Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Performance Megathread

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Stellaris 52835 Bug Reports 33973 Console edition 1287 Suggestions 20886 Tech Support 3133 Multiplayer 390 User Mods 4761 Stellaris AAR (After Action Reports)
Show only dev responses
Kolath said:
Is there anything that can be done for lag on the Species screen? Late game I end up with tons of species from migration and that screen drops to about 10 FPS (vs. a smooth 60 FPS for rest of the game).

It is markedly worse with the UI Dynamic Scaling mod and even worse when I turn on Planetary Diversity and Ethics and Civics. I can reliably reproduce that one screen chugging by starting a new came using the console `communications` command to to meet all empires and then showing galaxy species.

- Vanilla it is about 20-30 FPS
- UI Dynamic it goes to 15-20 FPS
- Planetary Diversity and/or Ethics and Civics drops it to 8-10 FPS

I'm assuming the issue is maybe all the portrait animations? I am playing on an RTX 2070 and lots of RAM and CPU so it doesn't seem like a thing that should cause it to die?

Are there any ways to disable animation there?

Are there other calculations happening there that could be contributing?
Click to expand...

I am having this same issue. It is unbearable and makes using Biological Ascension unusable as it takes several minutes to modify a single species.

I am not sure what changed. Before people say it is a mod issue, this didn't exist before 3.0 so something was changed by Paradox.
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Bioness said:
I am having this same issue. It is unbearable and makes using Biological Ascension unusable as it takes several minutes to modify a single species.

I am not sure what changed. Before people say it is a mod issue, this didn't exist before 3.0 so something was changed by Paradox.
Click to expand...
I want to add I have problems with the Species screen only in a single player game,
when I play multiplayer there are practically no lags there, it is very strange
 
Kolath said:
Is there anything that can be done for lag on the Species screen? Late game I end up with tons of species from migration and that screen drops to about 10 FPS (vs. a smooth 60 FPS for rest of the game).

It is markedly worse with the UI Dynamic Scaling mod and even worse when I turn on Planetary Diversity and Ethics and Civics. I can reliably reproduce that one screen chugging by starting a new came using the console `communications` command to to meet all empires and then showing galaxy species.

- Vanilla it is about 20-30 FPS
- UI Dynamic it goes to 15-20 FPS
- Planetary Diversity and/or Ethics and Civics drops it to 8-10 FPS

I'm assuming the issue is maybe all the portrait animations? I am playing on an RTX 2070 and lots of RAM and CPU so it doesn't seem like a thing that should cause it to die?

Are there any ways to disable animation there?

Are there other calculations happening there that could be contributing?
Click to expand...
I'm having the exact same issue as you, sadly i don't know why this is. :(
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I noticed game is utilizing my CPU a lot more than previous versions.
I hear fans spinning all the time which is a good thing, because otherwise I wouldn't take a look at task manager.

My current game is like 450 years long and didn't notice any issues so far, but this could be because I never run at speeds faster than "normal".
I also don't use any mods, my OS is clean as pharmacy and no background apps are running except Windows Defender.

Intel i3-8100 @3.6 Ghz 4 cores
I'm sure the rest of hardware doesn't really matter.

One additional suggestion would be to enable firewall for everything except stellaris, because once, I noticed huge performance hit which was caused by Windows downloading and installing updates in background.
I even enabled to prevent installing unsigned software in GPO, and I never use administrator account, that way I know nothing is wasting my hardware resources.

It's hard to detect these things when you play game so it's easier to prevent it than finding a cure.
 
Anemetius said:
The same, late-game lags still kill the game, just late-game comes later as pop growth is slower...
Click to expand...
it's not game killing at all. and up til then it runs like a racecar compared to how it used to be
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
playable, maybe
they add sliders for population grow and lower the overall population a little, but they dont fix the mess of 2.0 and 2.2
the AI cant still do anything right and late game lag is as deadly as before
 
  • 5
  • 2
Reactions:
The Conmmander said:
playable, maybe
they add sliders for population grow and lower the overall population a little, but they dont fix the mess of 2.0 and 2.2
the AI cant still do anything right and late game lag is as deadly as before
Click to expand...
I tend to agree. Personal impression of my games in the latest version: yes, you can set pop growth in a way that the performance remains good. But unfortunately then you'll have almost no pop growth anymore during late game, even on newly colonized planets. I had to stop my last playthrough because of this. Beside the fact that this effectively makes some play-styles unusable - it does not fit to my expectation in terms of immersion if a newly colonized planet stagnates completely.
 
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Ahead of the next patch, I have been playing a bit of 2.1.3 and 1.9.1 games. 1.9 is peak performance, no question about that (game moves so fast I have to really slow it down to keep up at first), but the features are rather bare and the mid-game is practically empty (slightly offset by some aspects of the AI and the novelty of the old FTL systems) I don't really notice much of a difference right now between 2.1.3 and the current game, yes, the former is still faster, but not by much as far as I can tell. Definitely much improved than what it was in the height of post 2.2 unplayability. Frankly, downgrading back then felt much more rewarding but now I really feel the absence of features especially in the midgame. The tile system, while cute at first, is hard to keep track of through the sector AI at least isn't terrible.

All in all, I think the game is on the right track performance-wise and as badly executed as many of the 2X features were, I think they are well on the way to maturing so long as nothing too drastic is added or replaces an existing mechanic to the point of breaking everything again. I derive far less enjoyment from reverting.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
I tried 3.1 and 150 years into game, the slow down starts to hit as hard as before and i dont have a potato rig. (medium settings, 0.5 habitability, no guaranteed worlds)
Even with smaller maps, less empires etc. i can delay that max. 50 years. It always comes (every map size) and makes the game unenjoyable for me. (because it's growing fast).
Come on PDX, your self chosen time table (default settings) is 300 - 350 years. You have to find ways for better scaling, controll or counter the exponentially growing parts of the game!
 
Last edited:
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
The Conmmander said:
I tried 3.1 and 150 years into game, the slow down starts to hit as hard as before and i dont have a potato rig. (medium settings, 0.5 habitability, no guaranteed worlds)
Even with smaller maps, less empires etc. i can delay that max. 50 years. It always comes (every map size) and makes the game unenjoyable for me. (because it's growing fast).
Come on PDX, your self chosen time table (default settings) is 300 - 350 years. You have to find ways for better scaling, controll or counter the exponentially growing parts of the game!
Click to expand...
Looking at this thread and also the reactions to 3.1, it seems like this is not seen as one of the major issues by most of the players anymore. Therefore I tend to accept that priorities seems to be better set somewhere else. However, after close to 3000h I now stopped playing Stellaris because of this issue. Makes no sense for me personally to continue playing a game that gives me this type of frustration. Again: personal impression.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I tried it aswell and the performances were just as bad as before for me. And this time I disabled every single mod I had, also just to see the difference.
About a 100 years in the game, medium galaxy size, it starts hitting. Needless to say it grows exponentially from this point on and becomes unplayable.
I mean, when a single in-game year takes you about 30 to 45 minutes, there's a giant problem there. And I'm not playing on a potato.
Hell I can play ARK on max setting without a problem, and that game is NOT optimised at all, but stellaris in low settings? Nah, forget it.
Performances have never really been fixed to be honest, which is a shame. It got a bit better, but gradually comes back to where it was.
And here's why, since the cirlce starts again: Now, not a major issue for them anyway so they'll keep on adding features, DLCs and whatnot, maybe even revamp a huge chunk of the game like they do almost every single year But all this will... well result in performances going down the gutter yet again. It's an infinite circle with PDX.
A game that most can barely play to half of its full potential is something to be ashamed of really.
 
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
Ive noticed at the start of a game im running like 200-350 fps(ya its not capped for stellaris). Im at 2560+ year and its down to 40fps. 3.1 is def better than the previous but holy crap it hitches and stalls alot.

Im also running this on a watercooled, OC'd
11th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-11700K @ 3.60GHz (16 CPUs), ~3.6GHz(OC'd to 5ghz)
With - Memory: 32768MB RAM

Its not a potatoe.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
I'm really curious how PDX games run on Alder Lake CPUs, with the hybrid architecture of performance cores vs efficiency cores.

We know that when the games start lagging, its because one core is being maxed out. So ensuring you have a CPU with the best single core performance is one way to help maximize performance in PDX games.

But do the games/operating systems/CPU make sure that the core being maxed out, is a performance core? I would hate to get an Alder Lake or soon Raptor Lake CPU, and find out PDX games run like crap on them, because the maxed out load ends up on an efficiency core. On the other hand, maybe these CPUs and their scheduling are fantastic for PDX games, even better in a relative sense. You'd think everything is smart enough to do this right, but you never know lol.
 
It's complicated... I would say the performance would depend on which Alder Lake, with some performance gains for the i7 and i9 over the i5/i3.

source: Intel. tl;dr on the i7-107xx and higher (117xx, 127xx), Turbo 3.0 will boost *one* core, the best core, to its highest potential, rather than trying to boost all cores to some value (which is what turbo2 did).
 
Last edited:
Logros said:
I'm really curious how PDX games run on Alder Lake CPUs, with the hybrid architecture of performance cores vs efficiency cores.

We know that when the games start lagging, its because one core is being maxed out. So ensuring you have a CPU with the best single core performance is one way to help maximize performance in PDX games.

But do the games/operating systems/CPU make sure that the core being maxed out, is a performance core? I would hate to get an Alder Lake or soon Raptor Lake CPU, and find out PDX games run like crap on them, because the maxed out load ends up on an efficiency core. On the other hand, maybe these CPUs and their scheduling are fantastic for PDX games, even better in a relative sense. You'd think everything is smart enough to do this right, but you never know lol.
Click to expand...
I haven't noticed a problem on my 12700KF.

Considering their single threaded performance, I'd say Alder Lake is probably the best choice for Stellaris - though the 5800X3D might very well be even faster. (Factorio loves the big cache might be similar with Stellaris)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back