Then it's a grab-bag:įirestorm is the most feature-rich, but also a bit bloated with features most casual users never use (and crash-prone if your computer isn t up-to-snuff). The best is the official Second Life viewer from Linden Lab.
KOKUA VIEWER 4.1.1.39717 REVIEW WINDOWS
Great, so my question is since I haven't used windows in so long, what is the best viewer for sl for windows as far as running the game smoothly and good graphics?
KOKUA VIEWER 4.1.1.39717 REVIEW MAC
So far I have to say, it performs really well.I just got a new windows laptop for Christmas, used to go on sl with a mac but I have the sl viewer like I had on my MacBook and the graphics don't seem that I plan on doing more testing and with the 3D mouse I use for machinima work and on different sims to do more comparing. From my observation on this particular sim in this particular area, I would say it was anywhere from 2-5 times better in FPS, and in addition, when walking, no choppiness The loading was very fast and I was instantly getting rates from between 40-90 FPS (I walked back and forth along a path in both viewers) there was no observed 'bake in' period where I had to wait for the FPS to pick up. It's loaded, no grey, just takes a while for the FPS to build up. FS has for me for a while now, chugged and very low FPS on some sims until it gets more processed.
viewer to the same WL and same draw distance, same display settingsįirst of, observing the windows task manager, the usage of the CPU / GPU is really no different than of FSĪfter intial load I'm getting anywhere from 6-11 FPS and if I let the scene 'bake in' longer up to 20 FPS or so. I went to area in Grove Estate I know likes to chug alot. Ok some my first impressions (related to observed performance not anything to do with the UI) The improvement seems to not be an isolated occurrence just for me so far, other than my friend I mentioned in the video and her other friend, another friend of mine and some commenters on YT / Facebook have reported an increase in performance as well, some said they actually got better performance from Firestorm though. The shadow on Alchemy does look kinda different but I didn't mess with shadow quality setting on both viewer and left them at their default parameters. The Firestorm version I was using in the video is the newest one, and I tried my best to make sure the settings and factors are similar on both viewers during the testing (sliders, draw distance, amount of non-impostor avatars, etc except that Alchemy's draw distance is at 128m and Firestorm at 120m) which is why I had the radar open as well to show how many people are around me during the testing, and I tried not to go to too many places before recording, I only tp'd between the town and my place. I wonder if it will inspire the Alchemy developer to continue his efforts. Nor could I hear what you may have done in between running the different viewers for comparison. Similar, but I see 2 significant differences. But this is indeed part of the challenge of doing a "test". How much any of this is a factor, who knows. The current version of the official Second Life Viewer from Linden Lab is 6.64. That includes 7 updates from Linden Lab, compared with the Alchemy Beta. If it's the current Version 6.5, that is merged up to Linden Lab Version 6.64. There's no indication which Firestorm version is being used. The video links to the Alchemy website, so I'm assuming the current Beta 6.9 which is merged up to Linden Lab Version 6.03. This is interesting, and will certainly appeal to those wanting to see if they can double their FPS, but it lacks some benchmarking details.
Graphics settings are similar on viewers tested. Not sure if the increase in performance is really because it utilizes the GPU more or not, but hey it's there. Statistics bar is on in the video so you guys can see the FPS difference. So apparently the Alchemy viewer actually utilizes the GPU (Graphics Card) more than other viewers and might give you extra performance (it doubles my performance) if you have good GPU.
0 kommentar(er)
