Native Desktop Exporter for Construct 3

Discussion and feedback on Construct 2

Post » Wed Jan 28, 2015 4:14 pm

Jayjay wrote:C2 is fighting harder and yet games made with CC are still faster

I just showed an example that demonstrates C2 is faster than CC in one case. Again - I need examples, benchmarks etc. to comment otherwise on top of all the other optimisations C2 has I have no reason to think it's not as fast *based on measurements*.

@Aurel - console support is a different question really, I viewed this thread as talking about desktop exporters. But that may change too, especially considering Microsoft's recent comments about getting Windows Universal apps to run on the Xbox One.
Scirra Founder
B
387
S
230
G
88
Posts: 24,251
Reputation: 192,454

Post » Wed Jan 28, 2015 4:31 pm

Desktop exporter and console exporters are closely linked. If C2 was able to export in C, C++, or C# for desktop, companies I'm working with would have the sony port done already.
Also, even with partial WiiU support and full XboxOne support, It won't change things that much. We can't make games for the only console which can get you some audience and money (sadly, sales are really, really low on WiiU and XboxOne for indie games)

But again, and I hope it was super super clear, I'm not asking for native exporters anymore. Being ready to quickly export for new systems would mean to make exporters for every single system having a chance to become a standard a few months later. Every one of them is a bet, and you really need to have big money in the bank to afford this try, error, and often waste strategy. I don't want Scirra to explode on this mine!
Image | @AurelRegard on twitter
B
19
S
6
G
1
Posts: 307
Reputation: 2,500

Post » Wed Jan 28, 2015 5:05 pm

I just showed an example that demonstrates C2 is faster than CC in one case. Again - I need examples, benchmarks etc. to comment otherwise on top of all the other optimisations C2 has I have no reason to think it's not as fast *based on measurements*.


@Ashley
Using your tests :

Native : I got 137000 (137430) sprites @30 fps
native.jpg


WebGL : 73000 (73444) sprites @30 fps
webGl.jpg


On WebGL it stopped at 47K hung, then 53K, 61K, 65K, and finally 73444

Native is 2x faster for me.

Sys specs:
Xeon E3-1230 3.30GHz
32 GB ram
Nvidia GTX650 Ti
Win 7 64
Chrome Version 40.0.2214.93 m
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Image Image Image
B
61
S
19
G
6
Posts: 325
Reputation: 7,944

Post » Wed Jan 28, 2015 5:38 pm

@facecjf Aren't all of the effects WebGL only though?
B
47
S
12
G
7
Posts: 341
Reputation: 7,953

Post » Wed Jan 28, 2015 5:44 pm

helena wrote:As for the slowness. My game rely on array for its movements (so that many things can happen at same time at same timing and not getting "behind") and it can have lots of movements per "game round" (0.2 sec) and the array is 600 entries big, and it is still a relatively small level for its type of game.

The bottleneck is the searching the whole array for some certain values and it is done often.

If @ashley would like you are welcome to take a look at my game but then it has to be sent privately.


You got to do it differently. 200ms is quite a bit of time, so what you do, you make a loop for X and Y that every tick tests only certain part of array, like from 0-50, from 50, 50 to 100,50 etc. You can use any values that work best.
My professional Royalty Free Music at Scirra Assets Store
--------------------------------
Specs: i5 2500, 16gb of ram, gtx 770, win 7, Focusrite Scarlett 8i6, Mackie mr8mk2, Alesis 320, browsing the net on chrome.
B
85
S
27
G
21
Posts: 1,969
Reputation: 19,167

Post » Wed Jan 28, 2015 5:52 pm

@damainman

damainman wrote:Aren't all of the effects WebGL only though?

As far as I know, yes.

These tests are provided by Ashley. I'm just posting my benchmarks of these tests based on a post about the performance difference between native and WebGL and how they are close... FX or not. I see 2x the performance (native) just on sprite objects, unless I'm missing something here.
Image Image Image
B
61
S
19
G
6
Posts: 325
Reputation: 7,944

Post » Wed Jan 28, 2015 5:59 pm

@megatronx hum. hmm. Maybe it is better discussed elsewhere as of not hijacking the topic. *nods*

Did the performance test just for fun on a freshly started browser.
Got up to 26k objects then it hung. 30fps.

I have a few years old computer but I am not considering it as too slow generally. For my uses it is still performing well. I also play some games. Intel Core2quad cpu @ 2.40 GHz. 8Gb memory. (I wish I could have more but I have maxed the board) Nvidia Geforce 8800 GTS.

I do not really plan to buy new computer until I really feel I have to, as said right now it is performing well for me.

Then I ran on Ipad 4:
Poor Ipad started to hack at 7500 objects already. then 7801 it hung.
B
58
S
18
G
13
Posts: 447
Reputation: 10,735

Post » Wed Jan 28, 2015 6:41 pm

The test is also with the exact same sprite image and if any FX are applied, the same FX to each sprite, I wonder how it would work with more variety.
"Construct 4 lets YOU make advanced games! (but not play them)" Construct Classic - Examples Kit
B
113
S
39
G
17
Posts: 2,184
Reputation: 19,217

Post » Wed Jan 28, 2015 6:43 pm

Oh, and in the past we have actually measured Chrome outperforming Construct Classic, which I think now is due to Chrome's parallel & multi-process rendering architecture, whereas Classic was always single-thread single-process.


You have to remember that Construct Classic was made in 2007, with it's last update in 2012. It's like comparing a computer from 2007 to one from 2012, of course it's not going to out perform it for any number of reasons, old software and bottlenecks or the new software being able to better use hardware, etc.

Also there's a post just now with CC getting better results than C2.
The moderators are corrupt and ban for no reason, especially that condescending neckbeard asshole Kyatric. The forums are filled with fanboys.
Banned User
B
22
S
7
G
1
Posts: 558
Reputation: 2,925

Post » Wed Jan 28, 2015 7:04 pm

Nesteris wrote:
Oh, and in the past we have actually measured Chrome outperforming Construct Classic, which I think now is due to Chrome's parallel & multi-process rendering architecture, whereas Classic was always single-thread single-process.


You have to remember that Construct Classic was made in 2007, with it's last update in 2012. It's like comparing a computer from 2007 to one from 2012, of course it's not going to out perform it for any number of reasons, old software and bottlenecks or the new software being able to better use hardware, etc.

Also there's a post just now with CC getting better results than C2.


Where's the post?


@helena

Basically you need to spread single array loop in to several ticks. So you use 'for each' system loops for X and Y and check with positions on the array. Don't know how to explain it better... create region within array would be best explenation, and then check each region per one tick. You will need couple of variables that will count current region and when both are eqal to final region, you reset them.
My professional Royalty Free Music at Scirra Assets Store
--------------------------------
Specs: i5 2500, 16gb of ram, gtx 770, win 7, Focusrite Scarlett 8i6, Mackie mr8mk2, Alesis 320, browsing the net on chrome.
B
85
S
27
G
21
Posts: 1,969
Reputation: 19,167

PreviousNext

Return to Construct 2 General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: tarek2 and 7 guests