CMBB : How can I improve framerate/reduce proc load ??

[Pascal DI FOLCO]

Hi,

I have a quite subpar machine : Athlon500, 256 Mb RAM, GeForce2 64Mb.

So with CMBB, everything coughs when I play large+ scenarios, up to being unplayable in Huge scens (I tried To The Volga : 4 min load time, then choppy as hell, with 1" response time to camera moves...)

Though, I don't have much worser results in 1024*768 than 800*600, so I suspect the proc is the culprit, more than the Graphics card.

So what can I do to improve that ?

I can see only two ways of limiting workload :

* Less polys : only possible change is 2 men/squad, doesn't seem to be very effective

* Less textures : trees off/../full, doodads off...full

This one seems to be more effective, trees in particular (perhaps also the new "trees in the wind" move also plays a role in increasing processor load)

* Smaller textures : the biggest ones, that are always used, are Grass/Steppe/Snow and Buildings.

No lo res textures exists currently for that, so I couldn't test (resizing a couple hundred BMPs manually is tedious and I don't know how to make that automatically...)

Anyway it seems to me that this last solution will lighten Graphics load, but not much processor load, so I doubt it will be effective..

Any advice ? Other ideas ? Experience ?

Thanks.

[WWB]

To the Volga is a bad comparison. It even chokes my Athalon XP 2000+/GeForce 4 card. Actually, it chokes it almost as bad is it did my faithful Celeron 800/GeForce 2.

Regarding map scrolling, one big issue is what kind of GeForce you have. Is that an MX of some sort or a GTS (I had a GTS--there is a big difference).

Turning trees, doodads, etc. off can help a bit. Turning sounds off can help as well in some cases, at least while you are processing.

The time it takes to process is a direct function of your processor. Upgrading to a TBird-1ghz is probably possible with your motherboard, and not altogether expensive.

My experience has been that while huge battles could take a while to process on my old machine, they would scroll about just fine.

WWB

[mchlstrt]

I think the 'LoRes' thing is the key. I'll double check but it seems a lot of the BB .BMPs are twice as big as BO 'HiRes' (!), which is 4x as many 1s & 0s, 16 x BO LoRes. Even in BO I always thought it would be nice to have a 'LoRes Special' Site, since all LoRes looks better than differently 'downsampled' mixed together ( I downsampled all my fav HiRes Mods to use on my PB by hand). This still seems to be true even w/ BB's improved funcionality in this regard. How do you start a Website, anyway?

Strt

[murpes]

Originally posted by Pascal DI FOLCO:

[snip]

* Smaller textures : the biggest ones, that are always used, are Grass/Steppe/Snow and Buildings.

No lo res textures exists currently for that, so I couldn't test (resizing a couple hundred BMPs manually is tedious and I don't know how to make that automatically...)

[snip]

there is an excellent freeware utility called Irfanview that will batch convert just about anything to anything else. <a href="http://www.Irfanview.com" target="_blank">www.Irfanview.com </a> I've had good results getting CMBO to run on my craptop by reducing the color of all the bmps to 16 colors ... really, it doesn't look that bad. Every bmp in this screenshot is in 16 colors and low res. It's all in the quality of the program you use to do it with! Hint: Windows Paintbrush isn't all that good.

Also, I've selectively reduced the resolution of a bunch of textures ... you can do all of them, or go the more tedious route of reducing the ones you don't think you'll notice that much. I've found the grass is a good place to start.

As always, back up your original bmp folder so you can undo something that you don't like. Good luck!

[Scipio]

Originally posted by wwb_99:

To the Volga is a bad comparison. It even chokes my Athalon XP 2000+/GeForce 4 card. Actually, it chokes it almost as bad is it did my faithful Celeron 800/GeForce 2.

Regarding map scrolling, one big issue is what kind of GeForce you have. Is that an MX of some sort or a GTS (I had a GTS--there is a big difference).

Turning trees, doodads, etc. off can help a bit. Turning sounds off can help as well in some cases, at least while you are processing.

The time it takes to process is a direct function of your processor. Upgrading to a TBird-1ghz is probably possible with your motherboard, and not altogether expensive.

My experience has been that while huge battles could take a while to process on my old machine, they would scroll about just fine.

WWB

This is interesting, I noticed the same in 'To the Wolga', running a similiar hardware (AMD2200+, Geforce4 4600Ti).

BTW, is it possible to proof and log how much VRAM is used?

[Pascal DI FOLCO]

*messed up while replying, dbl post*

[ October 07, 2002, 04:38 AM: Message edited by: Pascal DI FOLCO ]

[Pascal DI FOLCO]

Originally posted by murpes:

there is an excellent freeware utility called Irfanview that will batch convert just about anything to anything else. <a href="http://http://http://http://www.Irfanview.com" target="_blank">www.Irfanview.com </a> I've had good results getting CMBO to run on my craptop by reducing the color of all the bmps to 16 colors ... really, it doesn't look that bad. Every bmp in this screenshot is in 16 colors and low res. It's all in the quality of the program you use to do it with! Hint: Windows Paintbrush isn't all that good.

Also, I've selectively reduced the resolution of a bunch of textures ... you can do all of them, or go the more tedious route of reducing the ones you don't think you'll notice that much. I've found the grass is a good place to start.

As always, back up your original bmp folder so you can undo something that you don't like. Good luck!

Thanks for the tip, Irfanview is a very good software !

I'm considering downsampling all CMBB BMPs to 256 colors : after some tests the difference is not even seeable, and BMP size is divided by 3 ! If graphics load is proportional to BMP size I won't even have to reduce resolution, and else I can go that way and cut off all big BMPs in half again.

Will keep you informed of the results

[ October 07, 2002, 04:38 AM: Message edited by: Pascal DI FOLCO ]

[Caesar]

Pascal DI FOLCO

I wouldn't go reducing the number of colours of any bitmap under 1500 bytes, this will probably increase its size. 256 colour bitmaps have a 1024 byte colour table. I would suggest you sort by size and only select the bigger bitmaps.

[BeauCoupDinkyDau]

I have 256MB RAM and a 128MB Geforce 4 card on a P4-1.5Ghz. I think I need more RAM myself. I tried dropping to 800x600, but still get a some what lower framerate just like in the higher resolution. I think all of these low frame rate problems on strong rigs may just be a limitaion on the CM engine itself. Any thoughts?

[mchlstrt]

Does anyone know, & can you explain, what saves more VRam? I Downsampled a bunch of Mods to use on my PB, but it never occurred to me to change the color whatis. Is what you're discussing different than 'XX bit' color, like I see in a Photoshop 5.5 menu? CM graphics seem to be 16 bit.

Strt

[Caesar]

mchlstrt,

The CMBB bitmaps that I have looked at (and that is only a few) are 24 bit.

This means that they use 3 bytes of memory per pixel plus a block of header data of around 50 bytes per bitmap. Assuming the program is using the graphics as loaded and is not converting them in any way internally, you can substantially reduce the amount of memory used by the larger bmps by changing to 256 colours. These bitmaps will use one byte per pixel + 1024 bytes per bmp as a colour table + around 50 bytes per bmp of header data. 16 colour bitmaps use only 4 bits per pixel i.e. 2 pixels per byte + 48 bytes of colour table per bmp + the ~50 byte header.

I hope this helps, though I am not sure that these sorts of changes are all the answers on the more powerful PCs. I suspect there are other factors we do not know about coming into play. I would have thought that if the graphics are being preloaded into the VRAM and then applied by the video card, then cards like the Ge Force 4 128MB that Vader's Jester has would have caused no problems at all.

[Tanks a Lot]

I believe BTS/BFC has said that reducing the number of colors on BMPs has no effect on framerates. Only reducing their resolution will help.

[Pascal DI FOLCO]

Originally posted by Tanks a Lot:

I believe BTS/BFC has said that reducing the number of colors on BMPs has no effect on framerates. Only reducing their resolution will help.

Yep, I did it (converting to 256 colors) on all 193K+ BMPs and didn't notice any difference in looks nor in framerate - but this was judged on sight alone as I don't know how to have CMBB shows FPS ... :confused:

Anyway it's a good deal overall for small HDs as HD space used went down 40%, CMBB weight going down from 1.16 Gb to 775 Mb

I now have to try lowering res, I think a 50% reduction (in one dimension only) can be a good compromise in perf vs quality, the resulting res being in fact CMBO "hi res". HD space will be down another 30%, all will now fit unzipped on a CD ...

[Tanks a Lot]

Originally posted by Pascal DI FOLCO:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Tanks a Lot:

I believe BTS/BFC has said that reducing the number of colors on BMPs has no effect on framerates. Only reducing their resolution will help.

Yep, I did it (converting to 256 colors) on all 193K+ BMPs and didn't notice any difference in looks nor in framerate - but this was judged on sight alone as I don't know how to have CMBB shows FPS ... :confused:

Anyway it's a good deal overall for small HDs as HD space used went down 40%, CMBB weight going down from 1.16 Gb to 775 Mb

I now have to try lowering res, I think a 50% reduction (in one dimension only) can be a good compromise in perf vs quality, the resulting res being in fact CMBO "hi res". HD space will be down another 30%, all will now fit unzipped on a CD ... </font>

[Pascal DI FOLCO]

Thanks for the info, FRAPS works well !

Indeed it looks like I have a pretty bad 9-12 FPS in CMBO and CMBB in medium sized scenarios, but I just realized I kept 2xFSAA on :eek: ...

Will put it off, reduce biggies BMP res and retest ...

[Bogdan]

Originally posted by Pascal DI FOLCO:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Tanks a Lot:

I believe BTS/BFC has said that reducing the number of colors on BMPs has no effect on framerates. Only reducing their resolution will help.

Yep, I did it (converting to 256 colors) on all 193K+ BMPs and didn't notice any difference in looks nor in framerate - but this was judged on sight alone as I don't know how to have CMBB shows FPS ... :confused:

Anyway it's a good deal overall for small HDs as HD space used went down 40%, CMBB weight going down from 1.16 Gb to 775 Mb

I now have to try lowering res, I think a 50% reduction (in one dimension only) can be a good compromise in perf vs quality, the resulting res being in fact CMBO "hi res". HD space will be down another 30%, all will now fit unzipped on a CD ... </font>

[Bogdan]

Pascal Di Folco said :

"No lo res textures exists currently for that, so I couldn't test (resizing a couple hundred BMPs manually is tedious and I don't know how to make that automatically...)"

I've checked it in Photoshop : it's possible ! You can apply a script automatically to all the pictures you've currently opened in the application.

Is there a list of BMP files for buildings, terrains and other big textures here ? With this list i could test resizing pictures by 50%.

I hope all this will be a good solution to increase framerate : I've downloaded a grass mod for CMBB. In the zipfile, i took a BMP file (16 bit color, 512x512 px, 679ko) and resize it the half, in 256 colors : 66ko !!

Is that the solution ?

Thanks for your answers.

Cheers.

[mchlstrt]

That sounds right. One could probably reduce a lot of them to a 1/4th & still have decent quality. If somebody does this on a big scale let us knows what you find.

strt

[Bogdan]

Originally posted by mchlstrt:

That sounds right. One could probably reduce a lot of them to a 1/4th & still have decent quality. If somebody does this on a big scale let us knows what you find.

strt

Hello,

I've tried to resize ground textures and buildings too, at 75% : a 512x512 BMP is now 128x128 (like many in CMBO) : the result is good, and the framerate seems to be better.

Photoshop can resize many pictures automatically. But i need a BMP number list, in order to check if i've resized all the files.

Bye.

[mchlstrt]

The only way to get a BMP list right now is from one's own BMP Folder. They've said they'll try to get us a complete List, but it will be a while at best, with Patches & such. I'd also ask if BXX can give A Second Opinion Concerning Color DownSampling Affecting Performance? Please keep us informed as to what Performance gains you get from your efforts.

Thanks

strt

[Bogdan]

Originally posted by mchlstrt:

The only way to get a BMP list right now is from one's own BMP Folder. They've said they'll try to get us a complete List, but it will be a while at best, with Patches & such. I'd also ask if BXX can give A Second Opinion Concerning Color DownSampling Affecting Performance? Please keep us informed as to what Performance gains you get from your efforts.

Thanks

strt

Ok... I think i've to make this list by myself

Concerning "Color Downsampling", I have done anything yet : my BMP are still 16 bits. Reading this thread, i've noticed that reducing the files to 256 colors doesn't affect the framerate.

In an other hand, I'm wondering myself about resizing the unit's textures (tanks) by 50%... in order to improve framerate again. Same problem with background pictures. I've also noticed that is a bit dangerous to resize BMP with "pink spots" (symbolising transparency). For now, I only resize "empty" BMP (without pink spots), so the trees stay the same as the originals. But, it may be possible to use CMBO tree textures, replacing big CMBB ones ? Here again a BMP list would be fully appreciated !

Anyway, I will continue my "Experimentations", and try "Color Downsampling"...

Bye.

PS : Who's BXX ? :confused:

[mchlstrt]

I can't bring myself to use 'BFC' (I keep thinking fried chicken) instead of 'BTS', so I use that.

If you're using Photoshop 5.5 you can set 'Interpolation' to 'Nearest Neighbor' in 'Preferences' for the Pinkie Problem. It has the side effect of sort of 'sharpening' the image, & seems to me to help more often than hurt. I would think most Graphics Prgrms have something similar.

strt

[Bogdan]

Hello,

Thanks for the tip with Photoshop mchlstrt, i'll try

Blanar said :

"At least some of the terrain elements can be swapped. I'm using my favorite roads, rivers and train track sets from CMBO in CMBB. You can always save the originals, try them and see if they work. I haven't tried moving the other way, from CMBB to CMBO, but the higher resolutions might cause problems."

Swaping BMP from CMBO to CMBB might be a solution too to improve framerate. Generally, CMBO textures are smaller than CMBB ones. But, looking at my two BMP's folders, it seems that only roads, rivers and train track sets are compatible. Maybe trees too ? If it doesn't, resizing is the last possibility.

Question : what do you think about resizing by 50% tank's textures and backgrounds ?

Bye.

[mchlstrt]

I travel a bit w/ a PowerBook. I loaded it w/ my favorite LR Mods, & if I couldn't find one for something I downsized a good HR Mod. This is for EVERTHING. I was happy enough w/ the results. That is why I say the BB standard res could probably be dropped 75% for EVERYTHING. BTW, because of the way BO handles downsampling, & this effect seems to be improved but not eleminated in BB, it is important to have consistant 'Resolutions' across everything as much as possible, otherwise CM will dwnsample HR to LR while making LR into NoRes, & that is very noticable & distracting.

strt

[Bogdan]

Originally posted by mchlstrt:

I travel a bit w/ a PowerBook. I loaded it w/ my favorite LR Mods, & if I couldn't find one for something I downsized a good HR Mod. This is for EVERTHING. I was happy enough w/ the results. That is why I say the BB standard res could probably be dropped 75% for EVERYTHING. BTW, because of the way BO handles downsampling, & this effect seems to be improved but not eleminated in BB, it is important to have consistant 'Resolutions' across everything as much as possible, otherwise CM will dwnsample HR to LR while making LR into NoRes, & that is very noticable & distracting.

strt

I see... In my opinion, the process must be used with HiRes textures only. Many light BMP, in BB don't need to be resized (doodads for example), but they're not so numerous ! According to you, droping all pictures to 75% produce a good effect, without altering graphics, and increase framerate.

You know, with my computer, framerate in CMBO is good,even with big maps (2500x1500 meters) and fluent, it's my objective with CMBB.

I think too that, before beginning, I have to make a good comparison between BO's BMP folders and BB one, in order to know what exactly, in BO, is a HiRes (size, dimensions). I don't want to downsize all textures too much, but recreat the same kind of graphics between BO and BB.

Let's experiment !