Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mini Client very slow

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

  • Mini Client very slow

    Now that everyone still playing is forced to use the mini client, we see that it has slowed down much more than before. Pls do something about it before more people leave out of frustration. Thanks

  • #2
    Yep,same here..specialy if u load even 1 more character..ihave 4 on 2 servers.
    so now i play main only.
    wirh 2 all takes forever..4 im not even gona try for some time.
    or ill kill rest 3..otherwise 2much time to waiste even to do dailys if they dont go insame time.

    Comment


    • #3
      I had this issue at first because of the Maintenance and its need to synchronise which means it will be very laggy in 3v3 and other PVP until this had finished, as there are a lot of server groups.
      Now saying this information came to me yesterday it should not be affecting people today so those effect should have gone, However on the side notes I was also informed that as this program, the mini client, uses browser cache, data e.c.t. it was advised that people clear Cache, data, and other parts (except Passwords) so that it means that all browser data is cleared so it speeds up the game and everything else.
      I followed this information and it did indeed speed up the Mini client and browser. Now I do not know why people would have to do this as it should be an independent program and have nothing to do with with the browsers but its there and done.

      So try clearing cache and all of that browser stuff and see if it works for you as well, it cannot hurt anyway as if it shares everything with your browsers then clearing it would mean you reinstall all game data and have no old buggy data, (which means there could still be issues).

      Comment


      • #4
        Ok thanks. I will try this.

        Comment


        • #5
          Another annoying thing about application performance: why is the processor-CPU used, even if the application is minimized (similar value with application running in full window)? This did not happen using the browser / flash relationship.
          A debugging of the application code would probably be necessary. Is only a suggestion
          Another suggestion related to the application code: the implementation of the possibility to use GPU instead of CPU, for computers with dedicated video cards.

          BR//Escort

          Comment


          • #6
            OK not being Dumb or anything but doesn't the CPU get used the moment you turn on the PC, open ANY Browser and it the main thing used so a computer works, Even when doing POST the CPU has to be installed otherwise nothing will work.

            As for the GPU to be used instead of CPU again silly comment as you still need a CUP for the GPU to work.

            Any program which needs to be run will run via the CPU (Central Processing Unit) or Processor for that program to run. If your saying that Browsers do not use the CUP to run then clearly you are mistaken and need to rethink your post.

            Now I understand the actual amount of Resources used by the Browser game and the Mini Client are different and some players cannot run more than 2 Clients where as they could run 4 or 5 windows within a browser. This is down to an amount of Resources required by the browser and would also be shared within the browser platform. A mini client is an individual program and as so it would require a set amount of Resources for each and every Client you run. It will not share as it will be seen as a separate program and Resource.

            To increase the speed you may try clearing the Browser cash as it may speed it up as Java seems to go into the browser settings as it is essentially a browser within itself.

            Just remember regardless of your processing power, how good you say your system is, or think that the GPU should run programs which are not Graphics related, you have to take into account or the Resources the browsers actually used over a mini browser (client) which people would have to open multiple times. Ask yourself this, how many different browsers, and browser games can you have open on your system (different games with high Resource requirements) before you start getting performance issues? I can run up to 8 Mini Clients before I start having issues, which is more than enough.

            Comment


            • #7
              Note that GPUs can be forced to use their resources over the CPU, but you must instruct the machine to do so. With AMD and NVidia, this is through their specific control panel - which is optional when downloading GPU drivers from websites. I do know that when I instructed the browser to use my RTX Graphics card when I was playing with a browser using Flash, that it would go faster and smoother. The G in GPUis rather antiquated and does not refer only to graphics - kind of like how we still call a capture card a "card" or when jumping to an earlier point in a video "rewind". In many cases, a GPU is superior to the CPU in terms of raw processing power- but most programs will default to using the CPU, unless you inform them otherwise. Those using integrated graphics do not have this option. I do know that enabling my RTX 2060 - a rather older graphics card for certain tasks is about 5 hours faster than having my Ryzen 5 3600 do all the work - it takes the graphics card 15 minutes to do what the more up to date Ryzen can do in 6-hours - firing on all cores. There are quite a few tasks - not "graphics" related that take advantage of the computing power of a discrete graphics card - and I only named one. I haven't tried enabling the graphics card with the mini-client yet, because they so far -run fine on the machines I have with discrete graphics cards - however, if I have 3 mini-client windows open, and one of them blacks out - they all black out.

              If you want very efficient processing power, an ASIC could be designed that only does one specific thing well - and this is done in the world of computing, but it would be downright silly to do so for our little game. But for many game-related tasks, a modest 4-year old graphics card will outdo a modern-day i9 or Ryzen processor - if the GPU is instructed to do so.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by 49369983572 View Post
                Note that GPUs can be forced to use their resources over the CPU, but you must instruct the machine to do so. With AMD and NVidia, this is through their specific control panel - which is optional when downloading GPU drivers from websites. I do know that when I instructed the browser to use my RTX Graphics card when I was playing with a browser using Flash, that it would go faster and smoother. The G in GPUis rather antiquated and does not refer only to graphics - kind of like how we still call a capture card a "card" or when jumping to an earlier point in a video "rewind". In many cases, a GPU is superior to the CPU in terms of raw processing power- but most programs will default to using the CPU, unless you inform them otherwise. Those using integrated graphics do not have this option. I do know that enabling my RTX 2060 - a rather older graphics card for certain tasks is about 5 hours faster than having my Ryzen 5 3600 do all the work - it takes the graphics card 15 minutes to do what the more up to date Ryzen can do in 6-hours - firing on all cores. There are quite a few tasks - not "graphics" related that take advantage of the computing power of a discrete graphics card - and I only named one. I haven't tried enabling the graphics card with the mini-client yet, because they so far -run fine on the machines I have with discrete graphics cards - however, if I have 3 mini-client windows open, and one of them blacks out - they all black out.

                If you want very efficient processing power, an ASIC could be designed that only does one specific thing well - and this is done in the world of computing, but it would be downright silly to do so for our little game. But for many game-related tasks, a modest 4-year old graphics card will outdo a modern-day i9 or Ryzen processor - if the GPU is instructed to do so.
                Sorry I stopped laughing when you said that you do not need a CPU as the GPU is so much better.

                Just going to add this extract for you "The northbridge was replaced by the system agent introduced by the Sandy Bridge micro architecture in 2011, which essentially handles all previous Northbridge functions. Intel's Sandy Bridge processors feature full integration of northbridge functions onto the CPU chip, along with processor cores, memory controller, high speed PCI Express interface and integrated graphics processing unit (GPU). This was a further evolution of the Westmere architecture, which also featured a CPU and GPU in the same package"

                AMD did the same thing as well. So if you remove the CPU, which you state, You can run your computer on something which will not work as a CPU. A GPU, which is on your Graphics card, could be turned into a computer, which is possible if, and only if, that GPU becomes your CPU and handles everything the CPU was designed to do. However as stated above, the CPU basically Controls the data which in is the Control hub, or memory hub which ever way you want to call it, and then, due to the FSB, it will run everything as all programs still have to go through the CPU to work.

                Are you telling people that they can all rip out their CPU's and only buy a GPU (Graphics Processing Unit) and ram that into the CPU socket so everything will speed up? Some how I think not.
                I can run 8 mini clients before I hit lag. I only have a Ryzen 7, 8 core with 16 threads. I admit my GPU has a lot more cores but it only works at a set speed which is determined by its own limitations. My GPU cannot take the place of my CPU as it needs the CPU to be there as that is part of the "Old Term here" North bridge. Unless you have rebuilt the formfactors of your PC, redesigned a New style of a motherboard which does not work how everybody elses works at all, and are sitting on a gold mine where nobody needs to spend $1000 on an AMD or Intel CPU ever again. In the world you live you have stated that your computer runs on your GPU and the CPU does nothing and can be removed totally.

                I may have gone hard on you here but the CPU and FSB are very important to the speed performance of any computer regardless of the Graphics card you have. You could be using a 3080 GTX NVid, and still be slower than a snale. The Graphics card does performance on the monitor and FSP, which makes Zero difference if you have a 60Hz Monitor it will still only refresh at 60Hz. If you use HTMI you are limited to the refresh rate of that monitor, same as if you use a display port. Stating that the GPU can out perform the CPU will always be a stupid comment because of the differences in the jobs at which they perform. The speed of the flow of graphics on a screen is measures in Tb/s and some are amazing with their speeds, however are limited by their own clock speeds, it would be like saying to somebody that a 5,200 rpm Hard Drive is faster that a 7,200 rpm hard drive when their data rates are equal. It would also be like telling somebody that there is Zero difference in performance if they just use 4Gb or ram compared to 8Gb let alone 16 GB or Ram. Everybody knows that the more Ram you have the better the performance within your system, and remember the Ram is directly linked to the CPU, which you clearly say nobody needs to run a computer.

                I understand what you mean by GPU because I have worked on too many computers built too many and fixed too many to not know what the interrogated Northbridge does and which parts it controls. I would love for somebody to designe a 3080 Graphics card that is also the main CUP for a computer because the processing power would be amazing, however if you are using a nice Ryzen 9 with 12 cores 24 threads, or their other 32 core 64 thread, or even the bigger processors you are only limited the the speed at which these processors run at. Remember what I said about the Hard drives, one at 5000 rpm and the other at 7000 rpm, clearly the 7000 is faster because the disk moves faster so the pick up is faster, the only issue would be the download and upload speed which is set by the controller. Like the Hard drives its the CPU Ghz speed that matters, the slower it is the less speed, and its ability to process data. Mine runs at 4Ghz, which is ok, but still I am limited by its speed. My Graphics card however has the same issue with speed but Raw processing power is so much higher as it only does Graphics. I know the card I use out performs cheap cards or old cards, but it only does the processes directed to it from the CPU.

                Comment


                • #9
                  [QUOTE=16761828211;n141013]

                  Sorry I stopped laughing when you said that you do not need a CPU as the GPU is so much better. . .

                  I never said that. Nowhere in my post do I say a CPU is not needed. To summarize, the GPU is superior for specialized tasks and did benefit the browser instance of the game but I haven't tried this on the mini-client.

                  The rest of your thread is based on you reading that I said a CPU is not needed, which I never said.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    We're getting off topic here, but GPU vs CPU is a very real-world issue right now. It's one of the reasons why it's impossible to buy one of the newer AMD or NVidia GPUs for the average person. It is because people are using the compute units rather then the CPU.

                    https://renderpool.net/blog/cpu-vs-g...a%20CPU%20core.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      To get us back on topic, I'm attaching where in my NVidia control panel do I tell the system to use the GPU for computing rather than the more general CPU. Some of the CPU functions are at such a high-level - disc storage etc - where despite it's power, it won't help the game at all. For those of you with AMD/NVidia cards, you can try to do this for yourself to see if there is an increase in responsiveness.Capture.PNG

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by 49369983572 View Post
                        We're getting off topic here, but GPU vs CPU is a very real-world issue right now. It's one of the reasons why it's impossible to buy one of the newer AMD or NVidia GPUs for the average person. It is because people are using the compute units rather then the CPU.

                        https://renderpool.net/blog/cpu-vs-g...a%20CPU%20core.
                        I get fully what you are saying, and if worked together, a good CPU and a good GPU you will bet better performance with the rendering of the progucts you use. I do a lot of photography and Video rendering and the GPU I use is perfect for this, and it will run every game on the market as well. The CPU is also of good quality which means I can run everything and it really does pull its weight.
                        As stated GPU's have hundreds of slow cores to do things, which makes the rendering fast, but they still cannot replace the CPU because you still need a CPU to do whats needed to run the machine. The only problem is Workstations are designed for specific things across business and would not be practical in a home environment. Home computers on the other hand require expensive components because you need a central processing unit of quality to run other applications at the same time as a multitude of other processes just so you are able to start doing anything with Graphics. To run a game you need an Operating system, to do anything you need code to process.

                        I am not saying a GPU is not fast, but speed is not the same thing as with a CPU. Without the CPU the GPU will not run. There are people out there with 128 core PC's that have 4 3080 GTX Nvid Cards, thich they have spent over 50k for, and run at 4+Ghz. Raw processing power from either of the GPU or CPU is mad, but they are still limited. Having the best of everything does not mean you can do everything.

                        This game for instance. Some players are still using Duel core processors and cannot run 2 mini clients regardless of GPU. I normally have bigger games running when playing on ST-AD and I do not have an issue at all, and these are not small games. ST-AD uses more resources than some of the huges MMO's I have played, and this is a browser game. Regardless of the GPU if your CPU just cannot handle the resources required then you'll still have the same outcome, and believe me when i say this, I have has 3 mini clients running on an old duel core processor, on a laptop, and it was still playable JUST. Putting another, better, GPU on that machine would never have made it better, maybe more RAM, or OverClocking the CPU could have made it better, but Graphics wise nothing would change.

                        As for slowness I increased the speed without doing anything OTHER than clearing cache, data, e.c.t. It was only a small increase but it took a lot of lag out of the game, enough to play two accounts not all three smoothly. On my main PC I can run so many more as my CPU can handle it and so can my GPU. But there is clearly no point having a 3000+ Gforce card if you only have a 2Ghz duel core processor

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Good point. The slowest CPU I use for the game is a 3rd gen i5 with 2 cores/4 threads but only Intel Graphics. It is capable of 3 mini-client windows, but it does lag and lacks responsiveness - but interestingly, the mini-client has never blacked out this machine.

                          The other machines I use for the game are Zen 2+ Ryzens or 8th gen i7, both with and without GPU. I still haven't used the GPU with the mini-client yet - but these machines are capable of running 3 mini clients, with satisfactory responsiveness. The 5 2500U laptops - with built in integrated Vega 8 graphics so often black out the screen - and it happens to one mini-client windows, it happens to all the other mini-client windows and all must be refreshed.

                          The game worked okay on browsers with slower Celeron CPUs, but I'd never tried sticking a discrete GPU in those machines, for the very reason you describe in your latest response. It makes no sense to put a super duper power GPU into a machine with only a celeron. Interestingly enough, there is a very niche market - that does have motherboards for Celerons and also has slots for 12 GPUs - and people do this very thing - equip a 5th-7tjh gen Intel Celeron chip into s specialized machine with a dozen or more of the latest RTX 30 or RX6K graphics cards. There are youtube videos of people who did this very crazy thing within the last 2 weeks - paying gouging prices for the GPUs off of a scalper. However, I do not think this would help with the game and I think it would be foolish for someone to build a machine with a celeron, then put $32,000 of scalped GPUs into it - just to play this little game.

                          I suspect 4GB or more of RAM would also help this game - and someone trying to play with less than 4GB of RAM would find things very laggy - regardless of the CPU. The other thing I would suggest, is getting an SSD. A lot of the lag, in general, on my older machines, was because my RAM would hit it's limit - then the CPU would proceed to use the hard disk as a cache = and using an SSD rather than physical hard drive will mitigate a lot of that lag.

                          Someone who will unnamed on my server, kind of shot himself in the foot, claiming to be an IT pro and building his own machine - but then claimed he was RAIDING 4 physical hard drives for speed - which made most of us realize he was probably reading a computer magazine from 2002 rather than actually working in IT - since by the time the game started, SSDs were already within the reach of consumers and were an order, if not orders of magnitude faster than the fastest RAID 0 array with physical hard drives.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            3 micro clients open on the slowest machine with integrated graphics that I would ever try.

                            Capture.PNG

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by 49369983572 View Post
                              Good point. The slowest CPU I use for the game is a 3rd gen i5 with 2 cores/4 threads but only Intel Graphics. It is capable of 3 mini-client windows, but it does lag and lacks responsiveness - but interestingly, the mini-client has never blacked out this machine.

                              The other machines I use for the game are Zen 2+ Ryzens or 8th gen i7, both with and without GPU. I still haven't used the GPU with the mini-client yet - but these machines are capable of running 3 mini clients, with satisfactory responsiveness. The 5 2500U laptops - with built in integrated Vega 8 graphics so often black out the screen - and it happens to one mini-client windows, it happens to all the other mini-client windows and all must be refreshed.

                              The game worked okay on browsers with slower Celeron CPUs, but I'd never tried sticking a discrete GPU in those machines, for the very reason you describe in your latest response. It makes no sense to put a super duper power GPU into a machine with only a celeron. Interestingly enough, there is a very niche market - that does have motherboards for Celerons and also has slots for 12 GPUs - and people do this very thing - equip a 5th-7tjh gen Intel Celeron chip into s specialized machine with a dozen or more of the latest RTX 30 or RX6K graphics cards. There are youtube videos of people who did this very crazy thing within the last 2 weeks - paying gouging prices for the GPUs off of a scalper. However, I do not think this would help with the game and I think it would be foolish for someone to build a machine with a celeron, then put $32,000 of scalped GPUs into it - just to play this little game.

                              I suspect 4GB or more of RAM would also help this game - and someone trying to play with less than 4GB of RAM would find things very laggy - regardless of the CPU. The other thing I would suggest, is getting an SSD. A lot of the lag, in general, on my older machines, was because my RAM would hit it's limit - then the CPU would proceed to use the hard disk as a cache = and using an SSD rather than physical hard drive will mitigate a lot of that lag.

                              Someone who will unnamed on my server, kind of shot himself in the foot, claiming to be an IT pro and building his own machine - but then claimed he was RAIDING 4 physical hard drives for speed - which made most of us realize he was probably reading a computer magazine from 2002 rather than actually working in IT - since by the time the game started, SSDs were already within the reach of consumers and were an order, if not orders of magnitude faster than the fastest RAID 0 array with physical hard drives.
                              The problem which some people do find when they only have 4Gb Ram is exactly what you stated. Once the Ram hits a set limit the CPU uses the C: drive as its Swomp files and Virtual Ram, which is not that good if your always at the Limit of the computer. Adding just another 4Gb will improve the system by a good 10 - 15% which reduces Latency (not lag) within the system. The use of an SSD will reduce Latency even more. Remember Lag comes from being online and millions of people trying to connect through a server which will cause lag, where as Latency is on your own system where it bottle necks through either the Northbridge to Southbridge transferes like CPU/Ram to Hard Drive read/write and so on. SSD's are basically Ram drives consisting of just memory chips which can sometimes be faster than a normal Hard Drive. I currently use a 1Tb SSD as my main OS drive, all my games are on other drives so I have over 800 Gb remaining to play with, this reduces Latency in my system when I play games like One of the latest Mass Effect games I used to play. Game drives run set games and C drive is used once my 16 Gb Ram gets low. I did have 32Gb of Ram on my old system but that was a little old so I upgraded.

                              I will not use a Raid system because of how it would work on my system. I have over 12 Tb's spread across a number of drives, which does not include another 7 Tb stacked storage which I use on an IceBox.

                              I build PC's I do not have much to do with software because thats just junk people say is good. Building something from scratch and compatibility makes more scenes and you do not need to be a stupid IT guy to make a good built machine. Making sure things work for you is the goal and making sure the CPU and GPU match the performance you require from the machine. Any idiot can make out they are an IT specialist, i mean come on you only have to take a Cissco course to get their say so and people will believe you know what your doing.

                              I have 26 years of computing and I still have to learn what is the best way to get things done. This is why I do not run the game via the GPU, it runs perfect through my Razen 7 3700.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X