MMO test

We'd like to collect some framerate data for a MMO renderer test. Can you kindly download the following file:

http://server.conitec.net/down/mmo.zip

and test the files mmo_crowd.exe and mmo_terrain.exe? We're interested in the average fps value over about 60 seconds run time. Please post the average fps you're getting here, together with your CPU clock rate and 3D card type.

The used engine is not A7, but a special MMO engine on top of the A7 scene manager.

Background: It turns out that we can not use the originally planned Granny 3D model renderer for the MMO, so we have to develop our own. While the A7 network could handle thousands of players per server surprisingly well, the bottleneck was simultaneously rendering thousand bones animated high poly models, as required for the MMO. A7 could only manage half of that. Therefore we originally intended to add a plugin with Granny 3D. That's one of the best and fastest model rendering engines.

Unfortunately due to financial considerations by our client, we can't use Granny 3D anymore - the license fees for an MMO apparently were too hefty. Thus we're supposed to develop our own renderer. This upload is for some early performance tests of a prototype renderer on as many systems as possible.

Thank you for your help!

Here are some values for you:

Testmachine: Lenovo T60 Laptop

CPU: 2.1 Ghz Intel Dual Core
GfxCard: ATI Mobility Radeon X1400

FPS:

mmo_crowd.exe: ~30 FPS
mmo_terrain.exe: ~18 FPS

Those values are surprisingly good for this gfx card as this laptop is not intended to be used for games.

During the tests was also a big vmWare application running; don't know if this slowed down the test a bit ... I will repeat the test this evening and post new values if they are different.

Regards,
Pegamode.

most of the tester will use pcs of today so I made a test with my old pc for surfing etc.
amd 3400 64bit ( so 2,4 ghz)
nvidia 6200TC

it's a really old pc, (1gb ram lol)

so mmo_crowd.exe was around 7 fps (both in windowed and fullscreen plus it started around 13,12 fps)
and mmo_terrain.exe was around 4 to 6 fps ( again in wondowed and fullscreen mode)

I know my pc is old ( I still test everything on this pc i like it to see the difference to nowadays pcs)
hm good luck with your own renderer

this appart did u take a look into Horde3D ?
ok it's build uppon opengl but maybe you could have some ideas from it. it's open source (and they changed the license, now its less restrictive than before). I remembered a demo of Horde3d and it was good for rendering a lot of models
simultaneously. maybe some ideas of how they handle it, is useful even if it's implented on opengl.

nice greetings

CPU: Core2Quad Q9300 @ 2.50 Ghz
GPU: Nvidia 9600GT 1gb (core clock:700mhz memory clock:2000mhz(2x1000) )

corwd: 70fps constant
terrain: 55-65fps

MMO Crowd I am getting around 60fps full screen and around 50 windowed.
MMO Terain I get around 55-60fps fullscreen sometimes peeks to 75fps. Windowed I get around 45-50 peeking to 60fps.

My specs are in my sig.

C2D 2,40 Ghz, GeForce 8600M GT 512MB

Crowd: 48fps
Terrain: 44fps


C2D 1,86 Ghz, Radeon HD4650 1024MB

Crowd: 47fps
Terrain: 41fps

~41 fps for crowd;
~30 fps for terrain;

Pentium D 3.00GHz
nVidia 9600GT 512MB

Jibb

EDIT: Btw, I very much liked seeing bones.fx Are we going to see matBones, inBoneIndices and inBoneWeights on the beta page soon?

Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q9400 @ 2.66GHz (4 CPUs), ~2.7GHz
Card name: NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GT

crowd: 52-60 fps
terrain: 32-51 fps

CPU: Intel PentiumD 820 @ 2.8GHz (2 CPUs)
GPU: NVidia Geforce 6600gt

crowd: 22fps
terrain: 16-20fps

Don´t work on windows 7. Get a direct x error. And i have direct x 11

crowd : 26-30
terrain : 30-35

Processor: Intel Core Duo 2,8 GhZ Graphic : 9600 GT 512 MB DDR-3

When not changing the camera position, I have got about 100 fps in windowed mode in both. If I change the position in the crwod demo so that I see as many models as possible, I´ve got about 50fps.

I am running it on a 64bit Windows 7 System with an Intel i5 750 with 2.66 GHz, quadcore and a NVIDIA Geforce 8800gts 640mb.


Rasch: you have to install dx... You should get that problem with all kind of games if you don´t.

CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600, 4x 2,4 Ghz
GPU: ATI Radeon HD 3780, Clock: 780 Mhz, Memory 512 MB at 950 Mhz (GDDR3)

crowd: 55 to 70 FPS
terrain: 39 to 49 FPS

Same problem with Windows 7 here, you need to manually copy the file "d3dx9_30.dll" from the 3DGS install folder to the mmo folder to make it start. looks like windows 7 doesn't have it in its system directory, despite having dx 11.

Oops, I got some pretty bad results.

MMO Crowd: ~40 FPS.
MMO Terrain: ~35 FPS.

Core 2 Duo 2.53 GHz, NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT.

And you know, this "MMO Engine 0.1.6" looks nice:

dx11 doesnt include dx9. install dx9. it works for me on win7.

MMO Crowd: ~125 FPS
MMO Terrain: ~115 FPS



Have a new computer since yesterday.

Windows 7 64bit
i7 975 4x3.3GHz
12 GB Ram
2 x Asus GTX295

Type: ASUS R1E
Display adapter: Mobile Intel 965 Express Chipset Family
Processor: Core 2Duo CPU
OS: Vista 32bit

Crowd: 11-14 fps
Terrain: 7 fps

CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600: à 2,4 GHz
GPU: Nvidea GTX 275 AMP! by Zotac 512 Mb

Crowd: 30-40

Terrain 40-50

~60-65FPS crowd
~50-60FPS terrain

CPU: intel core2 Extreme Q6850 @ 3.0GHZ (4CPU's)
GPU: Nvidia Geforce 8800 GTX (768MB)

well...

crowd: 6-10
terrain: 6-10

am aware my pc isnt top of the line especially since my video card got burnt but my pc does run cod4 and a couple other games at higher fps so this is rather interesting not that cod has this many ents onscreen

The pc isn't very good.

CPU: Intel Celeron 3.06 GHz
GPU: Ati X700

crowd: 10-20 fps
terrain: 10-15 fps

System:
P4 Integrated GPU (Intel)-- waiting on new card
Speed 2.6 GHz
Windows XP3

Results:
Crowd FPS 8
Terrain- generates error and closes before it renders

I plan on getting a new card, but a lot of folks will only have integrated GPUs, so perhaps these results are useful.

CPU: AMD Athlon64 X2
GPU: GeForce 9800 GTX+

Crowd: 60 FPS Constant
Terrain: 45-60 FPS

CPU : Intel E6300
GPU : HD 2600 PRO

crowd : 47-60 fps
terrain : 35 - 49 fps

CPU : i7 965 3.2 Ghz
GPU : Geforce Fx 9500
Ram : 2x2 GB DDR3 2000 Mhz
Xp Pro 64 bit sp2

Terrain : 39-72 Fps Windowed
Crowd : 42-57 Fps Windowed

CPU: amd64 5600+ 2.8GHz
GPU: 8600GT
RAM: 2GB
OS: vista

crowd 46-53fps
terrain 32-47 fps

CPU: Intel Core i7 920 (2.66Ghz)
GPU: nVidia GeForce 8800GTX
RAM: 6 GB DDR3
OS: Win 7 Professional

Crowd (average): 109 fps
Terrain (lowest): 85 fps
Terrain (average): 107 fps

CPU: Athlon64 AM2 3000 BOX AMD
GPU: ATI Radeon RX1600 PRO 256MB MSI
RAM: 1GB DDR2 PC667 KINGSTON
OS: XP

Crowd: 30-38 fps
Terrain: 25-36 fps

Crowd: 65 fps
Terrain: 50 fps

Intel Dual Core 2.4 GHz
nVidia 8900

Okay, my Pc is

CPU: AMD Athlon 2000 (~2 Ghz)
Graphiccard = ATI Radeon 9800 Pro (128Mb)

terrain = 5-10 FPS (not very playable)
crowd = 15-25 FPS(good to play, everything worked, moving is playable ;))

Liam

Crowd:
Windowed 40-48, mostly around 43
Fullscreen 36-38

Terrain:
Windowed: 30-45, mostly around 36
Fullscreen: 30-40, mostly around 34

Athlon 3700+ (single core)
GF7900GT
2GB Ram
Windows XP

Crowd:
Windowed 58-63
Fullscreen 42-47

Terrain:
Windowed: 45-70, mostly 60
Fullscreen: 42-70, mostly 60

Athlon 6400+ (dual core)
GF 9800GT
3.25 GB Ram
Windows XP SP3

Crowd:
Windowed 10-17
Fullscreen 8-15

Terrain:
Windowed: 11-13
Fullscreen: 10-13

Pentium 3.40GHz (dual core)
NVIDIA GF 7300GS
2.00 GB Ram
Windows XP SP3

intel e2200 dual core 2.2Ghz
Nvidia 9800GTX

crowd 40-50 initially, 19 with all ents visible.
terrain: 42-49 average, 35-39 with as many ents as i could keep on screen without them being clipped.



Edit: also wanted to add, whoever did the animations for the crowd people did a tremendous job.

Resolution 1680*1050 don't go in fullscreen.


Resolution 1280*1024
Crowd :
Window : 40-46
Fullscreen : 45-48

Terrain :
Window : 36-44
Fulllscreen : 39-52


Win XP
Athlon Dual Core 4600 + (2.41 Ghz)
2 Go Ram
Ge Force GTX 285

With ~1150 visible people (~443K polies) I get the framerate down to 15.

Crowd:
Windowed 21-25, mostly around 24
Fullscreen - not work

Terrain:
Windowed: 33-38, mostly around 34
Fullscreen: 30-35, mostly around 34

System Specs:
HP Pavilion dv6555en (loptop)
Windows 7 Ultimate
DirectX v11
Intel Core2 Duo CPU: T5450 @ 1.66GHz
2.00GB DDR2 Ram
GeForce 8400M GS

Crowd:
Windowed: average 55
Fullscreen: no difference

Terrain:
Windowed: average 45
Fullscreen: average 55


Windows Vista SP2
AMD Athlon X2 6000+ Dual Core (3GHz)
NVIDIA GeForce 9600GT
4GB RAM (or actually 3.5 because it's a 32bit system)

Crowd:
60 Frames per sec, both in window and fullscreen

Terrain:
Average 70 Frames per sec, 60 in fullscreen mode

Specs:

intel Dual Core (E8400) @ 3.0 GHz
NVidia Geforce 9800 GTX+ w/ 512 mb RAM
4 GB RAM there, 3.5 running because of 32 bit.

And on another PC:

Crowd: ~12
Terrain: ~21

GPU: nVidea GeForce 6600
CPU: Intel Dualcore à 3,2 GHz

ACER 4736ZG notebook
Intel T4200 2GHz 2GBDDR3, GEFORCE G105M 512MDDR2
Windows Vista 64-bit Home Premium

crowd: 23-24
terrain: 30-40

C2D 2,40 Ghz, GeForce 7950 GT 512MB

Crowd: ~51fps
Terrain: ~48fps

crowd: 78fps
terrain: 63fps

crowd: lowest was 25 fps when zooming out (1000 ents visible), while on the ground it was around 57.
terrain: lowest was 40 when zooming out, on the ground between 44 and 54.

Geforce 9800GT
AMD Athlon Dual 3.10 GHz
Windows XP

crowd: 60fps (Crowd.exe wird Von Norton Internet Security Online als Bedrohung bewertet und Blockiert. Nur im Quarantäne Modus ausführbar. )
terrain: 48fps

Vista SP2 32bit,4 GB Ram
CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600, 4x 2,4 Ghz
GPU: Nvidia Geforce 8600 GT 256 MB(DDR3)

Both around 65 fps

Geforce 8800 GT
4GB ram
Intel core 2 duo E6850

Thanks for all the feedback! We now have enough data to know how the MMO renderer will behave on user's systems.

Hmm.. what is this test really showing you?

You display a lot of untextured animated Models.
But in the final game, the client must display levelarchitecture
and multiple Models with a lot of different Textures,
plus other visual and logic calculations running at the same time...
What gives a high framerate in this setup, might as well
give you a low framerate in a full feature running client.

You should rather make a testapp with a lot of textured dummyobjects
plus terrain, plus dummycalculations running.
That will give more useful frameratedata.

When you do frame rate tests, you won't use a real level. You'll only use the specific objects of which you want to measure the frame rate. How the avatars look and what textures they have is irrelevant. We do not use instancing, thus all avatars and their textures can be different.

The purpose of the test was to check if our renderer surpasses the Granny 3D render, of which we already know the frame rates on a variety of systems. This was achieved and thus our client knows now that he can save the Granny license fee and can use our renderer for the MMO.

whats so special about this 'new renderer' and will it be released?

Not for release, only for the MMO. Maybe for some future engine, too. Nothing special with it except that it's made for very fast rendering. For all normal purposes, A7 is fast enough.

How about the shader-bones-animation features apparent in bones.fx. Are we going to see those soon?

Thanks,

Jibb

Problem is that the MMO renderer uses a different vertex format, with a different size of the vertex struct. That means most normal A7 plugins would crash when we implemented shader bones for A7. Also, a different kernel architecture is required for passing bones matrices to the shader. Maybe we could provide some special engine version for applications where shader bones are necessary.

Wow, okay. When I did my own (very limited) tests I used TEXCOORD1 to store an index for the bones (it only allowed one bone per vertex, and meant I couldn't use the second uv-set for anything else); I knew we'd need a slightly bigger vertex struct, but I had no idea the repercussions would be so big.

Really appreciate the effort, and wish there was something I could do!

Either way, I was stoked to see so many bones-animated models on-screen at a time, and was surprised to see each of those entities has 60 bones! That's a solid test as far as I'm concerned

Jibb

sounds fair, what do you guys plan to do about lighting? thats the major drawback right now, dont expect to see blocks being used for an rpg, so are you gonna bake lights or do something about model lighting in 3dgs?

if client want to save granny license why not give horde3d or ogre3d a try also?

- No one plans a change of the model lighting.

- We've looked into Ogre3D and Horde3D for avatar rendering, among other solutions, but found none suited for this purpose except for Granny. The other engines were mostly not fast enough, and had also other disadvantages.

CROWD: 30-32 FPS
TERRAIN: WITH LOT OF TREES 10-14 FPS WHIT LITTLE: 16-20 FPS

LAPTOP:
INTEL CORE 2 DUO T5760 2000 MHZ 4GB RAM
ATI MOBILITY RADEON 3470 VRAM 256 DEDICATED

Can we get some prerelease version of this renderer? Or is it only for A8?

Hiya.

Intel Quad Core2 Q9450 @2.66 (4 cores)
8GB DDR2
Radeon HD 4870 (512MB), running Catalyst 9.10
Windows 7 Pro (64-bit)

Crowd: 69 fps
Forest: 63 fps

Terrain:
Windowed 58 - 60 FPS
Full Screen 49-56 FPS

Crowd:
Windowed 58-60 (300 ent.) / 20-22 (1100 ent.)
Full Screen same as windowed ...

PC:
Intel Core 2 Quad 6600 (2,4 MHz), 3 GB RAM, Win XP Home 32bit SP3, Nvidia 8800 GTS with 320MB , two 22" monitors

I don't want to sound rude but:

Thats why I posted my critic.

That test showed really nothing, exept how
many models the computers can render in
an elswhere empty map without multiple textures, shaders
and running AI, physics or other calculations...

I guess that was just some benchmark against
the other possible renderer. "Granny"
(Although a correct comaprison would need to
test the other renderplugin with the same levels. Else its not conclusive.)

Intel QUAD Core 9650 3ghz 8 gig RAM

Video card 8800 GTS 764 MB


Crowd 60 FPS
Terrain 65 FPS

Ooops ... didn't see that one ...

Maybe JCL should lock the thread ...

On crowd i got an average of 30, and on the terrain one an average of 18.

I have a pentium 4, 3.0ghz HT, 2gb ram ddrII and a x1600 pro 512ram.

Oops, now i see it was no longer needed, sorry.

Yes, thanks anyway, but we have now all the data we want. I can now lock the thread.