NiranV Dean

Draw Distance , Object Quality and Sky Quality can be the most FPS killing

__________________

Ann Otoole

The overlooked aspect of draw distance is the higher it goes the more regions are connected and the more network bandwidth is used which plays a significant role in performance.

To understand this open a port monitor and increase draw distance 128 at a time and watch how many connections open up and also how many http texture connections start popping.

Inhandra

Personally speaking, I leave certain settings lower until I want to snap a photo. For example, the things I leave on the "low" side until picture time includes Post-Process quality, shadow quality, object quality, avatar quality, and sky quality. I don't notice much of a difference just leaving these low save for shadow quality, as that one's fairly noticeable. Also, managing your draw distance goes a long way, and I can't really think of a good reason aside from temporarily adjusting for a picture to raise it past 256 anyway. I tend to leave it at 128 or 96, just because the places I frequent tend to be small, indoors, and a little cramped anyway, so I get no benefit rendering that far when I'm socializing. Also, don't bother going over 2x for AA.

I've read or heard somewhere that enabling avatar cloth can sometimes boost framerates, so try that too.

Ultimately, you're just going to have to play with the settings and see what you can do and live with day to day, and are willing to change as need dictates.

__________________

Lee Ponzu

I think that all FPS measurements should also include the amount of time it takes to do the experiment.

Hitomi Tiponi

In an earlier test I also included time to fully rez all textures from an empty cache as well. The biggest observation from that was that Viewer 2 based viewers rezzed quicker. But again it was just a test on one piece of kit on one day.

ShrugDangle

Could you clarify that a bit? I may be misunderstanding but I think you mean start measuring time from the moment the login button is depressed until the scene is fully rendered.

When you factor in time you start to run into a few variables that will skew the results in an undesirable way, namely bandwidth - Case A may have a really fast computer but horrible bandwidth, Case B may have a crappy computer may have incredibly fast bandwidth. This has nothing to do with the framerate of the viewer.

All bandwidth does is affects how fast assets are downloaded to the viewer, so measuring the time it takes to download assets to a viewer ergo render a scene from start to finish would skew the results in a way that has nothing to do with the viewer or how it performs on certain hardware.

Romana

Me, I go by the FPS I get once I'm inworld for a while.
Of course, as has been noted before, this can vary widely between computers.
I get the very best performance from Nirans viewer on my oldest PC, whihc sounds counter-intuitive, but probably has something to do with the fact that it has an older nVidia card and my main computers have ATI cards (even though all the H/W in them is newer).
Next best performance is Cool VL, on my ATI-card PCs anyway (my nVidia PC doesn't seem to like it). I can run at high in Cool VL at the same frame rate I get on Dolphin or Catznip on medium, or more. In Cool VL I miss some of my customizations, though, and have problems dressing.
Firestorm runs as slow on my PCs as the official viewer, sometimes slower. IDK why.
So my preferred viewer on my main PCs is Dolphin these days, with Catznip close behind, lacking only Dolphin's client-side AO and, of course, derender, which I've heard is coming.
I'm still holding out hope that there's a way I can tweak the settings on Nirans so I can get the kind of performance on my main PCs as I do on the older one.
30 FPS on high graphics may be no big deal for a lot of you but it's huge for me.

Grid Strom

Ok so I thought id share a viewer comparison with you all

I run the latest Second Life 3.2.5 (247236) while in my some what empty skybox.

If I go out I need to use the Phoenix Viewer 1.6.0.1600 I don’t have any choice

Rendering the same seen on both viewers

Second Life 3.2.5 FPS = 10

Phoenix Viewer 1.6.0.1600 FPS = 49

Graphics Card: GeForce GTX 280/PCI/SSE2/3DNOW!
Windows Graphics Driver Version: 6.14.0012.8558
OpenGL Version: 3.3.0

I have the latest NVIDIA drivers for my video card.

Now here’s the very strange thing I have noticed

Running Second Life viewer 3.2.5 the video card temperature is the same as idle temps
Changing the graphics between low and ultra has absolutely no effect on the performance
When I try setting up a custom application in the NVIDIA control panel for second life 3.2.5 the configurations have absolutely no effect.

I some how feel that this viewer code is not correctly utilizing the full potential of my video card.

ShrugDangle

No it's not, but I do't think it's the viewer. I have a Geforce 260 GTX (a cut down version of your card) running 1920x1080 in my living room HTPC that gets better framerate (65fps on High) in LL v3.2.5 than you're getting on Phoenix.

The key here is that I make sure deferred rendering is on in V3 even if I'm not running shadows. That's the go-faster button for me.

EDIT: Also delete that profile out of your Nvidia control panel. Let the viewer tell the driver what it wants.

Kara Spengler

Exactly, but when it is radically different one day you look for what has changed: the client, the virtual environment, your machine's load, network connections, whatever.

Testing with about all things equal the FPS dropped off for me radically when mesh came out. I was able to replicate the difference going back and forth between clients so that was the sole variable.

With the latest build of FS and testing in my home sim I get 45-50 FPS at ground level with a minamistic avatar (a brony). With my usual avatar it is in the 30s, with a bit of tweaking to my AV (less complex hair and the like) I have a decent looking AV with 40-42 FPS.

__________________

Kara Spengler

LOL!

I was getting GREAT frame rates testing with my brony avatar but realized that for the results not to be biased I should be a bit closer to the normal cluster of textures and prims I have attached to me.

Hitomi Tiponi

As Shrug says that is definitely not right - I am also getting much better performance with my 260GTX. Make sure that LL have not suddenly flipped your common settings such as bandwidth and cache size onto something really low, it does happen. Also have a play with the settings in the Hardware Settings floater, that is a another possibility.

Grid Strom

Ok I tried all those different options nothing I did had any effect on the performance still in the 10’s. I also notice just now that if I turn every thing down to 0 and turn all graphics options off I get 7 FPS so I get even less with every thing turned off.

Hitomi Tiponi

Have you tried deleting your settings file - it will be SecondLife/user_settings/settings.xml wherever your computer stores programme related data - it could be that something is broken in the debug settings somewhere.

I'm assuming this is the same with an alt - if not create or try using one.

Then try looking at the Nvidia Control Panel and try switching any settings in there that look interesting between programme and Nvidia's settings.

ShrugDangle

I want to help you out if I can. Your hardware is good so you shouldn't be getting such crappy performance.

I recommend following the directions on this page but of course substitute "Firestorm" with "Second Life". Get everything cleaned up then try again.

I also recommend downloading the new Nvidia 290.53 beta drivers. Yes they're beta but they're stable. Do a clean install so it blows away any possible framerate killing settings that may have gotten set.

In my experience running V3 based viewers on clean installs of Windows results in really good performance. Running V3 viewers on a machine that's had several versions of V1 viewers then V3 installed on top of them is when things get ugly.

Grid Strom

Ok uninstalled every second life version i had on my pc and got rid of every user file and cache file i could find and i just installed viewer 3.2.6 now im getting 50FPS up in the sky with nutting around me but as soon as i try going some where public like a night club some thing i can do with phoenix just fine the frame rate just curls over and becomes unbearable. Same issues exist non of the graphics options have any effect on the performance. Thanks for your help. I guess once viewer 1 gets Axed i want have much of a social experience on second life until i upgrade my video card.

Hitomi Tiponi

Have you tried stripping off everything including HUDs and then wearing just one of the basic outfits from the Library folder and visit a busy area? You'll look terrible I know, but it would indicate if something on you is making the viewer behave oddly.

Kara Spengler

I would think you *should* be okay if you just use different caches and a new settings file each time you install a browser. To do a full clean install though rename your settings directory tree entirely and let the client build a new one.

All throughout 1.* and 2.* I did not have to rebuild the settings directory. I had my FPS drop off radically in 3.* and my performance did not change whether I did or did not use a new settings directory tree. With the latest browser I am testing my FPS rose again, but that is with a new directory (I have yet to test it with the old one, do not want to possibly jinx a good thing).

ShrugDangle

Maybe all is not lost. You never did mention what kind of CPU you had. That can have a lot to do with performance you see.

Grid Strom

Well yes its only an AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5200+ witch is lower mid range now days. If i had the money I would try and get an AM3 cpu at lest. I also think this cpu could be a bottle neck considering I can buy a similar CPU for $10 says alot.

Hitomi Tiponi

I have an old dual core 2.13 GHz machine and a graphics card that wasn't top of the range even 5 years ago. You should have no trouble with SL with what you have.

Romana

Do you feel that CPU is more or less important than GPU? I am curious because I assumed that SL's better performance on my oldest PC was due to its having a nVidia graphics card (the newer ones have ATI). But the older PC also has an AMD processor while the others have Intel.

Sent from my SCH-I905 using Tapatalk

Grid Strom

I Have been doing abit of study and the fastest CPU my mother board can support are the AMD Phenom II X4 up to about the 945 quad core. I may be able to find a second hand one fairly cheap.

And yes Romana i do believe the CPU speed plays a big part in allowing the video card to process at its maximum throughput as what i feel with my system currently is the CPU is holding it back.

Romana

I am starting to wonder, then, whether BIOS settings play a part, because my AMD PC is also a Phenom.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

ShrugDangle

It's really a good question and hopefully someone that knows more than me will come in and give a more thorough explanation..

I know and have always read and been told that the SL viewer does quite a few things on the CPU.

In my case, and this is possibly subjective, I had an Nvidia 570 paired up with an AMD Phenom X4 and my framerate was satisfactory but when I turned everything on my framerate would drop down in the teens. When I upgraded my CPU to an Intel Core i5 2500k my framerate increased considerably to the point that it never drops below 35fps with everything on at the same spot on my land.

So it would seem that getting a faster CPU is as important if not more important than having a fast video card.