Jump to content

[1.1][1.1-1] Apr-19-2016 Dynamic Texture Loader

rbray89

By rbray89
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

linuxgurugamer

linuxgurugamer

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, smjjames said:

Anyways, mine is pretty heavily modded, so, testing that will take a while, I'm also planning on doing it in pure stock to have a baseline.

I don't mind trying out new versions, but I don't have time to do  extensive testing to find if there is a conflict or not.  I'm pretty busy with my own mods right now :-)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
speedwaystar

speedwaystar

Posted
Posted (edited)

well this is decidedly odd.

With Dynamic Texture Loader   Without Dynamic Texture Loader
  GCMonitor Task Manager Video Card     GCMonitor Task Manager Video Card
                 
-force-d3d9         -force-d3d9      
Initial Menu 3577 3218 1200.0   Initial Menu     crash
Space Center 3674 3318 583.6   Space Center  
VAB 3763 3427 399.3   VAB      
Loaded Kerbal X crash   Loaded Kerbal X      
Launch Pad         Launch Pad      
Mechjeb Circularize         Mechjeb Circularize      
                 
-force-d3d11         -force-d3d11      
Initial Menu 2767 2418 307.2   Initial Menu 2741 2392 307.2
Space Center 2899 2535 798.7   Space Center 2864 2515 798.7
VAB 3005 2652 399.3   VAB 2981 2628 399.3
Loaded Kerbal X 3220 2855 460.8   Loaded Kerbal X 3149 2779 460.8
Launch Pad 3245 2885 1050.0   Launch Pad 3194 2819 1080.0
Mechjeb Circularize 3284 2911 399.3   Mechjeb Circularize 3171 2831 430.1
                 
-force-opengl         -force-opengl      
Initial Menu 2359 2021 952.3   Initial Menu 2395 2077 952.3
Space Center 2444 2122 491.5   Space Center 2448 2142 491.5
VAB 2503 2185 276.5   VAB 2527 2207 276.5
Loaded Kerbal X 2739 2416 276.5   Loaded Kerbal X 2632 2305 276.5
Launch Pad 2791 2443 245.0   Launch Pad 2711 2396 245.0
Mechjeb Circularize 2763 2469 276.5   Mechjeb Circularize 2706 2391 276.5
SUM 15599 13656 2518.3   SUM 15419 13518 2518.3

with opengl and dx11 i get an average INCREASE in system memory load of between 50 and 100k (KSP.exe private bytes) with Dynamic Texture Loader active.

the real winner (well, kind of) is dx9 which can actually load and run the game with Dynamic Texture Loader, eventually crashing in the VAB on ship load.

mods used:

t8apFxd.png

thoughts?

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1C21awBSQD-onXUbfEyxZWG7e-j3a_iQ-gP6IFwZijZY/edit?usp=sharing

Edited by speedwaystar
add link
Link to comment
Share on other sites
smjjames

smjjames

Posted
Posted (edited)

I'm seeing similar results where it actually performs a bit better with OpenGL and without DTL. Also, while DTL does help with video memory usage, the results for memory usage in general seems mixed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1btlHDaOM5IIqKOUUO11ETg9IrX703aTkjepwfilBXQ8/edit?usp=sharing

Working on the near-pure stock install portion.

Edited by smjjames
Link to comment
Share on other sites
speedwaystar

speedwaystar

Posted
Posted (edited)

as i understand it, the base game simply loads every single texture into memory, even if it's never used. i presume DTL attempts to forcibly unload them, then reload actually needed textures on demand.

if that's so then any addon which iterates through the entire parts list assuming it to be permanently in memory might trigger DTL to load on demand, essentially reloading everything again.

any thoughts on which mods might interfere with DTL in this way? DistantObject? TextureReplacer? VesselView? grasping at straws here.

Edited by speedwaystar
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rbray89

rbray89

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, speedwaystar said:

well this is decidedly odd.

With Dynamic Texture Loader   Without Dynamic Texture Loader
  GCMonitor Task Manager Video Card     GCMonitor Task Manager Video Card
                 
-force-d3d9         -force-d3d9      
Initial Menu 3577 3218 1200.0   Initial Menu     crash
Space Center 3674 3318 583.6   Space Center  
VAB 3763 3427 399.3   VAB      
Loaded Kerbal X crash   Loaded Kerbal X      
Launch Pad         Launch Pad      
Mechjeb Circularize         Mechjeb Circularize      
                 
-force-d3d11         -force-d3d11      
Initial Menu 2767 2418 307.2   Initial Menu 2741 2392 307.2
Space Center 2899 2535 798.7   Space Center 2864 2515 798.7
VAB 3005 2652 399.3   VAB 2981 2628 399.3
Loaded Kerbal X 3220 2855 460.8   Loaded Kerbal X 3149 2779 460.8
Launch Pad 3245 2885 1050.0   Launch Pad 3194 2819 1080.0
Mechjeb Circularize 3284 2911 399.3   Mechjeb Circularize 3171 2831 430.1
                 
-force-opengl         -force-opengl      
Initial Menu 2359 2021 952.3   Initial Menu 2395 2077 952.3
Space Center 2444 2122 491.5   Space Center 2448 2142 491.5
VAB 2503 2185 276.5   VAB 2527 2207 276.5
Loaded Kerbal X 2739 2416 276.5   Loaded Kerbal X 2632 2305 276.5
Launch Pad 2791 2443 245.0   Launch Pad 2711 2396 245.0
Mechjeb Circularize 2763 2469 276.5   Mechjeb Circularize 2706 2391 276.5
SUM 15599 13656 2518.3   SUM 15419 13518 2518.3

with opengl and dx11 i get an average INCREASE in system memory load of between 50 and 100k (KSP.exe private bytes) with Dynamic Texture Loader active.

the real winner (well, kind of) is dx9 which can actually load and run the game with Dynamic Texture Loader, eventually crashing in the VAB on ship load.

thoughts?

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1C21awBSQD-onXUbfEyxZWG7e-j3a_iQ-gP6IFwZijZY/edit?usp=sharing

What windows version are you running? what is your mod list?

The thing that concerns me with DX9 is that you are already so close to the mem limit. The other thing that I'm having trouble understanding is why there is no difference in your graphics memory for DX11/OpenGL and why the memory usage is so low. On a KSP version loaded with mods that starts up normally around those marks I see a LOT more usage of graphics memory. Are you running with half-textures?

Note that only part mods are affected as well. Graphics mod textures like EVE won't be impacted.
Also, I'd expect the DX9 graphics mem to be much lower.

Edited by rbray89
Link to comment
Share on other sites
speedwaystar

speedwaystar

Posted
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, rbray89 said:

What windows version are you running? what is your mod list?

windows 10 pro fast ring build 11082. mod list is:

t8apFxd.png

20 minutes ago, rbray89 said:

The other thing that I'm having trouble understanding is why there is no difference in your graphics memory for DX11/OpenGL and why the memory usage is so low. On a KSP version loaded with mods that starts up normally around those marks I see a LOT more usage of graphics memory.

for GPU vram load i was using GPU Meter rather than GPUZ. -- i'll check in a moment whether GPUZ returns different results.

EDIT: okay, looks like GPU Meter is a load of krakens. i'll update with values from GPU-Z.

GPU is GTX 780Ti, if that's relevant.

Quote

Are you running with half-textures?

Full textures, 2560x1080 borderless, everything maxed.

Edited by speedwaystar
Link to comment
Share on other sites
smjjames

smjjames

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, rbray89 said:

What windows version are you running? what is your mod list?

The thing that concerns me with DX9 is that you are already so close to the mem limit. The other thing that I'm having trouble understanding is why there is no difference in your graphics memory for DX11/OpenGL and why the memory usage is so low. On a KSP version loaded with mods that starts up normally around those marks I see a LOT more usage of graphics memory. Are you running with half-textures?

Note that only part mods are affected as well. Graphics mod textures like EVE won't be impacted.
Also, I'd expect the DX9 graphics mem to be much lower.

 

Giving the info pertaining to my spreadsheet: Using Windows 8.1, 64bit, I have texture quality on full res and render quality on beautiful.

modlist:

Spoiler

000_Toolbar
  000_USITools
  AdjustableLandingGear
  AsteroidDay
  AtomicAge
  BahaSP
  CommunityResourcePack
  CommunityTechTree
Contract Configurator
contractpacks (tourism, advanced progression, field science)
contractswindow+
  CrowdSourcedScience
  CryoEngines
  DMagicOrbitalScience
ExtraplanetaryLaunchpads
Firespitter
FShangarextender
  HeatManagement
heatcontrol
interstellarfuelswitch
  KerbalFoundries
  Kerbaltek
kerbalstats
KIS
KAS
KER
  KWRocketry
  MagicSmokeIndustries
  NearFutureElectrical
  NearFutureProps
NearFutureSolar
NearFuturePropulsion
  NearFutureSpacecraft
  NMSG
  NovaPunch2
ProceduralFairings
  RadialEngineMountsPPI
  RSCapsuledyne
radiatortoggle
SCANsat
sciencealert
sensiblescreenshot
smartstage
SpaceYHeavylifters and Expanded
  Squad
stagerecovery
surfacelights
  StockBugFixPlus
Throttle Controlled Avionics
  TriggerTech
tweakableeverything
  TweakScale
  UmbraSpaceIndustries (FTT, UKS (Kolonization), Karbonite, Exploration pack, Kontainers, Reactors, Orion, submarine pack)
  UniversalStorage
  WildBlueIndustries

OSEworkshop

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rbray89

rbray89

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, smjjames said:

@speedwaystar I've been using the GPU-Z thing for memory usage.

@rbray89 Does the modded KSP section of my spreadsheet look like what should be expected? Just wondering here.

I think I'd expect a bit more savings on the stock install... the results you have look like the resolution isn't set to full or something... I'd expect more savings from the modded section for sure. Think similar performance to stock or better. 

Also keep in mind that display size will affect graphics memory too.

I think I'm going to have to start installing more mods to see where the issue lies. For reference, my "Test" install looks like this: 

12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          000_Toolbar
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          B9_Aerospace
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          CommunityResourcePack
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          CrossFeedEnabler
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          DynamicTextureLoader
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          Firespitter
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          FuelTanksPlus
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          InterstellarFuelSwitch
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          JSI
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          KAX
12/25/2015  03:20 PM             1,397 KAX_ReadMe.txt
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          KineTechAnimation
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          Klockheed_Martian_Gimbal
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          KWRocketry
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          ModuleAnimateEmissive
12/25/2015  03:25 PM            60,928 ModuleManager.2.6.13.dll
12/25/2015  04:23 PM         3,405,486 ModuleManager.ConfigCache
12/25/2015  04:23 PM               148 ModuleManager.ConfigSHA
12/25/2015  04:23 PM             6,605 ModuleManager.Physics
12/25/2015  04:23 PM            44,444 ModuleManager.TechTree
12/25/2015  03:23 PM               719 ModuleManager_README.md
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          MP_Nazari
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          NearFuturePropulsion
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          OPT
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          PlanetaryBaseInc
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          RcsSounds
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          ResGen
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          SmokeScreen
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          SpaceY-Lifters
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          Squad
12/25/2015  06:05 PM               852 toolbar-settings.dat
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          Virgin Kalactic
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          WarpPlugin

 

If anyone has a .ckan file that they can share that has a ton of part mods installed where you are seeing less than great performance, that'd be great.

Edited by rbray89
Link to comment
Share on other sites
smjjames

smjjames

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, rbray89 said:

I think I'd expect a bit more savings on the stock install... the results you have look like the resolution isn't set to full or something... I'd expect more savings from the modded section for sure. Think similar performance to stock or better. 

Also keep in mind that display size will affect graphics memory too.

I play in windowed mode but with it 'fullscreen in that it takes up the screen.

Anyway, it seems a bit worse when using OpenGL with DTL, but when I use force dx11, it's not all that much better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
speedwaystar

speedwaystar

Posted
Posted

okay, here are my new results for -force-opengl, with and without DTL, using GPUZ for vram load.

With Dynamic Texture Loader   Without Dynamic Texture Loader
-force-opengl         -force-opengl      
Initial Menu 2414 2094 2035   Initial Menu 2364 2027 2760
Space Center 2500 2188 2068   Space Center 2445 2144 2813
VAB 2570 2254 2073   VAB 2529 2212 2818
Loaded Kerbal X 2818 2490 2115   Loaded Kerbal X 2664 2328 2828
Kerbal X on Pad 2840 2526 2119   Kerbal X on Pad 2714 2390 2840
Mechjeb Circularize 2848 2527 2115   Mechjeb Circularize 2723 2407 2846
SUM 15990 14079 12525   SUM 15439 13508 16905
DTL av ΔMB 91.8 95.2 -730.0          


again, seem to be using an extra 100k system ram (roughly) across the board with DTL, but ~730MB less video ram.

problem is, it's the system ram usage which crashes Unity, yes? for me, it's curtains as soon as system ram approaches 3.5GB,

Link to comment
Share on other sites
smjjames

smjjames

Posted
Posted (edited)

Yeah, it's the system RAM which makes 32bit Unity crash. It doesn't neccesarily crash right at 3.5gb, but it starts the clock ticking.

I'm observing similar results in my spreadsheet with the system memory going up by ~100-200MB and video memory going down by ~500-600 with force opengl plus DTL. Without DTL, system memory remains steadier. You can actually see a similar, though much smaller and more subtle, thing happening with the near pure stock testing. Though that might be within margin of error.

To me, it seems like the best results are coming from -force-opengl without DTL.

Edited by smjjames
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rbray89

rbray89

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, speedwaystar said:

okay, here are my new results for -force-opengl, with and without DTL, using GPUZ for vram load.

With Dynamic Texture Loader   Without Dynamic Texture Loader
-force-opengl         -force-opengl      
Initial Menu 2414 2094 2035   Initial Menu 2364 2027 2760
Space Center 2500 2188 2068   Space Center 2445 2144 2813
VAB 2570 2254 2073   VAB 2529 2212 2818
Loaded Kerbal X 2818 2490 2115   Loaded Kerbal X 2664 2328 2828
Kerbal X on Pad 2840 2526 2119   Kerbal X on Pad 2714 2390 2840
Mechjeb Circularize 2848 2527 2115   Mechjeb Circularize 2723 2407 2846
SUM 15990 14079 12525   SUM 15439 13508 16905
DTL av ΔMB 91.8 95.2 -730.0          


again, seem to be using an extra 100k system ram (roughly) across the board with DTL, but ~730MB less video ram.

problem is, it's the system ram usage which crashes Unity, yes? for me, it's curtains as soon as system ram approaches 3.5GB,

Not sure why it'd be eating system ram. Note that you probably shouldn't be summing these values, as they are state-based. :) 
Other than eating system ram, these values are closer to what I'd expect. 

And another important thing... If you are doing these tests, be sure to let it load and cache the resized textures once, then run again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
speedwaystar

speedwaystar

Posted
Posted (edited)

indeed, the summation is just to get an extremely rough ballpark eyeball-style average.

here's dx11 -- similar, only the kraken has eaten more system ram:

With Dynamic Texture Loader   Without Dynamic Texture Loader
-force-d3d11         -force-d3d11      
Initial Menu 2889 2549 2108.0   Initial Menu 2743 2390 2821
Space Center 3042 2685 2161.0   Space Center 2866 2513 2875
VAB 3155 2808 2176.0   VAB 3009 2650 2888
Loaded Kerbal X 3371 3014 2213.0   Loaded Kerbal X 3107 2733 2899
Launch Pad 3414 3043 2212.0   Launch Pad 3159 2796 2897
Mechjeb Circularize 3417 3048 2221.0   Mechjeb Circularize 3179 2823 2917
SUM 19288 17147 13091   SUM 18063 15905 17297
DTL av ΔMB 204.2 207.0 -701.0          
Edited by speedwaystar
Link to comment
Share on other sites
smjjames

smjjames

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, rbray89 said:

Not sure why it'd be eating system ram. Note that you probably shouldn't be summing these values, as they are state-based. :) 
Other than eating system ram, these values are closer to what I'd expect. 

And another important thing... If you are doing these tests, be sure to let it load and cache the resized textures once, then run again.

You could have said that earlier, on the letting it load and cache the textures and then restart KSP per run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rbray89

rbray89

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, smjjames said:

You could have said that earlier, on the letting it load and cache the textures and then restart KSP per run.

Sorry, I didn't think about it until just now. Looks like it shouldn't matter too much though I think. might matter more if the original graphics were PNG format though it seems.

8 minutes ago, speedwaystar said:

so load to splash screen twice before recording DTL results? yikes.

Actually, I'm pushing a new version that would be best to load the vessel of test first then exit :) You guys really don't have to do all the profile work right now. I've seen enough from your results that It substantiates my thoughts that one of your mods is holding this one back. If you have a CKAN build, that would be fantastic, or even a zip of your GameData folder if you can afford the bandwidth somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rbray89

rbray89

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Using this release: https://github.com/rbray89/DynamicTextureLoader/releases/tag/DTL-1.4

My Results so far: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1K4PbZKUeqfnJEiDWATf0VlVAzFRFbTGuQV2krammYYo/edit?usp=sharing

Procedure: Perform entire load to craft once.
Then restart KSP using the different graphics profiles.
Settings: full texture resolution, windowed, 1280x720

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sarbian

sarbian

Posted
Posted (edited)

@rbray89 I suggest that you display SystemInfo.graphicsDeviceVersion (or SystemInfo.graphicsDeviceType ) somewhere so that people can be sure of the API they are running in case they did not use the exact correct launch option

 

Edit : and SystemInfo.graphicsMemorySize could have a use too

Edited by sarbian
Link to comment
Share on other sites
linuxgurugamer

linuxgurugamer

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, rbray89 said:

I think I'd expect a bit more savings on the stock install... the results you have look like the resolution isn't set to full or something... I'd expect more savings from the modded section for sure. Think similar performance to stock or better. 

Also keep in mind that display size will affect graphics memory too.

I think I'm going to have to start installing more mods to see where the issue lies. For reference, my "Test" install looks like this: 


12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          000_Toolbar
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          B9_Aerospace
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          CommunityResourcePack
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          CrossFeedEnabler
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          DynamicTextureLoader
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          Firespitter
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          FuelTanksPlus
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          InterstellarFuelSwitch
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          JSI
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          KAX
12/25/2015  03:20 PM             1,397 KAX_ReadMe.txt
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          KineTechAnimation
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          Klockheed_Martian_Gimbal
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          KWRocketry
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          ModuleAnimateEmissive
12/25/2015  03:25 PM            60,928 ModuleManager.2.6.13.dll
12/25/2015  04:23 PM         3,405,486 ModuleManager.ConfigCache
12/25/2015  04:23 PM               148 ModuleManager.ConfigSHA
12/25/2015  04:23 PM             6,605 ModuleManager.Physics
12/25/2015  04:23 PM            44,444 ModuleManager.TechTree
12/25/2015  03:23 PM               719 ModuleManager_README.md
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          MP_Nazari
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          NearFuturePropulsion
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          OPT
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          PlanetaryBaseInc
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          RcsSounds
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          ResGen
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          SmokeScreen
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          SpaceY-Lifters
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          Squad
12/25/2015  06:05 PM               852 toolbar-settings.dat
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          Virgin Kalactic
12/25/2015  07:52 PM    <DIR>          WarpPlugin

 

If anyone has a .ckan file that they can share that has a ton of part mods installed where you are seeing less than great performance, that'd be great.

Here you go:

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/zlniixsib0z2wjr/installed-default.ckan?dl=0

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...