Jump to content
LaunchBox Community Forums

Best Performance


Lenny

Recommended Posts

Hi all, I'm running BigBox on a i52500k with a gtx1050 and 8gb of ram. Sometimes it gets laggy. I was wondering if there are recommended specs for hardware or any suggestions to try to make it more fluid. I'm running the refried theme and the lag is present when scrolling through games. Also I get alot of screen tearing in the platform videos, I tried switching media player but no luck. Thanks for your help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Yes, please give us a recommended spec (specially for large database). I'm considering upgrading since I'm not satisfied with my setup now. It's a Asus ROG-GR6 wit 16GB ram, 256SSD for OS, 2TB SSHD for Launchbox and 10TB  USB3.0 drive for Roms. It has a GTX-960M and i5-5200U.

Boot is nice and fast, Launchbox & BigBox have loong start times, and if startup video in BigBox is enabeled the looooooong startup time gets added after the startup video so it looks SUPER laggy...

It also lags when moving throug the systems and if categories enabeled it's slow and difficult to navigate.

It's a big library, so that is the reason, but what is needed to get it to run faster? CPU, GPU, SSD, RAM?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can't give a "recommended" system specs because there are a variety of factors involved as well as Jason doesn't have a range of systems to test on to find a "recommended" hardware configuration.

While library size itself used to be the major cause of performance issues it has become less of an issue unless you have an abnormally large collection (80,000+ games). Now the biggest source of performance issues will be due to playlists and the number of them, especially those that are auto-generated by meta data. LB has to parse all the playlists and the library to get all the games for them.

Keep in mind that if you don't have all your images and media cached there will be performance issues until that is all done caching in, once this is done there performance should improve dramatically.

Also I recommend checking out this older but still relevant thread on how to improve your performance in BigBox:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have followed that guide :)

But if I'm to build a new computer for my Arcade, I would like to know what will have the most effect.

My library is at 50 000 now, but I'm not done adding all that I want, and yes I noticed the speed difference when adding the playlists.
Since I love them, I'm willing to upgrade my rig...

If it is the CPU, what cpu will give most performance? I guess this one is my culprit.
If it is the RAM, how much and what speed? I think 16GB is overkill
If it is the GPU, I dont think it's the GPU....

The CPU is up to 95% while starting BigBox but not constant.
The CPU is at 100% for long periods after BigBox is started. (only in the GUI with video running, Unified Redux theme).

What will be the best CPU for BigBox GUI?

Idle in LaunchBox.JPG

Start BigBox.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recently upgraded my CPU from an i3-2120 3.3 GHz to an i5-2550K 3.4GHz and noticed a huge difference in BB.  Other specs are: 8GB DDR3, GTX 960 4GB, 250GB SSD for OS only, 1 TB HDD.  Granted I only have 4700 games, it seems to run pretty smoothly.

What's the best CPU? Probably the the fastest your MB will take without mortgaging the house (ok, mortgaging is probably is little far fetched).  I wanted to get an i7-2700k(?) which my MB would take, but had a hard time justifying the funds.  I think anything above your current 2.20 would scream performance (from what you're seeing now). Everything looks fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Cirion said:

If it is the RAM, how much and what speed? I think 16GB is overkill

16 GB is pretty darn close to the normal amount for most people nowadays.

8 hours ago, Cirion said:

If it is the GPU, I dont think it's the GPU....

BigBox does benefit from GPU but exactly how much I cannot say.

 

I know LB/BB requires some more system power than other front ends out there but I would make the argument that it doesn't require anything more than the more accurate or newer emulators such as Higan, Dolphin, Mednafen Saturn and Cemu. So unless you are planning on only emulating up to an including the SNES using Snes9x you should get the best system you can afford. Also I have stated in other threads that you can never have too much hardware when it comes to emulation. Yes, I know these old system weren't fast but emulating them accurately requires far more power. While the SNES has only a 3.5 MHz CPU in it, it requires a modern 3 GHz CPU to emulate it accurately with Higan. I also tell people that having more CPU than is required to run the emulator is not a bad thing or a waste. If using emulators such as Retroarch you can but that extra CPU power to work reducing input latency by increasing Frame Delay and Audio Latency, it really does make the emulation experience that much better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Lordmonkus said:

you should get the best system you can afford.

Lets just say it like it is... I can afford it... What should I buy?

As for what I like to emulate, is everything that is controllable with arcade sticks, arcade guns, trackball and spinners. If I need a gamepad with analogue sticks I do not need it.

From what I can see, a Nvidia GTX 1060 would probably more than I need så anything better than that is just a waste of money. The GTX 960M in my current rig, does look like it's enough. But the CPU is the one getting maxed out. To me, it looks like the CPU is the bottleneck.

What is the best CPU for Launchbox? There are to many CPU's to choose from, and I prefer buying the one that gives most performance for BigBox. All emulators I use, run fine, it's just BigBox that is laggy.

Since my ROG-GR6 is not up gradable, I can start with a fresh build.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just looked at what an ROG-GR6 is.  So yes, a complete, new, fresh build is your only option.  For CPU, I prefer Intel over AMD (that's just me). The more cores a CPU has, the less GHz required to outperform lesser CPUs, and decreases power consumption and heat.  With that, more is better. Too much is.... well, call it future proofing. 

Is your current GPU standalone?  That is, can you take it out to use it in a new box?  Note: re the 960, yesterday I was playing Lego Jurassic World (via Steam) through HDMI to my 60" 1080p and it (GTX 960 4GB, not MSI overclocked) was running at mostly 100%.  Not sure if that's the nature of GPU's. Just sayin'.  The GTX 1060 is good.  Maybe also look at the RX 580.  And yes, anything beyond that is "just a waste of money".

If doing a diy build, PCPartPicker is a good resource. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Cirion said:

Lets just say it like it is... I can afford it... What should I buy?

If you only emulate then you should buy the best Intel processor you are willing to buy, they have the best single thread performance CPUs right now. If you do other work on your PC like video editing and other production an AMD Ryzen CPU is a very viable option. it's not as good as the Intel for emulation but it is no shit at it either, it's much better than the previous AMD CPUs.

6 hours ago, Cirion said:

From what I can see, a Nvidia GTX 1060 would probably more than I need så anything better than that is just a waste of money. The GTX 960M in my current rig, does look like it's enough. But the CPU is the one getting maxed out. To me, it looks like the CPU is the bottleneck.

Yeah those GPUs should be fine. One thing I would suggest trying in BigBox is to lower the image quality to medium, you won't see any visual difference but I have seen huge performance gains over max quality.

6 hours ago, Cirion said:

What is the best CPU for Launchbox? There are to many CPU's to choose from, and I prefer buying the one that gives most performance for BigBox. All emulators I use, run fine, it's just BigBox that is laggy.

Again, I can't give you a specific because I don't have a wide range of computers to test and find the "tipping point" but if you looked at that performance thread you can see 2 of my PCs specs that I have run BigBox on and it ran fine. One of the systems by todays standards is probably considered mid grade at best but I would even call it slightly under mid grade now and the other is a complete toaster by todays standards and it ran fine, though I did have to make some tweaks to the settings in BigBox which I outlined in that thread.

 

3 hours ago, JoeViking245 said:

For CPU, I prefer Intel over AMD (that's just me)The more cores a CPU has, the less GHz required to outperform lesser CPUs, and decreases power consumption and heat.  With that, more is better. Too much is.... well, call it future proofing.

I agree with you that Intel is better for normal emulation but it is because it has the better single thread performance, not because it has fewer cores. The vast majority of emulators only use single thread but some of the newer ones are taking advantage of multi core CPUs such as Cemu and RPCS3. Like I said earlier if the PC will only be used for emulation then an Intel CPU is the way to go but if doing other stuff on the computer such as production or will be used for modern PC gaming then an AMD Ryzen series CPU is very much viable. More and more modern PC games will be taking advantage of multi core CPUs.

I can only tell you my experience now that I have had my new system with a Ryzen 2700X in it and it performs great in emulation. I can run the Higan and Beetle Saturn cores in Retroarch (2 of the most demanding single thread emulators) with very high levels of Frame Delay and the system runs Cemu (BotW) and RPCS3 (Demons Souls) great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a ROG-G751JT laptop laying around... It has a i7-4720HQ, 16GB RAM and GTX 970m.

So I installed a clean W10 on that and installed the 2TB SSHD with Launchbox, and attached the 10TB USB 3.0 drive.

BigBox is definitely a lot faster. Startup time is stil as slow, but moving around in BigBox is a lot smother and the video's now play without beeing choppy.
Big difference.

I also see a huge difference when scanning for media, before it used minutes per game. Now it's seconds...
CPU is only at 2-31% while scanning, instead of 95-100%

Edited by Cirion
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...