Jump to content

Developer Discussions: Alpha 17


Roland

Developer Discussions: Alpha 17  

1 member has voted

  1. 1. Developer Discussions: Alpha 17

    • Newly Updated
      1
    • Check out the newest reveals by Madmole
      0
    • Over 100 new perk books with set collecting and bonuses
      0


Recommended Posts

I play several different Voxel games and I wanted to know exactly what impact a graphics card really has on game performance so recently I did a simple straight forward experiment where I used one of my older rigs which is a 3.2Ghz Sandybridge 6-core, 32GB of memory and a Sandisk Ultra II SSD as a test bed to see how much impact there would be between two different generation Nvidia Geforce flagship graphics cards a EVGA GTX 780 FTW and a EVGA GTX 1080 Ti SC2 and what I found is interesting.

 

To set up the scene I turned on the FPS meter and called 15 scouts from the console and let them do their thing while I stayed out of the way and as soon as there was approx 100+ zombies on my screen I started shooting.

 

Win10: Disk Cache Disabled.

 

Graphics settings: High

 

Results:

 

GTX 780:

Average FPS: 4

 

GTX 1080 Ti:

Average FPS: 16

 

The old girl had some headroom left after all and the GTX 1080 Ti won the day being 4x faster on the bottom end and keeping the game from grinding to a halt and being completely unplayable.

While your computer core has the most impact on the performance of Voxel games it is obvious that a flagship graphics card still has a considerable impact on performance in extreme situations during game play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I play several different Voxel games and I wanted to know exactly what impact a graphics card really has on game performance so recently I did a simple straight forward experiment where I used one of my older rigs which is a 3.2Ghz Sandybridge 6-core, 32GB of memory and a Sandisk Ultra II SSD as a test bed to see how much impact there would be between two different generation Nvidia Geforce flagship graphics cards a EVGA GTX 780 FTW and a EVGA GTX 1080 Ti SC2 and what I found is interesting.

 

To set up the scene I turned on the FPS meter and called 15 scouts from the console and let them do their thing while I stayed out of the way and as soon as there was approx 100+ zombies on my screen I started shooting.

 

Graphics settings: High

 

Results:

 

GTX 780:

Average FPS: 4

 

GTX 1080 Ti:

Average FPS: 16

 

The old girl had some headroom left after all and the GTX 1080 Ti won the day keeping the game from grinding to a halt and being completely unplayable.

While your computer core has the most impact on the performance of Voxel games it is obvious that a flagship graphics card still has a considerable impact on performance in extreme situations during game play.

 

strange I get 120-200 FPS with my GTX790, EVO SSD, i7 (3.4Ghz - don't recall) my rig is 2 1/2 years old and I only drop down to 40-60 when I hit an office tower and it settles around 60-70FPS. I have full on textures, high on most other and distance set to 80 percent. I play in HD (1920x1080) and windowed mode. I do turn off sun shafts and motion blur and water set to medium

Link to comment
Share on other sites

strange I get 120-200 FPS with my GTX790, EVO SSD, i7 (3.4Ghz - don't recall) my rig is 2 1/2 years old and I only drop down to 40-60 when I hit an office tower and it settles around 60-70FPS. I have full on textures, high on most other and distance set to 80 percent. I play in HD (1920x1080) and windowed mode. I do turn off sun shafts and motion blur and water set to medium

 

Keep in mind your GTX 790 is considerably more powerful than my GTX 780, it has a staggering 4992 CUDA cores, with 10GB of GDDR5 memory with a 640-bit memory bus, you can't even compare the two because they aren't even in the same class of card, in fact my GTX 1080 Ti only has 3584 CUDA cores and a 352-bit memory bus.

 

Keeping that in mind I don't lag in office buildings either, I don't really start to lag until I have 100+ zombies packed into a 10 square yard space climbing all over each other trying to get to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I play several different Voxel games and I wanted to know exactly what impact a graphics card really has on game performance so recently I did a simple straight forward experiment where I used one of my older rigs which is a 3.2Ghz Sandybridge 6-core, 32GB of memory and a Sandisk Ultra II SSD as a test bed to see how much impact there would be between two different generation Nvidia Geforce flagship graphics cards a EVGA GTX 780 FTW and a EVGA GTX 1080 Ti SC2 and what I found is interesting.

 

To set up the scene I turned on the FPS meter and called 15 scouts from the console and let them do their thing while I stayed out of the way and as soon as there was approx 100+ zombies on my screen I started shooting.

 

Win10: Disk Cache Disabled.

 

Graphics settings: High

 

Results:

 

GTX 780:

Average FPS: 4

 

GTX 1080 Ti:

Average FPS: 16

 

The old girl had some headroom left after all and the GTX 1080 Ti won the day being 4x faster on the bottom end and keeping the game from grinding to a halt and being completely unplayable.

While your computer core has the most impact on the performance of Voxel games it is obvious that a flagship graphics card still has a considerable impact on performance in extreme situations during game play.

 

I have a GTX 660 and I'm thinking about building a new PC for A17 lmao

 

I get serious slowdowns since the introduction of skyscrapers even on the lowest settings. I average about 30-40 FPS in major cities which isn't good enough for competitive play. It's been a while since I built a rig (obviously) so I'm saving up to build a fresh one here in a month or two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a GTX 660 and I'm thinking about building a new PC for A17 lmao

 

I get serious slowdowns since the introduction of skyscrapers even on the lowest settings. I average about 30-40 FPS in major cities which isn't good enough for competitive play. It's been a while since I built a rig (obviously) so I'm saving up to build a fresh one here in a month or two.

 

Good for you, what are you aiming for?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good for you, what are you aiming for?

 

Nothing too crazy, just a fresh build with mid-high tier parts. A 1080 with a nice processor (i7-7820 maybe?), 32 gigs of ram and an ssd. I don't play a lot of AAA so I just need something that can give me steady performance on medium settings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing too crazy, just a fresh build with mid-high tier parts. A 1080 with a nice processor (i7-7820 maybe?), 32 gigs of ram and an ssd. I don't play a lot of AAA so I just need something that can give me steady performance on medium settings.

 

The i7-7820X is an excellent entry level choice for the LGA 2066 platform, I own one and it is blazing fast and I would highly recommend it, also since it is LGA 2066 there is the added benefit that you can upgrade to an i9 later if you need more power. I would also recommend no less than a Samsung 960 EVO M.2 NVMe SSD because it has a huge impact on Voxel games like 7DTD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are mostly correct. There is a bit of a hype train surrounding this. Its mostly a positioning move for A18 development. The good news is that they were able to switch over with minimal issues. For now the game is mostly going to be as if they kept it at Unity 2017.

 

Rain meet parade.

 

I knew it wouldn't affect A17. I just didn't see the need to state it. I am sure the ones that would understand already knew it wouldn't really do much for A17 and everyone else wouldn't understand anyway. I'm still HYPED!!!! :)

 

- - - Updated - - -

 

World is 255 high, and -60, -59, -58 are reserved for bedrock.

 

...it has to be at SOME number, might as well be that.

 

I never did understand why it wasn't just 0, 1, and 2 for bedrock and 4 being the lowest. I mean it really doesn't matter but the world going from 0-255 would make more sense logically to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never did understand why it wasn't just 0, 1, and 2 for bedrock and 4 being the lowest. I mean it really doesn't matter but the world going from 0-255 would make more sense logically to me.

 

0 is sea level iirc

 

Makes sense for bedrock to be well below that, in general

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I play several different Voxel games and I wanted to know exactly what impact a graphics card really has on game performance so recently I did a simple straight forward experiment where I used one of my older rigs which is a 3.2Ghz Sandybridge 6-core, 32GB of memory and a Sandisk Ultra II SSD as a test bed to see how much impact there would be between two different generation Nvidia Geforce flagship graphics cards a EVGA GTX 780 FTW and a EVGA GTX 1080 Ti SC2 and what I found is interesting.

 

To set up the scene I turned on the FPS meter and called 15 scouts from the console and let them do their thing while I stayed out of the way and as soon as there was approx 100+ zombies on my screen I started shooting.

 

Win10: Disk Cache Disabled.

 

Graphics settings: High

 

Results:

 

GTX 780:

Average FPS: 4

 

GTX 1080 Ti:

Average FPS: 16

 

The old girl had some headroom left after all and the GTX 1080 Ti won the day being 4x faster on the bottom end and keeping the game from grinding to a halt and being completely unplayable.

While your computer core has the most impact on the performance of Voxel games it is obvious that a flagship graphics card still has a considerable impact on performance in extreme situations during game play.

 

Well, it does make a difference of course. But I would be willing to bet it would be a lot harder to quantify that difference between say a 1060 and a 1080 than the 1080 and 780. The 1080 would make a text box run smoother than that 780. Lol

 

- - - Updated - - -

 

0 is sea level iirc

 

Makes sense for bedrock to be well below that, in general

 

I can see that. But really, in a game does knowing sea level ever matter? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see that. But really, in a game does knowing sea level ever matter? :)

 

At one time it did matter to the terrain generator but that was changed quite recently. It used to be that any air block below a certain height was changed to water. One of those things where a mechanic which is no longer used was left in place because it would have been more work to remove it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being at a negative elevation makes me feel lower than being at an elevation of 1. It's an arbitrary number choice but it's more engaging to use both sides of the number scale than to just start at 0

 

Like do you use black to white in a drawing or middle-gray to white?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being at a negative elevation makes me feel lower than being at an elevation of 1. It's an arbitrary number choice but it's more engaging to use both sides of the number scale than to just start at 0

 

Like do you use black to white in a drawing or middle-gray to white?

 

Depends at what level I want the heightmap clamped :-)

 

Even on this planet there are plenty of places on land which are below sea level... I'm looking at you Holland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends at what level I want the heightmap clamped :-)

 

Even on this planet there are plenty of places on land which are below sea level... I'm looking at you Holland.

 

I'm not making any claims of the mechanics of actual water blocks. I'm just saying -57-255 is a better scale than 0-255 (or 0-312). It makes you feel like they are using a wider range of values even if there are the same amount of vertical blocks in the world, and 0 as a value is not without some significance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not making any claims of the mechanics of actual water blocks. I'm just saying -57-255 is a better scale than 0-255 (or 0-312). It makes you feel like they are using a wider range of values even if there are the same amount of vertical blocks in the world, and 0 as a value is not without some significance.

 

I was replying to your comment about the drawing. In terrain generation a heightmap is often, but not always, a grayscale image from black to white. Sometimes it's easier to limit the depth of colour to adjust the height instead of the code, sometimes it's the other way around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was replying to your comment about the drawing. In terrain generation a heightmap is often, but not always, a grayscale image from black to white. Sometimes it's easier to limit the depth of colour to adjust the height instead of the code, sometimes it's the other way around.

 

new concept for an art gallery using only heightmaps???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it does make a difference of course. But I would be willing to bet it would be a lot harder to quantify that difference between say a 1060 and a 1080 than the 1080 and 780. The 1080 would make a text box run smoother than that 780. Lol

 

You had me curious so naturally I checked and the results might surprise you.

 

GTX 780 3GB vs GTX 1060 3GB

http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-780-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1060-3GB/2164vs3646

 

GTX 780 3GB vs GTX 1060 6GB

http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-780-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1060-6GB/2164vs3639

 

GTX 1080 Ti vs GTX 1060 6GB

http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-1080-Ti-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1060-6GB/3918vs3639

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At one time it did matter to the terrain generator but that was changed quite recently. It used to be that any air block below a certain height was changed to water. One of those things where a mechanic which is no longer used was left in place because it would have been more work to remove it.

 

You know, just after posting this earlier I thought to myself. I bet the water generation system is keyed off of it. :) So they changed that recently?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I know the benchmarks between a 1060 and a 1080 are off the charts. I'm talking more about the difference in a Voxel game. It could be a big difference. I haven't actually been able to test it.

 

BUT stop making me think that. I tell myself my poor little 1060 is fine for the games I play so I don't need a 1080. Don't burst my bubble. Lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not making any claims of the mechanics of actual water blocks. I'm just saying -57-255 is a better scale than 0-255 (or 0-312). It makes you feel like they are using a wider range of values even if there are the same amount of vertical blocks in the world, and 0 as a value is not without some significance.

 

If 7 Days ever throws a release party and we are all invited I imagine the conversation that goes on would require HEAVY amounts of alcohol and lots of loud music.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, just after posting this earlier I thought to myself. I bet the water generation system is keyed off of it. :) So they changed that recently?

 

There have been huge changes to the terrain system over the years, it may even be a hangover from when we had flat biomes separated by rivers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...