LOD Models into RAM? Faster LOD switching, less stutter

[megagoth1702]

Hey folks!

This is kind of a question and suggestion in one.

Question: Do the different level-of-detail models take up much space? When toying around with 3Ds Max back in the days a model was not much more than a few hundred kilobytes. Given that the trees & grass models in arma2 are pretty much all the same only a few LOD models would be needed.

Is it possible to load LOD models into RAM instead of having to load them from HDD every time? I understand there is RAMDISK but having such a feature in the game itself would be really nice. Of course the memory hunger would be a bit bigger but today's systems have 4GBram usually, OA taking 1.6 GB is not that much of a deal. If those other 400MB would be filled with LOD models for quicker LOD switching - I think that is an OK compromise.

Thoughts? Maybe I am totally wrong here. Correct me!

[PuFu]

1. individual LODs cannot be pre-loaded in RAM as you would want. RAM's purpose is completly different anyways. Not even wanna talk about the number of models (and thus the number of visual LODs) present in the same scene at the same time.
One mesh is not big in terms of kbs or whatever have you. But a p3d is a lot more than that.

The said stuttering and slow lod switching is not caused by the lods, but by the number of sections (individual texture files or rvmats) that need to be loaded up. One can test how a heavy model (and i mean heavy as in well over the poly limit - using multiple proxies) performs if there is no textures asigned to it.

That said, arma is the only game pushing towards 16k poly a vehicle model (even more at times), with several 1k+ textures each.

That said, i would welcome A3 using more than 2gbs of ram (i have 16 and 24 GB on the rigs)

[megagoth1702]

Thanks for clearing that up! Thread can be pretty much closed. I hoped that you can pre-load some stuff so not only RAID dudes/SSD dudes can play this flawlessly with super high detail.

Thanks a lot again for explaining!

[PuFu]

your best bet is still getting an SSD - they are still expensive, but hell...

[galzohar]

So what you're saying it's really the texture loading that makes all the mess, and models alone don't really have anything to do with it?

I still wish the game could keep stuff in RAM for those who have the RAM for it instead of making us use a ramdisk...

[PuFu]

So what you're saying it's really the texture loading that makes all the mess, and models alone don't really have anything to do with it?

No, it is a mix, obviously. But between having a high poly model and a model with tons of textures to load, the first option is better. It all ads up in the end, but as i said, the section count is the number 1 thing to look for when you want to optimize content for BIS engine.

I still wish the game could keep stuff in RAM for those who have the RAM for it instead of making us use a ramdisk...

You and me just the same.

[zorrobyte]

No, it is a mix, obviously. But between having a high poly model and a model with tons of textures to load, the first option is better. It all ads up in the end, but as i said, the section count is the number 1 thing to look for when you want to optimize content for BIS engine.


You and me just the same.

Yup.

http://www.romexsoftware.com/en-us/fancy-cache/

http://www.superspeed.com/desktop/supercache.php

[Sickboy]

32-bit game, 2 GB address space on 32-bit windows, 3 GB due to LAA on 64-bit windows.

They'd probably first have to go 64-bit (which brings a whole scala of other things with it, as described by Suma in various other threads),
unless some of that 'abuse file system for accessing memory' tricks can be applied


In any case, with SSD's becoming more and more mainstream, and faster and faster, I personally feel BI can spend their time better on other things.

[galzohar]

SSDs will never compete with RAM though on any level. If you consider the cost it becomes even less of a competition.