11-09-2023, 07:57 AM
(This post was last modified: 11-09-2023, 08:09 AM by josemendez.)
Hi!
Mesh density has zero impact on simulation, since the mesh isn't simulated: a particle-based representation of it is. Amount of vertices/triangles/submeshes/etc only has an impact on rendering. How many particles does your softbody have?
All other parameters in your screenshots look ok to me.
The profiler screenshot shows 1.68 ms spent on the player loop: that's around 600 frames per second, hardly a performance problem. I guess you sampled a specific frame that had normal performance, amongst frames that did exhibit the issue? In any case, this profiler pic is of no use whatsoever. Could you export the profiling data and share that instead? (there's buttons at the top of the profiler to export/import data). That way I can navigate your profiling session and view all useful info, you can send the profiler data file to support(at)virtualmethodstudio.com.
Collision detection between particles is quite cheap, certainly a lot cheaper that the actual softbody simulation or collider collision: it's just pairs of point-point distance tests. Unless there's several thousand particles in the scene and they're all colliding with each other, chances are particle collision won't ever be a performance bottleneck.
kind regards,
(09-09-2023, 10:49 AM)creekat Wrote: The mesh of the softbody I am using has 3328 vertices, 3332 triangles and 2 submeshes.
Mesh density has zero impact on simulation, since the mesh isn't simulated: a particle-based representation of it is. Amount of vertices/triangles/submeshes/etc only has an impact on rendering. How many particles does your softbody have?
All other parameters in your screenshots look ok to me.
(09-09-2023, 10:49 AM)creekat Wrote: I took a screenshot of the Profiler during the time when the game lags and attached it below.
The profiler screenshot shows 1.68 ms spent on the player loop: that's around 600 frames per second, hardly a performance problem. I guess you sampled a specific frame that had normal performance, amongst frames that did exhibit the issue? In any case, this profiler pic is of no use whatsoever. Could you export the profiling data and share that instead? (there's buttons at the top of the profiler to export/import data). That way I can navigate your profiling session and view all useful info, you can send the profiler data file to support(at)virtualmethodstudio.com.
(09-09-2023, 10:49 AM)creekat Wrote: I can probably send the entire project to you if you have a personal e-mail address to which I can send it to. My observation is that the Burst mode is fine as long as there are no colliding softbodies. Maybe the computation for Obi just overloads with all the collisions happening? If this is the case, might the softbody be subscribed to the OnParticleCollision event? (I did not perform any subscription via script.)
Collision detection between particles is quite cheap, certainly a lot cheaper that the actual softbody simulation or collider collision: it's just pairs of point-point distance tests. Unless there's several thousand particles in the scene and they're all colliding with each other, chances are particle collision won't ever be a performance bottleneck.
kind regards,