C2, C3 runtime stress test

  • Hello. I did a small stress test to check the performance. Result:

    C2

    8500 objects count

    40 fps

    C3 (new runtime)

    6500 objects count

    30 fps

    With a smaller count of objects, C3 produces a lower FPS than C2. Why?

    C3 c3p - drive.google.com/open

    C2 capx - drive.google.com/open

  • Mnm Interesting I got unexpected results too, I guess they still haven't tweaked properly yet the c3 New Runtime as is still on Alpha testing

    C2 Results: https://www.dropbox.com/s/g7shhngshvcd54z/C2%20Test.png?dl=0

    C3 Results:https://www.dropbox.com/s/0yjfkkuej3zrys3/C3%20Test.png?dl=0

  • New Runtime as is still on Alpha testing

    Yes, but I thought that fps would be roughly equal

  • > New Runtime as is still on Alpha testing

    Yes, but I thought that fps would be roughly equal

    I'm not an expert or anything like that, this is only my point of view I could be wrong though.

    If it was at last on a beta test you could spect that

    but as is an Alpha test it could have hundreds of bugs preventing c3 new Runt time riching his Pick Performance I guess. it's very unstable yet.

    For the results of the test showing C2 outperforms C3 with that huge Difference is very clearly that has still a lot of bugs and optimisations yet to fix, or at last, I hope so.

    I base my thoughts from the C3 Run Time blogs showing all the Results of a huge Performance gain in most of the areas I don't think they will risk showing those results if it wasn't true

  • q3olegka

    I'm not sure if you haven't checked yet but Has been an Update for C3 today, especially check the part

    Performance: C3 runtime: optimise creating and destroying large numbers of instances with behaviours

    https://www.construct.net/wf/make-games/releases/beta/r112

    I guess it was something to do with creating and destroying objects, it should work about the same FPs now.

    Still, on my test, the C2 works just slighter better and smoother as the C3 test every 15 secs or so it drops from 75 to 68 Fps causing a bit of the junk while the c2 test is standing stable on 75 Fps

    is not much of a difference though, I'm pretty sure C3 will get better in the future

  • yikes

  • Stress Spawn test.

  • Hmm interesting, the C2 runtime seems to be indeed quicker. With todays update it appears to have been fixed, though it still seems that the C2 runtime runs just slightly (~3-5fps) faster.

  • This is a bit weird cause I've been seeing the opposite can you all try this out?

    mega.nz

    WASD-movement

    Left click or B-Spawn objs

    Z-increase line of sight(logics only run within line of sight)

    X-Decrease line of sight

  • Try Construct 3

    Develop games in your browser. Powerful, performant & highly capable.

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads
  • Did some quick tests.

    Sprite with bullet + fade. Before (111 stable)- C2 ~10400 sprites vs C3 5500 sprite at ~30 FPS.

    After update (112 Beta) - C2 ~10 400 vs C3 around same as C2 ~10 000, but seems maybe 2-3% slower.

    Bullet behavior on sprite (111 stable) - C2 ~ 11000 vs C3 ~9500. (112 beta) - C2 ~11000 vs C3 ~ 14 000

    Did some extreme test. Sprite with fade,bullet,Solid,Flash,DestoryOutsideLayout,Rotate:

    (111 stable) C2 ~7700 vs C3 ~ 1800. (112 beta) C2 ~ 7700 vs C3 6700.

    When sprite has 1 behavior it is better in 112 Beta and in 111 in most cases, but if multiple behaviors are added, C3 is same or bit slower in come tests.

    Just Fade on sprite, is around same in 111 stable and 112 beta. C2 - 15 000 vs C3 ~25 000.

    Sine same in 111 and 112: C2 ~ 23 000 sprites vs C3 ~ 34 000.

    Test are results with 30 fps, so when you try achieve 60fps, results maybe be different. Done it with my own tests to give some overview.

    C3 peforming a bit slower is to do with C3 trying to match C2 runtime, so it is faster but doing extra work to match C2.

    It seems really nice that C3 is getting better with every update.

  • tarek2

    Thank you for reminding. Yes, r112 now looks much better. I got ~8000 objects and ~40 fps. I hope that in the next updates the performance will only increase.

  • SnipG

    Thanks for testing. Interesting

  • Phacanu

    but with what to compare this test?

  • That's why I always tell people that all these tests are meaningless bullshit.

    You have to wait until it's done and make some games to see how they run. Anybody can find a few tests that run better in one engine than some other. That is exactly what Steve Jobs used to do so he could claim how macs were faster than PCs. nVida and ATI, Intel vs. AMD. It's all bullshit.

    The only thing that matters is how your finished game runs.

    And I am sure they are going to lock this thread because I used the word bullshit, but that is the only word that describes these tests accurately.

  • For the engine to be finished, first you need to find all the errors, and most of the engine errors are searched by users themselves, so I do not think that various tests are bad for the development of the engine

Jump to:
Active Users
There are 1 visitors browsing this topic (0 users and 1 guests)