik Detinu
Posted: 12th Sep 2003 21:22 Edited at: 12th Sep 2003 21:24
The thing is in DBC it's the same. Maybe they made the same mistake in both versions, but never realised it.

I don't know why it's faster in DBC. It shouldn't be like that at all!

Brains are for idiots.

Athelon XP 1400 Plus - Nvidia Geforce MX400 - 256mb RAM
BatVink
Moderator
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Apr 2003
Location: Gods own County, UK
Posted: 12th Sep 2003 23:38 Edited at: 12th Sep 2003 23:39
I think the problem is with the Screen FPS() command.

Try this variation on your code. You can see the screen updating with the second variable at high speed.

The fps, which updates once every 20 loops, sticks at 1 - 2 frames on my PC.



Hamish McHaggis
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Dec 2002
Location: Modgnik Detinu
Posted: 12th Sep 2003 23:46
Nope, I did that, same frame rate.

Another weird thing, 100 .3ds cubes go at 45fps.
100*1000 poly objects go at 45 fps.

Odd. Seems that the primitives aren't all efficient.

Brains are for idiots.

Athelon XP 1400 Plus - Nvidia Geforce MX400 - 256mb RAM
UberTuba
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2002
Location: Brittania
Posted: 13th Sep 2003 00:28
if you write a program to move them around, for some reason it
goes back up to 300 fps

the artist formally known as darkfluff
spooky
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Aug 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 13th Sep 2003 00:44
eek is right. code below draws 500 cubes and rotates them and you get well over 100fps. Putting 100 cubes in same place filling whole screen is not getting to be something you need in a game anyway. It appears once you spread them out a bit then fps rockets up



If your mansion house needs haunting, just call Rentaghost!
Hamish McHaggis
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Dec 2002
Location: Modgnik Detinu
Posted: 13th Sep 2003 01:50 Edited at: 13th Sep 2003 01:51
Whew! That cleared things up a bit. The spheres are slower than cubes then for some reason. Oh well, problem solved.

Brains are for idiots.

Athelon XP 1400 Plus - Nvidia Geforce MX400 - 256mb RAM
Scorpyo
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: italy
Posted: 14th Sep 2003 00:51
Polygon density ( n. of polys within an area ) matters as to FPS rate
Darkflame
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location:
Posted: 14th Sep 2003 01:24
but why was the cubes slower either way?
cube = 6 sides, 12 polys no?
Spheres gota always be more.

"The man who says it cannot be done is generally interrupted by someone doing it." ~ Elbert Hubbard
Philip
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Jun 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 28th Sep 2003 20:58
I just ran Spooky's code and got a measley FPS of 31. That settles it. There is obviously something seriously wrong with my 'puter. I've suspected this for a while but haven't been able to prove anything.

I am running a P4 1.3 ghz machine with a nVIDIA TNT 2 Model 64 (32 megs) with 384 megs so, to my mind, Spooky's example should go like stink. Yet it only does 31 fps.

Actually, as a favour to me, could I ask a few kindly souls to run the attached prog (no media involved) and just post the FPS they are getting. Its the figure at the top left hand side of the screen.

Cheers, a very disgruntled

Philip

What do you mean, bears aren't supposed to wear hats and a tie?
simonuk74
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 29th Sep 2003 02:38
p3
450
512meg ram
geforce 256 (32mb)

with all 500 cubes on the screen I get 21 on spookys code

and on the solar system generator, I get a constant 57 fps

oh, I got 5.1 DBP & directX 9
spooky
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Aug 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 29th Sep 2003 02:53 Edited at: 29th Sep 2003 02:56
Laptop
P4 2.53Ghz
256MB
ATI Mobility Radeon 9000 (64MB)
XP Home SP1

A nice round 50 fps

If I change sync rate to 0 I get between 250 and 450 fps

If your mansion house needs haunting, just call Rentaghost!
AlecM
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: Concord, MA
Posted: 29th Sep 2003 03:23
Hammish, try running in windowed full screen mode. Also set your desktop resolution and colors to match what you set in DB. You may notice a speed increase.

Its very odd that cubes are slower that spheres.

Goto http://www.shellshockede.com
simonuk74
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 29th Sep 2003 09:52
I get an average of 75 fps with a sync of 0, on my humble p3 450
Philip
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Jun 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 29th Sep 2003 17:58
Grumble grumble. So it seems my machine is getting a lower FPS than a P3 450mhz. Even the suggestion of changing my screen resolution to the same as the set display command in DB Pro only gives me a top of 52. Thats crap. There is obviously something seriously wrong with my puter. I've tried everything and I can't work out what it is so I am going to have to buy a new one. F....!

Philip

What do you mean, bears aren't supposed to wear hats and a tie?
the architect
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Jan 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 30th Sep 2003 23:11
Phillip
have you updated your graphics card drivers. I had some speed problems too. Some Nvidia drivers will not run fast with DX8 up.

It's enough to make you wonder if your on the right planet!!! or
Get it straight! War breaks out and nobody shows up!!!
Philip
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Jun 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 1st Oct 2003 09:07
Yep. I've done all the following:

1. cut out all the non-vital programmes from the Windows XP boot (i.e. messengers, apps, etc.)

2. downloaded and installed the latest drivers from the relevant websites for my GFX card, my motherboard, my monitor, my soundcard and, just because I was being anal, my rather cool mouse as well; and

3. defragmented my hard drive.

There is still something seriously odd going on. For example, my computer takes a surprisingly long time to boot (5 minutes!!) even though if you watch the process monitor on XP it claims it is not doing anything (either CPU processes or accessing the hard drive). The desktop icons take ages to be updated from the "no icon picture" default to the proper icon picture.

A further example of the weirdness are these TGC website forums. They scroll really slowly. Worse, when I want to post a message, like this, it takes literally 20 seconds between when I type something to the words appearing on the screen in the post forum message box. Hence I now post from work at lunchtime because 20 seconds is an eternity. (I can only guess my 'puter has got something up with its javascript plugins but I can't isolate the problem).

However, and this is really what bugs me, if there was something really badly wrong with my puter you'd expect it to evidence it in every application it runs and for problems to appear in the device manager, etc. Yet when I check all my 'puter's stats they all come up correctly. Also, I just bought Lucasarts' Jedi Knight: Jedi Academy, and that seems to run fine - no noticeable slowdown at all. WEIRD.

I'm tearing my hair out here. I've owned computers since the early 1980s and I'm very familiar with PCs yet I simply can't locate the problem. I'm vaguely wondering if it may be virus related.

Philip

PS: The only other thought that does occur is that back in the days of the dx33 and dx2 66 there was some kind of issue with the early 486 motherboards whereby if you put sim cards in the 2 open slots which cards were bigger in memory capacity than the existing two, this caused performance issues. For example, if you had two 8 meg cards in the first two slots and put two 16 meg cards in the second two slots to increase your ram from 16 meg to 48 megs, this would cause weird things to occur. Apparently, you had to put them in the other way around, big cards first. Is that still the case? If so, it might be that it is my 384 megs that is to blame. I've got two cards of 64 megs and two cards of 128 megs.

What do you mean, bears aren't supposed to wear hats and a tie?
kfoong
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Jan 2003
Location: Australia
Posted: 1st Oct 2003 13:25
Thats strange, i dont have XP so i dont really know. It sounds like theres a virus or some spyware on your computer.

As for the sphere thing, a decent sphere has way more polygons than a cube. Its probably just the way that the stuff is programmed...

Heh heh... Mule...
http://www.stellarblue.vze.com/
spooky
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Aug 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 2nd Oct 2003 02:08
Try kfoongs suggestion by downloading spybot search and destroy (http://www.safer-networking.org/). It will find all dodgy spyware and hidden proggies.

I have 2 XP computers and both boot from completely off to desktop completely loaded in less than 30 seconds.

5 minutes is a joke!

If your mansion house needs haunting, just call Rentaghost!

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2026-07-25 08:29:19
Your offset time is: 2026-07-25 08:29:19