Jump to content

[1.9-1.11.x] EVE-Redux: Performance-enhanced EVE + maintenance (v1.11.2.1 - 31/01/2021)


Recommended Posts

Just now, blackrack said:

it's probably your config that differed.

Nope, same patch file I have been using for months :) all I did was check to make sure nothig had changed.

2 minutes ago, blackrack said:

You should do a before/after in the scatterer thread

Will do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm...

26 minutes ago, blackrack said:

You should do a before/after in the scatterer thread

hmmm... I don't see any difference at all now... weird, maybe it was the angle or the lighting that made it look different at that specific time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, blackrack said:

Glad to hear it. I would appreciate some numbers though :)

Well, I checked my Life on Laythe recreation with all of Matt Lowne's craft all in 1 place I usually run very choppy, so its more of a museum on Laythe, lol. But my main point is that switching vessels and moving the camera around is much smoother. Furthermore i got around a 2 fps increase, I went from 9 fps to 11 fps. :) 

 

Same feeling I have on other heavy load places.

Edited by AlphaRP
Link to post
Share on other sites

Phenom II X4 3.2Ghz - 32Gb DDR3 1333Mhz - Radeon R9 380X 4Gb - Windows 7

 

Main Menu went from 66 to 67 fps - 1% increase

KSC view goes from 50 to 53 fps - 6% increase

Flight Scene, a 30 pieces aircraft standing on the runway went from 40 to 46 fps - 15% increase

 

I used EVE+Scatterer with Spectra on these tests and my Physics Delta Time is set very high, will do more tests with another configs but this is an absolute win.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@blackrack, I've just ran some tests on a barebones KSP 1.10.1 install with various EVE/EVE Redux/Scatterer setups using the default BoulderCo configs and also the BoulderCo config for Kerbin with its volumetric particle area changed from 18000,4 to 18000,6 (basically with the particle array subdivided an extra 2 levels). For reference, my tests were done using the same Aeris 4 stock plane launching from the runway at the same UT each test flying at the same heading into a thick particle cloud at level flight to try and make the instance as identical as possible; the BoulderCo Kerbin config has the cloud layer set at 4000m, hence why I flew at this altitude to try and be directly at the center of the particles. My results were as follows:

EVE + BoulderCo: 95-105fps @ 4000m

EVE Redux + BoulderCo: 135-140fps @ 4000m

---

EVE + BoulderCo (Kerbin layer's Volumetric area set to 18000,6): 16-17fps @ 4000m

EVE Redux + BoulderCo (Kerbin layer's Volumetric area set to 18000,6): 55-60fps @ 4000m

---

EVE + BoulderCo + Scatterer: 78-80fps @ 4000m

EVE Redux + BoulderCo + Scatterer: 93-95fps @ 4000m

---

EVE + BoulderCo (Kerbin layer's Volumetric area set to 18000,6) + Scatterer: 12-14fps @ 4000m

EVE Redux + BoulderCo (Kerbin layer's Volumetric area set to 18000,6) + Scatterer: 38-40fps @ 4000m

---

This can all be visualised below, I've grouped RTB's EVE 1.10.1-1 release on the left and your EVE Redux 1.0 on the right:

MGNuZNa.png

Without Scatterer, EVE Redux 1.0 seems to grant around a 65% FPS boost for me on average and with Scatterer a 45% FPS boost on average... culminating in around a 55% FPS boost on average between the two EVE versions.

Edited by Poodmund
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Poodmund said:

@blackrack, I've just ran some tests on a barebones KSP 1.10.1 install with various EVE/EVE Redux/Scatterer setups using the default BoulderCo configs and also the BoulderCo config for Kerbin with its volumetric particle area changed from 18000,4 to 18000,6 (basically with the particle array subdivided an extra 2 levels). For reference, my tests were done using the same Aeris 4 stock plane launching from the runway at the same UT each test flying at the same heading into a thick particle cloud at level flight to try and make the instance as identical as possible; the BoulderCo Kerbin config has the cloud layer set at 4000m, hence why I flew at this altitude to try and be directly at the center of the particles. My results were as follows:

EVE + BoulderCo: 95-105fps @ 4000m

EVE Redux + BoulderCo: 135-140fps @ 4000m

---

EVE + BoulderCo (Kerbin layer's Volumetric area set to 18000,6): 16-17fps @ 4000m

EVE Redux + BoulderCo (Kerbin layer's Volumetric area set to 18000,6): 55-60fps @ 4000m

---

EVE + BoulderCo + Scatterer: 78-80fps @ 4000m

EVE Redux + BoulderCo + Scatterer: 93-95fps @ 4000m

---

EVE + BoulderCo (Kerbin layer's Volumetric area set to 18000,6) + Scatterer: 12-14fps @ 4000m

EVE Redux + BoulderCo (Kerbin layer's Volumetric area set to 18000,6) + Scatterer: 38-40fps @ 4000m

---

This can all be visualised below, I've grouped RTB's EVE 1.10.1-1 release on the left and your EVE Redux 1.0 on the right:

Without Scatterer, EVE Redux 1.0 seems to grant around a 65% FPS boost for me on average and with Scatterer a 45% FPS boost on average... culminating in around a 55% FPS boost on average between the two EVE versions.

This is very comprehensive. Thank you and thanks to everyone who tested.

This pretty much validates it for me, for a bit there I was thinking people with faster CPUs than mine weren't getting the same benefits.

Now I conclude that:

- Existing EVE configs like Spectra's are well optimized around old EVE's limitations and boulderCo is a bit less so

- Volumetrics and layers can now be "spammed" a bit more and hopefully used in more creative ways

Link to post
Share on other sites

@blackrack, there was one thing I noticed... which has been around forever and I think it's just a shortcoming of the particle based system... but when you go through a particle field the particle nearest to the camera pops out of vision as you pass past it. 

You can see in the video that as you transition past particles there is quite a strong visual jump that is quite jarring. This is very apparent which the BoulderCo particle textures. Is there anything that could be done to fade out the particle you're passing to smooth out this transition?

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Poodmund said:

@blackrack, there was one thing I noticed... which has been around forever and I think it's just a shortcoming of the particle based system... but when you go through a particle field the particle nearest to the camera pops out of vision as you pass past it. 

You can see in the video that as you transition past particles there is quite a strong visual jump that is quite jarring. This is very apparent which the BoulderCo particle textures. Is there anything that could be done to fade out the particle you're passing to smooth out this transition?

It should be easy enough to fade them out as they approach the camera and disappear. I'll give it a try.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Poodmund said:

@blackrack, I've just ran some tests on a barebones KSP 1.10.1 install with various EVE/EVE Redux/Scatterer setups using the default BoulderCo configs and also the BoulderCo config for Kerbin with its volumetric particle area changed from 18000,4 to 18000,6 (basically with the particle array subdivided an extra 2 levels). For reference, my tests were done using the same Aeris 4 stock plane launching from the runway at the same UT each test flying at the same heading into a thick particle cloud at level flight to try and make the instance as identical as possible; the BoulderCo Kerbin config has the cloud layer set at 4000m, hence why I flew at this altitude to try and be directly at the center of the particles. My results were as follows:

EVE + BoulderCo: 95-105fps @ 4000m

EVE Redux + BoulderCo: 135-140fps @ 4000m

---

EVE + BoulderCo (Kerbin layer's Volumetric area set to 18000,6): 16-17fps @ 4000m

EVE Redux + BoulderCo (Kerbin layer's Volumetric area set to 18000,6): 55-60fps @ 4000m

---

EVE + BoulderCo + Scatterer: 78-80fps @ 4000m

EVE Redux + BoulderCo + Scatterer: 93-95fps @ 4000m

---

EVE + BoulderCo (Kerbin layer's Volumetric area set to 18000,6) + Scatterer: 12-14fps @ 4000m

EVE Redux + BoulderCo (Kerbin layer's Volumetric area set to 18000,6) + Scatterer: 38-40fps @ 4000m

---

This can all be visualised below, I've grouped RTB's EVE 1.10.1-1 release on the left and your EVE Redux 1.0 on the right:

MGNuZNa.png

Without Scatterer, EVE Redux 1.0 seems to grant around a 65% FPS boost for me on average and with Scatterer a 45% FPS boost on average... culminating in around a 55% FPS boost on average between the two EVE versions.

 

2 hours ago, blackrack said:

This is very comprehensive. Thank you and thanks to everyone who tested.

This pretty much validates it for me, for a bit there I was thinking people with faster CPUs than mine weren't getting the same benefits.

Now I conclude that:

- Existing EVE configs like Spectra's are well optimized around old EVE's limitations and boulderCo is a bit less so

- Volumetrics and layers can now be "spammed" a bit more and hopefully used in more creative ways

Hm... Perhaps it's time to look back into denser Eve clouds and more polar snow for Kerbin/Laythe...

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Avera9eJoe said:

Hm... Perhaps it's time to look back into denser Eve clouds and more polar snow for Kerbin/Laythe...

My video above was using the default BoulderCo configs but with the volumetric area values changed to 18000,5 which basically means there is twice as many particles as the default setting. With my setup and Scatterer installed, the frames didn't fall below 60fps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I have some bad news for OpenGL users. I was doing some testing today (notably with the fading of the particles) and discovered that the dual-camera rendering system still used in OpenGL mode breaks the blending of the lower-res particle rendering resulting in a visual "pop" when transitioning between the cameras and I can't really fix it. OpenGL won't be able to render the particles at 1/4 resolution, but it retains all the other performance improvements detailed in the OP, something to keep in mind.

Edited by blackrack
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/20/2020 at 8:35 AM, TheKurgan said:

It looks a little lighter.. or more pale to me, but I like it!

  Reveal hidden contents

EavV4Nf.jpg

My custom settings for my ocean if anyone likes it...
https://www.dropbox.com/s/awrkcpv21kha6fw/KerbinOcean.cfg?dl=0

:O I'll have to take a peak! I've never been too happy with Spectra's ocean settings, preferring FPS over visuals but I never actually tested how many frames there are to gain with optimizing the oceans. Perhaps I can learn about aesthetics from your configs?

Directed towards Blackrack- does EVE-Redux (I nominate 'EVER' as an acronym) have any performance improvements to UVnoise? I found that it was one of the laggiest features of EVE, so I only used it on Jool's primary clouds and Laythe's bioluminescence. If it's optimized as well I night add it to Kerbin, Duna, and possibly Eve.

Edited by Avera9eJoe
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just tested your Redux config with Astronomer's Visual Pack, Scatterer and many mods installed. I found no observable difference.

I tested 3 scenarios with and without the config: main menu (same GPU usage, 100 fps), KSC (same 54 fps) and launchpad with a simple satellite (same fluctuations around 52 fps, possible 2% max fps increase - 55 max instead of 54, or just an error)

Test rig: Intel i5-6600k OC'd to 4.5 GHz,
Nvidia GTX 970 4 GB no OC,
16 GB RAM, SSD.

Edited by Krzeszny
2% increase?
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Krzeszny said:

I've just tested your Redux config with Astronomer's Visual Pack, Scatterer and many mods installed. I found no observable difference.

I tested 3 scenarios with and without the config: main menu (same GPU usage, 100 fps), KSC (same 54 fps) and launchpad with a simple satellite (same fluctuations around 52 fps, possible 2% increase - 55 fps max instead of 54, or just an error)

Test rig: Intel i5-6600k OC'd to 4.5 GHz,
Nvidia GTX 970 4 GB no OC,
16 GB RAM, SSD.

Thanks, what was your GPU usage at KSC and launchpad though? To determine if you are CPU or GPU bound

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, blackrack said:

Thanks, what was your GPU usage at KSC and launchpad though? To determine if you are CPU or GPU bound

GPU-bound. On launchpad around 90% GPU or less (not more), not sure about CPU, but in KSC CPU was 50% on average with same fps, so definitely GPU-bound.

Edited by Krzeszny
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, blackrack said:

So, I have some bad news for OpenGL users. I was doing some testing today (notably with the fading of the particles) and discovered that the dual-camera rendering system still used in OpenGL mode breaks the blending of the lower-res particle rendering resulting in a visual "pop" when transitioning between the cameras and I can't really fix it. OpenGL won't be able to render the particles at 1/4 resolution, but it retains all the other performance improvements detailed in the OP, something to keep in mind.

Aside from Linux and Mac support, there's no real good reason to provide support for OpenGL at this point at performance is markedly better with DX11... but KSP should really be offering Vulkan or Metal support too alongside DX11 for that reason.

EDIT: I also think these 'tests' that users are doing and providing figures for you Blackrack may be very misleading as from the launchpad and runway, I was only seeing a small noticeable improvement in FPS because the volumetric particles were a fair distance away from the camera. The performance increase was VERY noticeable once I got the craft up alongside the cloud layers and flooded the camera with them. This is what I think you are probably more interested in as that was the intent of the changes with regards to performance gains, no?

What was kind of funny is that with EVE Redux installed, I got better framerates inside the clouds than I did when I exited the particle clouds over the water. It seems the ocean rendering was a bigger tax on the performance now than the cloud particles... which is something.

Edited by Poodmund
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...