Lag/game not running propperly

(previously 'DEVELOPER') Private forum for registered community members. To register, please visit www.prison-architect.com/register.

Moderator: NBJeff

Are you also experiencing lag at this low amouth of prisoners?

Yes
28
68%
No
13
32%
 
Total votes: 41
laser50
level2
level2
Posts: 110
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 12:55 am

Postby laser50 » Sun Jun 02, 2013 8:26 pm

There are ways to keep the game playable.. This is what works for me:


* Restart the game every so often, at least once per 30-45 minutes works best for me, once per hour should work too.

* Set it to high or even real time priority in the task manager, this REALLY helped me a lot, from "Fuck this lagging shit" to "Okay, this is actually playable!".


Could try doing some more PC-related stuff (Defragment your hardrives, try CCleaner, they improve speed a little.)
Great Magical Hat
level3
level3
Posts: 486
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:57 pm
Location: Netherlands

Postby Great Magical Hat » Sun Jun 02, 2013 8:34 pm

laser50 wrote:Could try doing some more PC-related stuff (Defragment your hardrives, try CCleaner, they improve speed a little.)


I do hate it when people just randomly bring up defragmenting, and while it's good to keep your disk reasonably defragmented, it really won't fix bugs and generally won't affect performance all that much.

Of course, I run PA from an SSD myself, so defragmenting is not just a random thing to suggest, it would actually bad idea to do so...
asmo0
level2
level2
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 4:53 pm

Postby asmo0 » Sun Jun 02, 2013 8:46 pm

laser50 wrote:* Set it to high or even real time priority in the task manager, this REALLY helped me a lot, from "Fuck this lagging shit" to "Okay, this is actually playable!".
Anyone else had the problem of, when setting a higher prio, being unable to drag anything, as in create squares/straight lines with various tools? walls, foundations, planning tool etc. instead of making a square, it instantly places a 1x1 wall/whatever whereever my mouse passes over. As if it registers every mouse movement as mouseUpEvent or something silly like that.
Critical_Jim
level0
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 12:25 am

Postby Critical_Jim » Sun Jun 02, 2013 10:54 pm

The game is extremly laggy since i started playing in alpha 2 or 3

Thats why i never "finished" the game

During the last alphas it got slighty worse and now in alpha 10 i can hardly build 1 cell block

My PC is a dualcore E8600 with 4GB of ram. Dont tell me my machine is too old or i will point a finger at you and laught.

There seriously needs to be alot of work spend on optimizing the code
Vitz
level0
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 7:25 pm

Postby Vitz » Sun Jun 02, 2013 11:30 pm

paktsardines wrote:
It's not a low hardware issue.


I politely disagree. I've heard PA has problems taking advantage of extra cores. If only one core is being used effectively, then the above specs are below par.

The two options are to:
1. Upgrade cpu (very cheap oldish AMD cpus are available for next to nothing). I personally run PA on a dual core AMD AM2 5600 and it runs quite well because each core runs at 2.8ghz (roughly 3 times the speed of each of your cores).
2. Wait until the alpha's developed to a stage where it effectively uses multiple cores.


I'm not sure who you're aiming this post toward, but if it's the OP I think you've misread. His CPU is much stronger than yours.
User avatar
paktsardines
level5
level5
Posts: 1752
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 11:10 am
Location: Australia

Postby paktsardines » Mon Jun 03, 2013 12:04 am

I'm not sure who you're aiming this post toward

I'm aiming it at the person who I quoted at the top of my post.

And I think you've misread my post. His CPU isn't stronger if not all cores are being used by the game. I wasn't suggesting he 'upgrade' to a AMD AM2 5600, rather was giving evidence that the game runs perfectly well on such a low-end system (because each core runs at nearly 3ghz). That is, the performance of the game currently seems to be a function of core speed rather than core quantity.
Great Magical Hat
level3
level3
Posts: 486
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:57 pm
Location: Netherlands

Postby Great Magical Hat » Mon Jun 03, 2013 1:33 am

paktsardines wrote:(because each core runs at nearly 3ghz)


And he has cores run at 3 GHz, which is about 7.1% faster than almost 3 GHz. Of course, clock speed says far from everything, but I'm pretty sure you lose in every other area as well, save temperature and power usage.

I really don't know where you got the idea that a single core from your processor that's three years older is faster than a single core from his...
User avatar
paktsardines
level5
level5
Posts: 1752
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 11:10 am
Location: Australia

Postby paktsardines » Mon Jun 03, 2013 4:04 am

Apologies, I presumed 950 was the core speed and 3.0ghz+ was the total. Clearly I haven't bought a cpu for a while.

Return to “Community Members”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests