hi every body , the problem this time with me is Rasterizer usage of resources ,
when i put my tank in view , the usage is very high( about 110 ms)
but when the tank is out of view the usage decreases a lot (about 21 ms)
what can i do to decrease the usage of Rasterization while i use my same tank , and how ?
and thanks for helping any way…
Ensure you’ve not got high levels of subsurf applied, and apply all modifiers where possible (not the armature modifier).
I notice you have your desktop set to 800 x 600. Perhaps you have an aged system, or aged parts. Other than that the usual troubleshooting guide applies, a supplied .blend file and we should have an astute answer for you in no time at all.
I would also agree with AGoose, many a time I’ve been hit with a high taxation on the rasterizer’s part because of a subsurf modifier. Although with only 985 polies and no visable texture images on screen I could only speculate, with reason, that you have an outdated system running your game.
Perhaps we could have this solved more quickly if you could lend us a list of your system specs. Because I feel strongly that that is the reason.
Get a NASA pc :D…fixes all problems.
Maybe you have a lot of materials with enabled transparency. Ensure to avoid Sort/blend alpha that as much as you can.
Your tank looks unnecessary high-poly. How much faces has your scene?
there is no subsurf s or modifiers m thanks for help
I don’t think you packed your textures,
I think they may be your issue,
I don’t have even a dip in my rast
what version of blender?
my PC is 8-threaded @ 1.2 ghz with 1.5 ghz @ “boost”
Ati Mobility Radeon HD 5400
Are your video cards running in synch mode or duel moniter mode or bridged or?
I notice you have 2
if you don’t have 2 cards, it thinks it does…
is the driver up 2 date?
also what is the unknown device 
there is no texture in my tank at all
first question i don’t know
the last question the unknown device is another vedio card built in in my mother board
By the way, when talking about a game that pushes the graphical look to the “limits”, it is really BAD if the rasterizer is so high, or does it simply mean the machine is working harder than usual to render the image (therefor not that much of a worry if you know you are developing a game with heavy graphics?).
Simply put is it a must to make sure the Rasterizer doesn’t hit that high?
There are 26000 tris in your tank. I think you could easily reduce this to a couple of thousand or even less. For the wheels in the caterpillar tracks I would use textures on planes instead of cylinder shaped meshes. Try to minimize detail on parts that won’t be visible at close.
Runs at 60FPS on my laptop.
But, just thought I’d add:
20,000 polies for a tank that simple is WAY to many. I reckon you could get it down to ~2000 without major loss of detail/
20000 tris on a GPU as old as a R200 / Radeon 9250 is a really bad idea. I also noticed, while doing research on your Graphics card, that it only supports Open GL 1.3. I think your card is just simply too old. It’s only a mid-range card for 2004. Mid-range in 2004! My suggestion is that you stick to VERY low poly geometries, or 2D sprites.
If you are limited to 2D sprites, remember that that doesn’t exclude 3D worlds. Like old-school Final Fantasy, that was almost completely 2D, but it was in isometric (Limited, almost fake, 3D) space.
But, I say again, I think your card is much too old for 20,000 tris. Perhaps you should consider an upgrade. Although I’m not sure how much of an improvement you could get if your motherboard only supports AGP graphics interface.
If you are wanting to upgrade, PM me and I will see what I can do in terms of a list of parts for a small budget. Although, 2D games are still fun, so don’t rule that out.
Sounds a bit like … if you can’t paint … use a bigger canvas.
Using slow Hardware is not that bad as it sounds. It forces you to take care of your resources right from the beginning.
It is much easier to switch to faster hardware rather than to downgrade.
Finally it depends on the target audience. If you develop for latest hardware -> There are not so much potential players.
To me it sounds more like: if you want to paint a house in detail, then use a bigger canvas. There’s nothing wrong with wanting more freedom in creating something. I agree that having less freedom will be inspiring to make use of resources better. But I think as a developer this should be the priority anyway.
Yes! Man after my own heart!
How I see upgrading hardware as is that:
When you use low end hardware, you can make a game that has maximum gameplay, maximum story, and probably ok-ish graphics. But if you use high-end hardware, you can still make maximum gameplay, maximum story, AND maximum graphics.
But then the question comes in that, does high end hardware on the developer’s end mean ONLY high end on the end user’s end? Never. Quality and fidelity on the graphics front is a river with a firm current. If you develop on low end hardware, you are very limited in what you can achieve, but if you develop on high end hardware, you can DOWN scale. (And I can personally say that it is one of my VERY high priorities to get maximum frame rates out of anything I’m working on, I always optimise even if I’m getting 60 fps. My personal ethic is that, I down scale until it juuuuuust looks like it’s on the borderline of really good, and okay-ish, regardless of performance.)
And this has been evident in AAA titles like Battlefield 3, that was developed with high end PCs in mind from the start, and DOWN SCALED for consoles.
In conclusion, graphics and complexity aren't everything BUT, that does not necessarily mean that you should limit yourself. Or that if, given the perfectly reasonable opportunity to do so, using higher end tech is the best choice.
A common way of perceiving the situation is that: You can travel 50km/h in a go-kart, but you can in a Lamborghini too. And the Lamborghini has so many more benefits and positives, so if you can get a Lamborghini, why even bother with the kart? I'm not saying everyone can afford any high-end tech, I myself am sitting on entry to mid-level parts, I'm just saying there's no need to set any unnecessary limits.
I also neglected to thank you “chmanfromegypt” for posting your system specs. And in such detail too, I never thought about doing it that way.
On my desktop, run at 60 fps.
My setup: nvidia 8400 Gs, 2GB RAM and Intel Dual Core Ghz 2:53.
The problem with many polygons should the Caterpillar Tank. In addition to the above tips from colleagues, try using texture instead of modeling each part. Unless the camera provides constant close this part.