Celestia Forums

Maybe is the new textures for the stars,but the fact is: Celestia 1.5.0 pre 5 is much more computer demanding then pre4.
Mars 2 or 3,inside Valle Marineris(cartrite addon),I could get around 28 fps in pre4;now I get around 21 fps,under Open GL 2.0.Under another render paths,I could get around 35 fps;now I get 26 fps.The Ioplumes (buggs_moran addon) runs around 19 fps;although the other model was simpler,the fact is I could run it around 30 fps.And Titan Light passed from 15 fps to 10 fps.Even the BMNG Earth have problems.I could get around 60 fps;now the frame rate is below 40 fps
If I knew that,I would wait for Celestia 1.5.0 final!


If anyone still don??t know,here my specs AGAIN:
Athlon64 X2 3800
2 GB RAM
7600 GT
2XHD 160 GB SATA
Windows XP PE SP2
Nvidia Forceware Driver 163.75

1024X768 AA and AF application controled
AA Gamma correction Off
Transparency AA Off
texture filtering High Perfomance
Trilinear optimization On
Threaded Optimization On
Triple Buffering On

I get like 5 FPS with BMNG map haha. 0v3rc10ck y0ur Ce1e5t1a!!
ROXOR OMG!!1!1!one!1!!!!shift+1!!

1.5.0pre4:


1.5.0pre5:


Both default installations. Exact same scene taken at the exact same moment in time. Notice how the FPS is actually higher in pre5? You're doing it wrong.

I??m sure YOU changed the images.Anyway,I will return to Celestia 1.5.0 pre4 and verify again...
Your Mars2 is probably the 8k version!
Or I can see your resolution is bigger

Johaen wrote:1.5.0pre4:


1.5.0pre5:


Both default installations. Exact same scene taken at the exact same moment in time. Notice how the FPS is actually higher in pre5? You're doing it wrong.

Okay,I was a little wrong.But the increase on perfomance is not sustained.I hardly can see any difference...

Celestia1.5.0 pre5
http://img212.imageshack.us/my.php?imag ... re5fz0.jpg

Celestia 1.5.0 pre4
http://img299.imageshack.us/my.php?imag ... re4vl4.jpg

Celestia 1.5.0 pre5 (on the surface)
http://img153.imageshack.us/my.php?imag ... acerf9.jpg

Celestia 1.5.0 pre4 (on the surface)
http://img153.imageshack.us/my.php?imag ... aceve2.jpg

Note:Clouds,Galaxies and Nebulas disabled
Resolution 1024X768

danielj wrote:Okay,I was a little wrong.

Nothing new...

F.

t00fri wrote:

danielj wrote:Okay,I was a little wrong.

Nothing new...

Haha, ouch!