Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Define and document minimum and recommended requirements #8736

Closed
rubenwardy opened this issue Aug 2, 2019 · 5 comments
Closed

Define and document minimum and recommended requirements #8736

rubenwardy opened this issue Aug 2, 2019 · 5 comments
Labels
Discussion Issues meant for discussion of one or more proposals @ Documentation

Comments

@rubenwardy
Copy link
Member

rubenwardy commented Aug 2, 2019

In order to make performance testing easier, it would be good to define a minimum and a few recommended requirements. For example:

  • Minimum (20+ FPS, shaders off, opaque leaves, opaque water, range-30)
  • Recommended Midtier (50+ FPS, shaders on, fancy leaves, normal water, range-100)
  • Recommended Hightier (60+ FPS, shaders on, fancy waving leaves, normal water, range-200, future fancy shaders)

It would also be good to provide configurations for good performance on those tiers.

What hardware do you run Minetest on, and what FPS/stutters do you get with the above settings?

@rubenwardy rubenwardy added @ Documentation Discussion Issues meant for discussion of one or more proposals labels Aug 2, 2019
@rubenwardy rubenwardy reopened this Aug 2, 2019
@rubenwardy rubenwardy changed the title Define and document minimum and recommented requirements Define and document minimum and recommended requirements Aug 2, 2019
@style-nine
Copy link

CPU: AMD FX(tm)-6300 Six-Core
Video: GeForce GTX 1050
OS: Ubuntu 18.04.2 LTS

default config:

leaves_style = simple
screen_w = 1600
screen_h = 900
fov = 90
viewing_range = 160
enable_shaders = true

With shaders disabled, you can bump the viewing_range to 240 and get the same performance (around 50 fps in difficult terrain when flying around in creative).

@SmallJoker
Copy link
Member

SmallJoker commented Aug 3, 2019

Suggestions to get more comparable results:

  • Demo map which contains buildings and is at least 200x200m big
  • Fixed spawn point (preferably singleplayer)
  • Fixed pitch and yaw
  • Pre-defined minimalistic minetest.conf files (low, med, high) to use without any modification

EDIT:
CPU: Intel T2130 (Dual-Core)
GPU: Radeon Xpress 1150 (RC410)
OS: Ubuntu 16.04.2
FPS: 6 (city) ... 12 (forest)

view_range = 20
wieldhand (mesh) purged from rendering
sky stars and clouds purged from rendering

@raymoo
Copy link
Contributor

raymoo commented Aug 10, 2019

Tried on my laptop

Low: 60 FPS
Med: 28~30 FPS
High: 13~14 FPS
I tested against flying above a jungle and looking toward the horizon.

OS: Debian testing
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3610QM (Ivybridge, laptop)
GPU: Integrated graphics with above

@AKryukov92
Copy link

Is this about client requirements or about server ones?
Should we test config in which 1 client connects to dedicated server via LAN?
I think singleplayer MT will be slower than this setup. Single hardware for running map logic and rendering gui will perform worse than hardware only for rendering gui. Thats why these scenarios should be separate.

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Aug 26, 2019

For servers we ideally should have something like this. So we need numbers on how much one connected players "cost" so we can calculate the answer. We should also have a CPU field because MT does a lot on CPU.

Edit: There's also this thread that was a good indicator.

https://forum.minetest.net/viewtopic.php?t=11

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Discussion Issues meant for discussion of one or more proposals @ Documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants