ONI "Lag"

[JRup]

Hardware choices are indeed affected by monies, but most of all location ... I see you posted a european site for the evga... Don't know if you've got a preferred online shop ..

Jonnyguru's got good reviews.

I've built with EVGA psu's before.. (specifically the 600w) Haven't had complaints in those 3 builds. My pc has a seasonic in it, I got lucky because local shops don't have them around here anymore.

10 minutes ago, TheMule said:

it's better to invest in quality rather than raw power.

I'd also make sure to look for reviews on the 550w model, jic.. Manufacturers do tend to pool their quality resources on what's the average seller so there's that. "80 plus" and "bronze" help a lot in choosing. I still stay away from T-fakes.

 

15 minutes ago, TheMule said:

I've run a couple of calculators, both place my system below 450W

600/650w is the highest I'd go for that...  You're right on leaning towards 550w.. just make sure to take that into account if you're planning on a full overhaul of the rig.. some CPUs are pretty thirsty atm. (not saying brands, just that some model numbers end with K)

[Phantom775]

6 hours ago, JRup said:

The PSU is one of the things that happily move from one pc to another.... Unless you're considering the move from a standard hulky build to a mini-itx build or anything that can't use the good old atx psu size... or also those watt guzzling dual video card setups...

That being said, sooner rather than later when it comes to replacing PSU's is the way to go. Any online psu wattage calculator will give a good head start when choosing the power needs for it (don't skip the calculator step but nowadays 650w is kind of the sweet spot for everyone that's not doing anything too fancy) Also check reviews that do actual disassembly and real load testing, lots of reviews out there just focus on looks first and performance last which is misleading.

The risk of bad apples in PSU's is more than real and this is the spot where I give the least compromise, I mean why would anybody want something that can fry any and all components at the same time. Or think of it this way: nobody wants to lose their 300+ cycle base, regolith melter, sourgas boiler, dupe tear harvester for something like that.

 

Sorry to see a base go - would have liked to know if you'd already tried mushroom farming, the picture on the map kind of shows lots of slime biomes... Then there's the sourgas pimple at the bottom, oh noes. I mean well, now that I look at it, the cookie has indeed crumbled in lots of awkward places.

I have 46 farm tiles dedicated to mushrooms. i've already 'used' 2 or 3 slime biomes, at the bottom i accidentally turned most of it into dirt with my steam / crude oil heat thing.

 

More findings on this issue, while playing my CPU is only at 23% utilization, RAM at 56% and GPU at a whopping 78% - and the only reason the GPU stops there is because it's maxing out the GPU's small 2 GB of memory. So, perhaps there's something more than the textures being utilized there.

 

[Phantom775]

hey there, just thought i'd update this. i just upgraded to a 1650 today (yay) and now pathfinding is... instant? it may just be coincidence, but i definitely think there's something more. 

[Denisetwin]

14 hours ago, Phantom775 said:

hey there, just thought i'd update this. i just upgraded to a 1650 today (yay) and now pathfinding is... instant? it may just be coincidence, but i definitely think there's something more. 

a 1650 what?  New GSU?  New Power supply?

[JRup]

7 minutes ago, Denisetwin said:

1650 what?

Usually a GPU, in this case, definitely a GTX1650. OP had made a remark about the 750ti's memory being full and causing lag.

[SharraShimada]

22 minutes ago, Denisetwin said:

a 1650 what?  New GSU?  New Power supply?

He/she: i upgraded to a new 1650

Everyone: Ah yes Nvidia GTX 1650

Only you: What is a 1650?

[Phantom775]

On 9/2/2020 at 3:51 PM, SharraShimada said:

He/she: i upgraded to a new 1650

Everyone: Ah yes Nvidia GTX 1650

Only you: What is a 1650?

 

On 9/2/2020 at 3:37 PM, JRup said:

Usually a GPU, in this case, definitely a GTX1650. OP had made a remark about the 750ti's memory being full and causing lag.

 

On 9/2/2020 at 3:28 PM, Denisetwin said:

a 1650 what?  New GSU?  New Power supply?

lmao, it's alright. Yes, it's a 1650 Graphics Card, 4 gigs. 

[Pumbo]

I love this game, but it's pretty tough to play a game that only uses 2 cores.

The FPS late game without mods is ridiculous.

 Klei should work to improve this point of the game.

 

[SharraShimada]

2 hours ago, Pumbo said:

I love this game, but it's pretty tough to play a game that only uses 2 cores.

The FPS late game without mods is ridiculous.

 Klei should work to improve this point of the game.

 

Or you should consider updating your hardware to something past 2006? Yes, there are new laptops out there with dualcores inside, but they are not condisdered gaming rigs. Everything <Quadcore is considered outdated today for gaming.

[Pumbo]

15 hours ago, SharraShimada said:

Or you should consider updating your hardware to something past 2006? Yes, there are new laptops out there with dualcores inside, but they are not condisdered gaming rigs. Everything <Quadcore is considered outdated today for gaming.

I don't think hardware is a problem, almost everyone has this problem late in the game.
I have a desktop Ryzen 1600 OC 3.7ghz, game on SSD, GTX 1070, Ram 16gb XMP on 2933 and I play the game on 20 fps, it's playable, but it should be much better performance than that.
The game doesn't use as much as it should use by my CPU, I already consider to upgrade to a better CPU, but I don't it's the correct answer in this case.

If you go on the specs for this game, it request a dual core CPU at 2ghz. Unfortunately, It doesn't make any diference if your cpu is 4C/8T or 6C/8T.
The game doesn't improve the performance.
 

 

[SharraShimada]

What i meant was, a CPU from 2006 (or prior) has lower performance per core compared to a CPU from today. So even if you dont use >2 cores, you will get a much better experience with a newer CPU

[Gurgel]

Well, ONI has a ton of animations going on. You can fully zoom out and all animations are still being run. I have no idea how much GPU that would need though, but path planning on a GPU is not a good idea as you would have to use GPU main memory. That would probably make things slower than doing it on the CPU.

[Saturnus]

On 8/30/2020 at 10:04 PM, TheMule said:

Me too. Problem is, this PSU is from three generations back... I've run a couple of calculators, both place my system below 450W, but that seems low. I know I can get a 450W PSU for less than 50EUR... 650W might be the way to go but I've also read that it's better to invest in quality rather than raw power.

So I've got my eyes on this https://eu.evga.com/products/product.aspx?pn=220-B3-0550-V2, only 550W but it's the same series of this one, which got a very good review: http://www.jonnyguru.com/blog/2017/07/24/evga-750-b3-750w-power-supply/6/

I've built several budget gaming PCs, think less than €800 for everything including a decent 24" IPS monitor, for my friends over the last year after I built one for myself. In all of them I've used the Corsair VS550. Although it's dirt cheap and barely above no-name price and looks I can honestly say I haven't had any issues with it. Even though I've upgraded my own CPU from the R5 2600 to a R5 3600X and the RX580 for an RX5700 (with XT bios) the PSU still chucks along happily. When I upgrade to to the 5000 series CPU and 6000 series Graphics cards I'll probably be looking for something a little more beefy but overall I had no complaints. The fans hardly ever runs, and when it does you can't hear it over your graphics card or CPU at least. I'm sure that if I put my ear precariously close the fan blades I might hear something but that's not something anyone would do.

[TheMule]

In the end I chose a GAMEMAX PSU 650W GP-650  (80+ Bronze), extremely cheap. Rationale is: the PC is old. FX6350, DDR3 RAM, GTX 570 Ti, you get the idea. I don't know when I'm going to upgrade it but it's likely I'm going to change everything else, so the PSU is hardly a factor.

Anyway my problem went away. I can't really tell if it's the new PSU, the temp (I mean outside the house, not inside the case) dropped by 15C pretty much the day I switched PSU, so definitely heat is less of a problem anyway.
 

[gabberworld]

i not see issue in pc but in cheap code. not even know it there is possible make good coded games at c#

i understand why developers use c# its simply faster make than in c++ but asm and c++ are those where performance comes

[KittenIsAGeek]

I have an old PC.  This game runs fairly well on it.  

 

There are two things that cause ONI to get laggy:

1. The number of calculations.
2. The amount of data shifted continually between RAM and CPU for computing.

You can improve your performance by designing your base to minimize the calculations load.  You can improve your performance by increasing your memory bandwidth.  You can improve your performance by using a faster CPU.

In my particular case, I have an i5-4690S CPU.  It runs at 3.2GHZ and has 4 cores (ONI only uses 2).  I have 24GB of RAM in a 3-channel configuration because my motherboard is really weird.  And yes, I notice a difference if I remove one of the sticks putting it into dual-channel mode.  

[gabberworld]

23 minutes ago, KittenIsAGeek said:

I have an old PC.  This game runs fairly well on it.  

 

There are two things that cause ONI to get laggy:

1. The number of calculations.
2. The amount of data shifted continually between RAM and CPU for computing.

You can improve your performance by designing your base to minimize the calculations load.  You can improve your performance by increasing your memory bandwidth.  You can improve your performance by using a faster CPU.

In my particular case, I have an i5-4690S CPU.  It runs at 3.2GHZ and has 4 cores (ONI only uses 2).  I have 24GB of RAM in a 3-channel configuration because my motherboard is really weird.  And yes, I notice a difference if I remove one of the sticks putting it into dual-channel mode.  

as cpu in game not use 100%, increasing cpu not helps, also upgrade the gpu not helps because it not use 100% aswell. only what may help is increasing memory speed for this. either way if game use huge database like this game then database needed optimized instead using default one they should using like MySQL or something else what is fast  

[KittenIsAGeek]

23 minutes ago, gabberworld said:

either way if game use huge database like this game then database needed optimized instead using default one they should using like MySQL or something else what is fast

It isn't exactly a database issue.  Certainly you're storing a lot of cell-type data.. but the storage of the data isn't the  problem. Its moving it from the RAM into the CPU's cache so you can perform calculations on it. For example, lets look at thermal transfer.

For thermal transfer between two solid tiles, you need to know the temperature of each tile, the type material (and hence, the thermal conductivity and thermal capacity of the materials), and the mass of the material.  So these details need to be moved from the RAM into the CPU's cache to have calculations run on them.   The calculation runs, and the results are stored back in RAM. 

Now, lets say you have a stack of 30 different materials on a solid tile in an atmosphere that shifts between CO2 and O2.  You're going to have to load the details for each item, perform the calculation, send the results back, then load the next.  Each calculation will be using different average thermal conductivities and limits unique to the thermal attributes of the material currently being worked on.  When the gas shifts from O2 to CO2, the numbers change again.  The CPU's cache isn't big enough to hold all that data, so you'll have to pull the next set of data from RAM every time it has to do the calculation.  Certainly, this can be pre-fetched to a degree, but the pre-fetch cache isn't that big either.  You may have room for  a couple of cells.. or a dozen.. but eventually your pre-fetch isn't going to be big enough and you're still going to end up waiting on the transfer from (relatively) slow RAM into the CPU's cache.  

And you're repeating this.  For every cell of the game.  Multiple times per second.  Accessing the data through MySQL or similar would only compound the problem because you would have to make external calls, which would end up flushing the CPU cache each time you asked for the next data set.

[gabberworld]

as every database use index for get and send data to memory. and also every function use that differently , from that comes the performance.

in old Delphi example there was custom made memory access. it was increasing faster memory reading than default Delphi builder one. if you added timer for see the difference you see right away the huge difference at big databases

[gabberworld]

what i'm talking here is that this game have by default 98304 tiles, what also means somewhere in game code it have the for loop for the 98304 tiles  what reads and writes data in memory. if database have delay aka memory database in this case, even 1milisecond it will decrease  the load that data to CPU what calculates new data and then send back to memory database for wait  new instruction

if you have old pc and not planning upgrade anytime soon, you may decrease map tiles if it makes allot issues atm

as usually developers not interested make performance already finished product. unless if they coding is also they hobby.

you probably need buy new pc what have faster memory and maybe also cpu

 

[KittenIsAGeek]

45 minutes ago, gabberworld said:

what reads and writes data in memory. if database have delay aka memory database in this case, even 1milisecond

I get what you're saying, but.. the problem is a basic hardware issue.  RAM is really slow when you compare it to the CPU.  You can have a hundred operations in the CPU just waiting for a 2mb chunk to get from the RAM into the level 2 cache on the CPU.  

Lets say that you've managed to optimize your thermal computing to an "order of n" algorithm.  This means for each tile, you're adding the same amount of work.  Lets assume you can do all the thermal stuff on a tile in one calculation.  So 98304 tiles, 98304 calculations.  Lets also assume that your L2 cache is 2mb and the average game uses 4gb of RAM. Some of that is going to be the executable program, some is going to be data other than thermal.. so lets say that one quarter of the total memory footprint is just thermal data.  That's 1000mb.  1000/2 = 500, so we're going to have to move data from the RAM to the L2 cache 500 times in order to perform calculations on each tile.  Also, we're going to have to move data from the L2 cache back to the RAM 500 times.  So we've got 1000 times that we're doing the "slow" operation of moving data so we can work with it.

On average, the CPU can access L1 data 100 times faster than it can L2 cache data, and L2 cache data is 25 times faster than access to RAM.  Once a chunk is in the L2 cache, it will be moved to the L1 cache so the CPU can work on it, then moved back. AMD and Intel both claim 95% hit rates for L1 cache, so for our purposes we're going to push that to 100. That means that every time the CPU asks for information from the L1 cache for its computation, that data will be there thanks to the L2 cache.  For an i7 circa 2015 with DDR3-1600 RAM, for any set of memory over about 8mb it will take a bit over 100 CPU cycles to get new data from RAM into the L2 cache.  We're doing 1000 of these transfers from the RAM to the CPU every time we run a calculation on the map.  So that's 100,000 CPU cycles that aren't getting used -- and we're assuming that everything is going perfect.  We're also ignoring the cycles lost moving information from the L2 to the L1 and back again.  

My CPU runs at 3.2GHz. 100,000 cycles is a bit over 0.03ms.  There are 4 game ticks per second in ONI, so you're spending 0.125ms (1/8th of 1ms) just waiting on the hardware to move the data from the RAM to the CPU.  And that's assuming that you're only doing 1 thermal calculation per tile per tick.

We haven't yet talked about gas movements, or liquid movements, or thermal transfers between piles of debris.. we haven't yet talked about dupe or critter pathfinding, piped fluids, or any of the other stuff.  ONI is literally running into the hardware limitations of modern desktop and laptop design.

 

**Edit: If your data set occupies more than 8mb of RAM, and you're working through it sequentially, then each L2 cache-sized block will take 100 cpu cycles to move from RAM to the L2 cache.

[gabberworld]

2 minutes ago, KittenIsAGeek said:

I get what you're saying, but.. the problem is a basic hardware issue.  RAM is really slow when you compare it to the CPU.  You can have a hundred operations in the CPU just waiting for a 2mb chunk to get from the RAM into the level 2 cache on the CPU.  

 

yes you totally correct ram is slow like regular hdd aka ssd.   and that is where also comes that issue you need write small data as possible to memory that he can read fast as possible back to CPU.

[KittenIsAGeek]

2 minutes ago, gabberworld said:

yes you totally correct ram is slow like regular hdd aka ssd.   and that is where also comes that issue you need write small data as possible to memory that he can read fast as possible back to CPU.

If I remember correctly, we had this conversation regarding the save file in compressed vs uncompressed form on an SSD.  It was slightly faster to compress the data, THEN write to the SSD -- but writing to an SSD is a couple orders of magnitude slower than accessing RAM.  

I would also be surprised if the CPU or the OS wasn't already doing some low level compression on data going into the RAM.

[gabberworld]

1 minute ago, KittenIsAGeek said:

If I remember correctly, we had this conversation regarding the save file in compressed vs uncompressed form on an SSD.  It was slightly faster to compress the data, THEN write to the SSD -- but writing to an SSD is a couple orders of magnitude slower than accessing RAM.  

I would also be surprised if the CPU or the OS wasn't already doing some low level compression on data going into the RAM.

it was example i not talking about using the ssd. what im talking instead that they use long names for instruction in game they should use them as small as possible like databases use that for indexing

[KittenIsAGeek]

Just now, gabberworld said:

it was example i not talking about using the ssd. what im talking instead that they use long names for instruction in game they should use them as small as possible like databases use that for indexing

...

...

You DO realize that the long names in the files we can edit are only for US, right?  That they get crunched down to bit locations inside the actual running game, right?