Upgraded my 1060. It looks like a brand new game.

"

it's not possible to make "everything" run "perfectly" no matter what you throw at it, so he's not right.

Thing is, no one said that.

"

There are reason(s) why most ARPGs (and other games for that matter) limit the amount of crap happening on the screen, be that the amount of AI-intensive NPCs, 3D models, shaders, shadows, tic or whatever.

It's something wrong what you said. It's more budget-thing, than a limitation reason.

"

Phrazz wrote:

Please elaborate on this.

Because it seems to me like you're saying; "no matter WHAT a developer throws into the game regarding visuals, calculation and speed, it is ALWAYS possible to write it in a way that runs PERFECTLY on ALL systems".

If you meant anything close to that, you are of course wrong.

The biggest problem PoE has when it comes to performance, is that the game lets you scale the amount of crap happening on your screen into oblivion. At some point, the only thing they can do with their code, is to reduce the amount of crap happening.

I'll make it a bit clear. You have four main factors which affect your performance:

1. The data you process
2. The algorithm, which defines how to process the data
3. Available system resources
4. The cost of implementation measured in time / money

As a software engineer (or system architect) your approach is to find the balance between all of these factors. For example, you can easily replace Bubble sort algorithm with something more efficient, like Timsort or Heapsort. In IT, efficiency is measured in "Big O Notation". For example, mentioned Bubble sort has O(n^2) notation where n - the total amount of elements in the data set. Timsort has O(n). Doing the same job, Timsort is WAY faster than Bubble sort, because the time spent (or machine operations) on the sorting is proportional to n-elements vs n^2 elements.

So basically, by using more efficient algorithms you can process more data, having the same amount of available system resources or free resources on something else. The problem is that you have to invest more of your (or your employees) time to produce proper code. The other problem - the requirements to your employees may limit of using such strategies. I mean - if they are not enough qualified, you can't to force them to use O(1) algorithm instead of O(n^2) because they have to invest more time into research, reading the books, exchanging with other IT-specialists which makes the whole project more costly.

Sannikov, for example, told that having shaders (it's GPU-executed programs) which allow processing of GPU-generated particles in more efficient manner than doing the same on CPU. So if you have a 2ms limit per frame, utilizing the GPU for this task is more efficient than utilizing the CPU. That's good point. But you can ask - can we just turn particles off? No particles - no job. No job, no FPS drops. Well, technically we could, but the problem PoE is a commercial product. It is developed to bring the money to the company, nothing else. By turning particles off you make the game looks uglier which is a negative factor for the company's income.

Alright, so we know that we can change / replace / adjust algorythm(s) to be more efficient by doing the same amount of job but with lesser resources or doing more job for the same amount of system resources. And we know - it's not easy party to just implement it. You must be REALLY good pro to know what to do. And pro requires good wage. Moreover, if you're really pro, it's better not to waste your time on the gamedev.

In short: we have full control how we can process the data, more efficient way requires more time / money invested.

What about the data? As you understand we can simulate each single atom in the PoE world, each single electron, neutrino, photon, whatever, but what the point of that if such simulation will eat everything on user machine? Don't you want to have 1 frame per month with the best possible algorithm available in the world? I don't think so. So basically we need to process data set which allows tricking the user eyes by giving him enough immersion and functionality. Enough - is a very subjective parameter, because in this case it is defined by... the game developer, not a user. User still can adjust his graphical settings, but they are completely limited by the developer's will and expectations.

For example, we can't limit the amount of sound processed by fmodex (a well known sound engine) on its input, even having an option. The impact of that is very well observed on Blighted Maps with tons of Seismic Towers.

As a developer, we will limit the data to process by some acceptable (from our point) level. This is why we still can't have 16K gaming today or AI-controlled robots in the open-world games.

Such technologies as z-culling, LODs, BSP, tesselation and UV-mapping, packed textures etc. allow to dramatically reduce the amount of data processed by the system in real time. Technically, you can process only one triangle / pixel / vertex if you want to. If your approach is to skyrocket FPS - you can.

And sure, you can boost FPS by forcing your user base to buy new hardware. The problem of this way of "fixing" is that you're not fixing 1 and 2 but offering a pill to the people for their own money. This way has long-term issues like OFP / ArmA series had, because it has multiplicative effect on the future updates where you have to utilize more and power system resources for n-elements in your complex system. It has short-time effect maybe 2–5 years, when you replace your 1660 with 4090 but at some point for the cost of 1400-ish of bucks because someone in dev studio decided to process mob's wisp particles on death which can cause significant FPS drop if you juiced the map with 10-12k of wisps. SO the cost - to buy new 4090 for the several thousands of ppl playing the game or limit the amount of particles drawn on the screen? Or make the algorhitm(s) simpler or efficient? Or just let these users turn the FX off completely?

If you think fixing the problem is a user-side duty, prepare for another iteration of lags in upcoming updates. 7 Days to Die, ArmA series, Cyberpunk 2077 are good examples.

So my short answer for you: dev has full control on algorithms, data and staff which can implement a solution, which is well-suited for your specific configuration.

As for me, I started to study in 1993, assembly language was my first serious experience, thanks to Peter Norton and his book. C was the next one. Today we're working on high-performance server applications in AMTS Solutions OÜ.

"

cursorTarget wrote:

Sannikov, for example, told that having shaders (it's GPU-executed programs) which allow processing of GPU-generated particles in more efficient manner than doing the same on CPU. So if you have a 2ms limit per frame, utilizing the GPU for this task is more efficient than utilizing the CPU. That's good point. But you can ask - can we just turn particles off? No particles - no job. No job, no FPS drops. Well, technically we could, but the problem PoE is a commercial product. It is developed to bring the money to the company, nothing else. By turning particles off you make the game looks uglier which is a negative factor for the company's income.

I don't see the reason to not cut more of particles. I mean 10 transparent materials one on another. Dude, it's not rocket science, it has to be heavy. It' has to be optimized. This dynamic culling in the game is too basic, and care only about numbers of all particles and priority.
Don't forget that to spawn particles you still using CPU for that, GPU handling processing and calculation. And I believe the main problem with this game is first part, which is spawning of the particle.

hoho

The game runs wonderfully nowadays within expectation. I hope they're slowing PoE2 down to a level where it runs equally smooth amongst many systems. Both from the beginning up to endgame. No one needs to zoom through maps with +200% movespeed, blasting hundreds of projectiles while rocking a full stack of headhunter buffs.

The game runs fine, it just wasn't designed with such extremes in mind.

I'm running a 4090 with a 7800X3d, great memory and fast storage. The game still drops to 5 or so FPS when I pop omega juiced deli, beyond legions with tornado shot. I press alt and the game crashes, every single time. I have to Windows-D to get to desktop then switch between programs lol.

"

Crimvaal wrote:

hoho

The game runs wonderfully nowadays within expectation. I hope they're slowing PoE2 down to a level where it runs equally smooth amongst many systems. Both from the beginning up to endgame. No one needs to zoom through maps with +200% movespeed, blasting hundreds of projectiles while rocking a full stack of headhunter buffs.

The game runs fine, it just wasn't designed with such extremes in mind.

Actually good point. I really hope continuation won't be like poe1 after time. Maybe with PoE1 still alive it will be possible. I hope so.

the fact people are mad that someone buys new hardware is insanely cringe. please touch grass

i recently upgraded my ancient pc to all modern stuff too, the difference is stunning.
i personally would wait for the 50 series if i had already a 40 series card.

doesnt it work good enough for now? i dont think poe2 will need alot of power.

the only game i am excited about besides poe2 is gta6, which will need alot of power, but thats still a bunch of years away.

Thing is, it's mostly an engine issue. This is exacerbated when you play certain builds, where the engine limitations become perfectly clear and literally unavoidable. Best part, the only "fix" option you have is to either settle with the performance drops or don't play those builds.