LeftoverNoodles Posted June 5, 2016 Author Share Posted June 5, 2016 Even with the low quality / fastest option selected. Any idea if this due to my low GPU performance? Lack of SSD? Or do I have something off else where on the system? Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DOS76 Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 what kind of specs are we talking? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Carr Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 Hi Noodles, I have tested this pretty extensively and the video card does have a major effect on the performance for Big Box animations. So yes, integrated graphics are probably at least part of the problem. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Carr Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 To clarify (sorry was running away so I had to respond fast), the GPU has the most significant affect on the performance, followed by the CPU. SSDs can help load times and such, but I have no doubt that the integrated graphics are the biggest issue in that situation (unless of course you're running a CPU that's ancient or something). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SentaiBrad Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 The Integrated Graphics portion is taking away from the CPU as well. You are having the CPU do two jobs, and neither of them well unfortunetly. The Integrated graphics are great for super tiny systems that don't need that power (which is not really for gaming), and Intel has made it better with each CPU, but it's unfortunetly not condusive to getting good performance out of anything really. If you have PC (not a laptop), I know that GTX 950's and 960's are half size cards and will give you performance comperable to a GTX 780Ti form what I've read (maybe as low as a 770 or as high as an 880, I don't exactly remember), and they are affordable. These are obviously not the best cards out there, but their power draw is rather low and their size is rather small if either of these things are a concern for you. If you have a laptop, or a netbook, then I am of less help here. I don't really play around with Laptops and I know Netbooks won't have a GPU option at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AutumnSounds Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 Just been hammering BigBox on my latop to see how it runs. With the following specs and settings, Big box cover flow seem to work perfectly fine. Obvious not as well as my Desktop PC, but still what I consider "normal" performance. Specs: Acer E1-571 i5 3210m @ 2.50 GHz 8GB RAM Intel HD Graphics 4000 - Driver version 10.18.10.4358 (21/12/2015) ** Intel HD Graphics control panel's "3D performance" set to Performance. And "Battery Mode" also set to Maximum Performance (I think this is overlooked by some Laptop gamers). Windows 10 on SSD but LaunchBox is on a the normal slow HDD (via optical bay caddy) though. Tips: * In BigBox, Image cover quality at Medium and having Fps at 30 seems to be a nice balance for this laptop. * Make sure your drivers are reasonably up to date and let your computer use everything it can to maximise perfomance in Intel HD Graphics Control Panel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SentaiBrad Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 Ah, thanks for the extra points of tweaking Autumn. I haven't ever really played around with that stuff before, so I am glad someone could bring in some insight. It could be beneficial to know @LeftoverNoodles's CPU model as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DOS76 Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 I have an i5 3330 with 8GB and Intel HD 2500 OBG and BigBox performs more than adequately with any view I put on there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SentaiBrad Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 Well the HD 2500 is an older architecture than HD 4000, so then potentially the change in the Intel Control Panel can help, or the performance issues come from elsehwere. Otherhard or over zealous active scanning software? AV Software? The list can get to be pretty long with PC's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
viking Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 (First post : Hello !) Same issue here, around PNG wheel logo. But overall performance is pretty good. Only a few image jump occasionally. One solution would be to use the logo in SVG? Lighter than PNG and not size dependent. I tried, but this format is not supported by LaunchBox. I used a Intel NUC motherbord in my homemade bartop : - Windows 10 64bits - Core i5 4250U @1.3GHz (2 cores / 4 thread) - Intel HD Graphics 5000 - 8Go de DDR3 - SSD HardDrive Proper emulation by the way. The limits comes on PS2-Wii. Although some games run very well. (Sorry for my poor English ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SentaiBrad Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 Welcome Viking! So unfortunetly SVG has two disadvantages that PNG currently wins out on. They are both lossless, and both do transparency well. However, SVG is Vector vs PNG's Raster image, which basically means Vector images are made up of lines rather than Pixels at a base level. While SVG's can scale to crazy sizes (up or down) and Raster images can really only feasibly go down, I can see why this would be a good choice. Because Vector graphics can scale though, you do need slightly more power to display the image as it's math and not pixels. We're not scaling them, but the amount of images we show could seriously make lag on lower end systems even worse. There is also an adoption problem with SVG. It's being used more and more, but PNG's are almost universal at this point, and I would even go so far as to say they've replaced Jpeg's as the standard image file. I am also not sure if LaunchBox / BigBox even has a Vector ready graphical engine. Vectors are made up of XML's more or less and can be edited via text to change something like color. However, the file needs to be read, then computations need to be made, then the image is displayed. Per performance, and file size for that matter, I did also find some tests that were made: "Just did some testing (no full research): I tested 23 icons in both svg and png. The svg's are quite simple and optimised. Total filesize of svg's was about 160% larger than png's (64x64px). Rendering of png's was way faster (especially on mobile devices)." So certainly, SVG files clearly are superior in quality for the end result, but they present a few problems that I don't think we're exactly equipped to dealing with yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
viking Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 Wow, what a complete answer ! Thanks !! OK , I understand. I'll deal with my borders around logos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SentaiBrad Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 Of course no problem! I don't want to seem like your suggestion was bad, because it was certainly a good one and a direction we could move if we scaled the same image a lot, but I did want to let you know where our head is at. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeftoverNoodles Posted June 11, 2016 Author Share Posted June 11, 2016 Jason Carr said To clarify (sorry was running away so I had to respond fast), the GPU has the most significant affect on the performance, followed by the CPU. SSDs can help load times and such, but I have no doubt that the integrated graphics are the biggest issue in that situation (unless of course you're running a CPU that's ancient or something). Thanks for the confirmation. The drive is a slower older 5200rpm. The CPU is an i7. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeftoverNoodles Posted June 11, 2016 Author Share Posted June 11, 2016 DOS76 said I have an i5 3330 with 8GB and Intel HD 2500 OBG and BigBox performs more than adequately with any view I put on there. BigBox's performance is generally fine. It's the only the coverflow that has noticeable poor performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.