Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What PC/Laptop do you need to have so you can run SAS 4 with less lag

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Beep View Post
    I’m talking about the gpu rasterisation under flags in chrome… animations and glowing effects run faster on the gpu than on the cpu. Its left on cpu based because it has trouble with rendering text on browsers which is what you expect on majority of users to use browsers for but you can force it to use gpu accelerated rendering for better performance on flash content. The downside is it uses a large amount of gpu memory so it’s very strange if its 0-1%

    note: I’m not talking about the hardware acceleration adobe flash player option

    Chrome is notorious for being a ram hog and you can simply google that. I even confirmed it myself with task manager, everything judders running sas 4 with 4 gigabytes with chrome. However chrome does offer a lot of simplicity and its fast when it not close to 4 gigs which is why I’m using it.

    There was no mention of future proofing pc specifically for sas 4… there was future proofing for a general pc so you don’t have to buy another one soon for general gaming without digging too deep into wallets.

    Hyper threading capable to run was the wrong way to put it in my last post, it’s more whether it hyper threading is capable of running what it’s expected to do when handling flash content for sas 4 because 4 physical cores isn’t equal to 2 logical/2 physical processors in this case. The instructions from flash that are fed into each processor pipeline have to contain some sort of stalling/delays e.g. pulling data from hard disk so another parallel pipeline can continue to do its job for hyper threading to have value. Even if this does happen, hyper threading has also been known to increase latency so it’s almost always better to go with 4 physical processors than 2 logical/2 physical ones. A different story for i7s however.
    i doubt any setting changes in chrome will allow sas to take significant advantage of my gpu. flash games are known to not use gpus. yes sure chrome use a bit more ran than other browsers, but fact is 4 gb is more than enough for sas. as for hyperthreading its not 2 logical and 2 physical, its 4 logical and 2 physical. you're not understanding this correctly, what hyperthreading does is allows parellelism. the usual is 1 thread per core, but hyperthreading makes it so theres 2 threads per core, hence 4 threads and 2 cores. i done a lot of research on computers and built one myself, never seen anywhere hyperthreading increases latency.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Meralla View Post

      I have no SSD. Do they help for NK games?
      Ethernet? Does this mean internet with cable and not WLAN? If yes, I do have it that way. My internet is fast.

      And I tried 10+ browser for SAS4 now. With most it doesn't run at all anymore. Others crash or my character jumped around weirdly or I can't control my movement. It got more and more horrible in the last months and more and more browsers stopped working. Right now I use Waterfox as that is the only browser left with which SAS still halfway works for me. But 2-3 weeks ago I started to get problems with it, too. When I play NM400 on the Survivors map now, I often get the problem, that I continue running in directions, despite not clicking on the key for that direction anymore. Really annoying. I guess recent flash/browser/windows updates are not favouring the SAS compatibility with my computer.

      Waterfox also stopped working recently for BMC. I can't even properly collect money from my farms anymore with it. When I click on a farm, it takes like 15 seconds until the money gets collected. At least BMC still works with Firefox, although also not at all anymore with some other browsers.
      SSDs dont help PC performance at all for running games, all they do is allow faster boot up times, allow you to move files around ur PC faster, makes ur operating system more responsive and for certain games make loading faster because they are stored in the computer itself (for downloaded games i believe) so no they will not help at all for sas. ethernet will not decrease ur lag but can help with disconnections from the server. i recommend chrome for sas, i myself have tested many and chrome has the most consistency and i dont have problems with unresponsiveness besides a little bit in late game apoc. it is also very stable and doesnt crash (never crashed with chrome).

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by mopping View Post
        SSDs dont help PC performance at all for running games, all they do is allow faster boot up times, allow you to move files around ur PC faster, makes ur operating system more responsive and for certain games make loading faster because they are stored in the computer itself (for downloaded games i believe) so no they will not help at all for sas. ethernet will not decrease ur lag but can help with disconnections from the server. i recommend chrome for sas, i myself have tested many and chrome has the most consistency and i dont have problems with unresponsiveness besides a little bit in late game apoc. it is also very stable and doesnt crash (never crashed with chrome).
        Chrome is one of the many, many browsers I tried for SAS. It worked long ago, but not anymore for me. :-(

        Comment


        • #34
          From my experiences, the best computer/laptop that you'd want is something with the most recently improved i7 drive (or whatever they're called), gamer card, something over 4GB RAM, and something no older than 2 years. cause like i said, with the laptops I own...

          Originally posted by RankoMatic View Post
          Can you post details of your PC/Laptop that runs SAS 4 with less lag.
          Originally posted by ZX840 View Post

          Definitely not mine
          Why earn alloy when you can just buy it? It's only 36 alloy for every $1 million.

          Why open knowledge boxes when you get them? It's more fun to open 100 in one go cause they're easy to obtain - 1 a day or 100 a month, or... 1000 in half a year if you can be bothered saving that many for that long.... ; )


          Seems links in the forum are now broken, man I haven't been here in a while. Search 'Sylvan Lawrenz' on YouTube for some of my silly/mature content if you're interested.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by mopping View Post
            i doubt any setting changes in chrome will allow sas to take significant advantage of my gpu. flash games are known to not use gpus. yes sure chrome use a bit more ran than other browsers, but fact is 4 gb is more than enough for sas. as for hyperthreading its not 2 logical and 2 physical, its 4 logical and 2 physical. you're not understanding this correctly, what hyperthreading does is allows parellelism. the usual is 1 thread per core, but hyperthreading makes it so theres 2 threads per core, hence 4 threads and 2 cores. i done a lot of research on computers and built one myself, never seen anywhere hyperthreading increases latency.
            Sorry for the confusion, was trying to compare them as if it was seen with 2 cores, 2 virtual ones competing with 4 cores if you see where I’m coming from. Yes by definition it is 4 logical cores with hyperthreading on i3.
            Hyperthreading trades off small amount of latency for increased throughput and applications support is needed for it to work at a level that is considered worth it. Right now I don’t think browsers have that capability for handling flash hypertheaded so still im leaning more towards an i5 because of the 4 cores was being used while I was in sas 4 in chrome browser.
            Originally posted by Meralla View Post

            Chrome is one of the many, many browsers I tried for SAS. It worked long ago, but not anymore for me. :-(
            With sas 4 updates, I think that made it worse for players suffering with ram related problems. Flash player itself will precache into ram and that ram is used for rendering performance. With those updates, it may have increased ram usage... which is why chrome worked before and not now but there could be many reasons really. This is a guess really.
            I also got Intel graphics and it competes with the available computer ram on top of that, with chrome so this is probably the reason why I need more than 4 gigs. I think 4 gigs is enough when you have a dedicated videocards that has their own gpu ram so it doesn’t have to compete. I ‘m looking at 5gigs but the next commercially available upgrade is the 8gig hence the overkill jump.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Beep View Post

              Sorry for the confusion, was trying to compare them as if it was seen with 2 cores, 2 virtual ones competing with 4 cores if you see where I’m coming from. Yes by definition it is 4 logical cores with hyperthreading on i3.
              Hyperthreading trades off small amount of latency for increased throughput and applications support is needed for it to work at a level that is considered worth it. Right now I don’t think browsers have that capability for handling flash hypertheaded so still im leaning more towards an i5 because of the 4 cores was being used while I was in sas 4 in chrome browser.


              With sas 4 updates, I think that made it worse for players suffering with ram related problems. Flash player itself will precache into ram and that ram is used for rendering performance. With those updates, it may have increased ram usage... which is why chrome worked before and not now but there could be many reasons really. This is a guess really.
              I also got Intel graphics and it competes with the available computer ram on top of that, with chrome so this is probably the reason why I need more than 4 gigs. I think 4 gigs is enough when you have a dedicated videocards that has their own gpu ram so it doesn’t have to compete. I ‘m looking at 5gigs but the next commercially available upgrade is the 8gig hence the overkill jump.
              sas developers have said sas can take advantage of multithreading, so im sure an i3 can be utilized effectively when running sas. as i said before sas requires VERY little graphics power if any at all, so even with integrated intel graphics you wouldnt exceed the chips maximum vram for it to use ur dram. i am not convinced that u need more than 4 gb ram to run sas on chrome. also just checked yesterday sas only using 300 mb ram when im playing nm.

              Comment


              • #37
                hyperthreading can do that but it won't have much of an advantage that is needed for browser activities that run at 4 cores since the throughput is still restricted to 2 cores. not saying it won't work, just saying it won't do it as well as an core i5 especially in last few waves in apoc or in vs. And if its a new computer, it probabaly won't just be used for sas 4, you'll most likely test it on other games that aren't too cpu intensive in the future too. It also has turbo boost feature which if you do decide to use it on cpu intensive games you can still run them so it isn't as restricted as the i3.

                right now my old laptop is at 3.34 gigs from windows hosting services in the background with chrome on so I would have small room to work with when flash, intel graphics takes over which is very close to 3.89 gb usable ram. On some days, it is more than 3.34gbs when I do open up sas on chrome so I do get the occasional juddering because of not having enough ram.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Beep View Post
                  hyperthreading can do that but it won't have much of an advantage that is needed for browser activities that run at 4 cores since the throughput is still restricted to 2 cores. not saying it won't work, just saying it won't do it as well as an core i5 especially in last few waves in apoc or in vs. And if its a new computer, it probabaly won't just be used for sas 4, you'll most likely test it on other games that aren't too cpu intensive in the future too. It also has turbo boost feature which if you do decide to use it on cpu intensive games you can still run them so it isn't as restricted as the i3.

                  right now my old laptop is at 3.34 gigs from windows hosting services in the background with chrome on so I would have small room to work with when flash, intel graphics takes over which is very close to 3.89 gb usable ram. On some days, it is more than 3.34gbs when I do open up sas on chrome so I do get the occasional juddering because of not having enough ram.
                  well yea obviously 4 cores is stronger than 2 cores with hyperthreading, my point was an i3 can run sas 4 fine and allow a playable experience. also i3s can turbo, and actually in cpu intensive games ur cpu will tend to not turbo or only turbo a little because those games will utilize all of the cores. turbo happens when there are unused cores, it basically makes it so that the cores being used have increased clockspeed and the cores not being used have decreased. an i3 can run any cpu intensive game, some on par with an i5 and others significantly slower. either one u can game on if paired with a good mid range video card.

                  as for ur laptops huge usage of ram, probably need to clean it. rn i have 2 tabs of chrome, discord, some update stuff and windows services running and only using 2.1gb ram. theres plenty of headroom for sas, which only uses 300 mb.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    personally I don't think you can fix lag, this is one of the main problem with most flash games, its all internet reliant

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by GreyDragon View Post
                      personally I don't think you can fix lag, this is one of the main problem with most flash games, its all internet reliant
                      flash is CPU dependent, not much internet.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X