Game Development Community

FPS Performance TGE vs TSE

by Colossai Studios · in Torque Game Engine Advanced · 08/23/2006 (5:10 am) · 4 replies

Let's say we use 500 players objects (dts), put them in TGE and TSE and look at them at the same time. Will TSE have lower or higher FPS than TGE?

I should have tested it myself, if I had a copy of Shader engine available.

#1
08/23/2006 (5:44 am)
TSE will render the scene faster, but remember it depends on the detail level as well.
You could overload TSE and get worse frame rate.

But if it was the same character, and there where 500 of them, TSE would smoke TGE.
You should read Brian Ramages Blogs, he details some of this information

Hope this helps

EDIT : Heres his Blog that Explains it

http://www.garagegames.com/blogs/5030/10647
#2
08/23/2006 (6:03 am)
It depends on all kinds of stuff. Have the TSE models got materials? Shaders? Glow? Specular? Bumpmapping? Are they affected by lights?
#3
08/23/2006 (6:29 am)
I've been testing porting over our client to TSE, in preparation for Milestone 4 the past couple weeks. TSE's performance seems to be very much improved in MS 3.5. About 6 months ago client I ported back and forth between the two in some cases performed better in TGE, although it always looked better in TSE. Now though there isn't really an comparision.

I haven't ported over the client fully, so I'm bound to lose a few frames as I get in our animation code, etc. And I'm fairly sure that the pretty lighting and bloom effects, etc in MS4 will cause us to lose a few more frames... But In comparable scenes from TGE to TSE now, I've been getting about 175 fps in 1280x1024 with a scene that features a good deal of parallax and normal mapped DIF and DTS shapes, with heavy use of glow and some custom shaders. A similar scene in our TGE client gets around 90 fps. This is on a P4-3ghz, Nvidia 7800 AGP and 1.5gigs of ram test system. TSE definately has better performance, and it looks much nicer.
#4
08/23/2006 (6:36 am)
TSE had huge problems with skinned shapes MS3 and below, which resulted in bad performance. There was also batching added in MS3.5.