Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ToonyMan]

Odd.  When I start in a small area the loading and saving is blazing fast, less than a second if on a 2x2.  As the years go by though the loading and saving take longer and longer.

[Kardos]

Do you play with any mods and/or an uncapped population number during world gen?  A really high world population will net you a slower save. 
I once used legendary lands mod on a large world with no population cap.  Except I didn't have neough memory to gen the world, so I used a medium world.  And saving fortresses took a long time.

[lemonpieman]

Excuse me, I'm a bit new to this forum, would you mind explaining what 2x2 3x3 etc. means?

[ToonyMan]

Excuse me, I'm a bit new to this forum, would you mind explaining what 2x2 3x3 etc. means?

The size of the local area.  Which you can change before you embark your fortress.

[Kardos]

Excuse me, I'm a bit new to this forum, would you mind explaining what 2x2 3x3 etc. means?

The size of the local area.  Which you can change before you embark your fortress.

The deafult in the init is 6x6.  When you embark you can change this size using umkh (verticly larger and smaller, horizontaly larger and smaller, respectively)

[azazel]

Odd.  When I start in a small area the loading and saving is blazing fast, less than a second if on a 2x2.  As the years go by though the loading and saving take longer and longer.

The more items you have in your fortress (yes, even stones and the like), the longer it'll take.

[Caz]

Thanks for all the replies 

*drools thinking of running large forts*   

[Jurph]

It seems like it would be simple... er, not simple, but certainly doable... to have a handful of save files of varying complexity available for DF users to run and report their framerates.  If there were a way to automate the load-and-run portion, you could even generate some rough benchmarks that would let you do a simple pulldown-type menu on a web app, like so:

I have

• 2.8 GHz CPU with multiple cores (means that DF will have exclusive access to all 2.8 GHz)
• 2GB of DDR2 RAM
• ...other specs as needed...

...and I'd like a 200-dwarf fort running at 40+ FPS with

• Meat industry (uncaged animals)
• Magma pipe
• An infinite water source
• Invaders turned on
• "Other Features"

My largest starting site must be no larger than ((AUTOMATICALLY-GENERATED NUMBER)).

Or you could do it another way: specify your desired features and minimum acceptable FPS, and an assistant program that knows the relationship between different parameters and your PC specs will auto-generate an INIT file for you by tweaking the temperature, weather, GFPS, FPS, Site-Finder Default size, Invaders, and Population Cap.

[Kishmond]

That sounds sweet.  I wonder how fast it drops later on though.

Currently at a 7x7 fort with 79 dwarfs. Holds at 50-60 FPS, but drops to 2 or 3 when designating many things for dumping or hauling.

[spokehedz]

Pre-recent optimizations, on an E8400 clocked to about 3.7Ghz, I can manage 30+ FPS with 200 dwarves and 200 animals, a lava moat, a working aqueduct system that is capable of being pretty well controlled, on a 9x9 mountain map with about 90 z-levels and a real river, a cave river, chasms, a volcano, and potentially HFS that I haven't found yet. I haven't done any sort of metagaming to improve my FPS, either, and I have all options enabled. I imagine you'll get similar or better.

Seed please.

[ShadeJS]

Um.. I am also thinking about getting a new laptop, so should this be able to run DF well?

Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad Processor Q9000 (2.00Ghz)
1GB Nvidia GeForce GT 130M

4GB DDR3 System Memory (2 Dimm)
?

The big thing with DF is the speed of your single fastest core. Basically 2 x 3 GHZ core is better than 4 x 2.5 GHZ. Basically you want one core for DF and one for everything else. Amount of memory, as long as it's adequate (2 GB should be fine), matters less than memory speed and bus speed AND latency. DF shifts lots of little bits of data about, doing that fast and with low latency helps. Beyond that, any video card with a good modern OpenGL implementation will do.

For reference, My dual core Athlon64 (2 x 3.0 GHZ) with 2 GB of bog standard DDR2-800 and a 256MB passively cooled desktop class ATI card will do a 6x6, with all map features, and about 200 Dwarves plus roaming pets @ about 20ish (or a bit less) fps. If I turn on a major pump rig, or have a siege, or breach the HFS that falls off a cliff. These days I cap at 130pop, with 50 kids, to keep things playable (> 20 fps) with traders and a siege, and some big water project turned on.

[yuhhaur]

Pre-recent optimizations, on an E8400 clocked to about 3.7Ghz, I can manage 30+ FPS with 200 dwarves and 200 animals, a lava moat, a working aqueduct system that is capable of being pretty well controlled, on a 9x9 mountain map with about 90 z-levels and a real river, a cave river, chasms, a volcano, and potentially HFS that I haven't found yet. I haven't done any sort of metagaming to improve my FPS, either, and I have all options enabled. I imagine you'll get similar or better.

Seed please.

You could try with mine, some say it is better than Dwarf Heaven 
http://www.bay12games.com/forum/index.php?topic=36396.0