Cylinder experience

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Cylinder experience

Post by Dexter on Mon Jul 07, 2014 1:38 pm

Hello guys,

I would like to ask some of the developers for their opinion. which do you think is more hardaware-demanding? Setting up a Cylinder command, or creating precisely the same cylinder using AddVertex? Experience please, I am trying to do a research and unfounded thoughts will not help me this time. Smile 
avatar
Dexter

Posts : 1842
Join date : 2011-07-08
Age : 31
Location : Brno, Czech republic

http://www.brnobve.eu

Back to top Go down

Re: Cylinder experience

Post by graymac on Mon Jul 07, 2014 3:25 pm

Opinion is worthless, facts are sacred. I don't know the facts.

Since you asked for opinion, though - - -
I suspect it may be less demanding to process a meshbuilt/vertex object, with the proviso that it doesn't involve "rotate" or "translate" operations ("cylinder" often needs both).
Custom code is best anyway if you want to add a texture.
avatar
graymac

Posts : 1745
Join date : 2011-08-28
Location : Co Mayo, Eire

http://www.celtictrainsim.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Cylinder experience

Post by Quork on Mon Jul 07, 2014 5:17 pm

I am not entirely sur whether I rememer correctly. However, if I do, there already once was a thread about this on Michelle's boards, where she explained, how the pre-existing meshes are less demanding due to calling pre-existing meshes from the GPU software itself, so especially on better graphic cards they are less demanding.
avatar
Quork

Posts : 1098
Join date : 2012-05-05
Age : 26
Location : Hofheim a.T., Hessen (Hesse), European Union

Back to top Go down

Re: Cylinder experience

Post by Dexter on Tue Jul 08, 2014 2:36 pm

OK, so here's the first result of my research.
I have made sort of a test with my route by temporarily removing all the traction mains. As expected, thuis has resulted in a massive performance boost (30 fps up in some areas), so I have told myself - OK, these objects contain a lot of cylinders, so let's get rid of them. I have recoded the main poles, and come up with an interesting result; the fps value is now actually lower!!!

From some notes I have made, I am able to make an assumption it is actually .animated files, what sucks the life out of the route the most. I use them to compone things together and - even if the bjects are static- my notes show that the higher the number of animated obects - repeat, static ones, they just have the extension and serve as a tool to put things together - the lower the fps. Looks like I will have to recode the poles once again, and I will need to put every single shared bit extra in the csv for the given pole type. Well f*** me. Evil or Very Mad 
avatar
Dexter

Posts : 1842
Join date : 2011-07-08
Age : 31
Location : Brno, Czech republic

http://www.brnobve.eu

Back to top Go down

Re: Cylinder experience

Post by Quork on Tue Jul 08, 2014 2:50 pm

That should not be happening. According to the documentation even non-static .ANIMATED are virtually load-less as long as no actual state change happens.

Also using more "simple" b3d/csv files won't help that much. Yeah, sure, you get rid of some .ANIMATED objects - but at the cost of having more specialized files, thus more files overall, and bigger files, which again has a strain on performance. I think you should stick with the .ANIMATED files.
avatar
Quork

Posts : 1098
Join date : 2012-05-05
Age : 26
Location : Hofheim a.T., Hessen (Hesse), European Union

Back to top Go down

Re: Cylinder experience

Post by Dexter on Tue Jul 08, 2014 2:56 pm

That is what I was thinking as well, and it was the main reason for me selecting the way to do things. But why is there the fps drop then? I have saved hundreds of faces by recomposing the traction mains... and I have also eliminated a few very complex (32+ sides) cylinders.  scratch
avatar
Dexter

Posts : 1842
Join date : 2011-07-08
Age : 31
Location : Brno, Czech republic

http://www.brnobve.eu

Back to top Go down

Re: Cylinder experience

Post by graymac on Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:14 pm

The telephone poles I made could have used a cylinder. I cheated, they're actually a hand coded rectangle mesh with color, not texture, and a custom normal to smooth the edges.
Very economical on resources.
avatar
graymac

Posts : 1745
Join date : 2011-08-28
Location : Co Mayo, Eire

http://www.celtictrainsim.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Cylinder experience

Post by Quork on Wed Jul 09, 2014 3:23 am

That is very economical, yes, but doesn't really work that well if a route is intended for external view as well, as is the case with Brno (is it?). Though now you mention that - a hexagonal prism with smooth normals would be surely sufficient for the poles?
avatar
Quork

Posts : 1098
Join date : 2012-05-05
Age : 26
Location : Hofheim a.T., Hessen (Hesse), European Union

Back to top Go down

Re: Cylinder experience

Post by Dexter on Wed Jul 09, 2014 3:44 am

Well, I have re-coded the poles without using the "cylinder" command. The result is shown below...as gray pointed out earlier, these objects (not using "cylinder" command) allow for correct texture application.
A rectangle does work well unless you look at it from very close (you can easily identify it then, mainly at the point where the base is touching some surface etc.) But for viewing from a certain distance it is not bad at all.

avatar
Dexter

Posts : 1842
Join date : 2011-07-08
Age : 31
Location : Brno, Czech republic

http://www.brnobve.eu

Back to top Go down

Re: Cylinder experience

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum