FGU running slower then FGC?

[Paperclipkiller]

Since it officially released, I transferred my campaign over to it. Whenever I am creating a new story section, FGU chugs and takes awhile, like 4-5 seconds to register what I've typed so far. Also, when I have a character sheet open, it lags when trying to scroll anywhere in the sheet. This happens when scrolling elsewhere as well, be it when scrolling through the spell list or story sections. There's no errors being reported.

When I roll dice, it'll also take a small amount of time for the dice to calculate. It gets longer the more dice I add, for example rolling 26d6 will take around 5 seconds for results to appear. I timed it with a stopwatch.

Basically, it seems like FGU is running delayed for me and I do not know why. Everything runs perfectly smooth on FGC.

I'm running no extensions, just a copied over campaign from FGC I've been running smoothly for 3 years until now with this transfer.

I have more then capable hardware for running FGU perfectly, with a GTX 1070 GPU, Ryzen 3600 CPU, 32 GB of RAM and an NVMe SSD. So it can't be hardware related.

[Trenloe]

Can you try adjusting the vsync rate FGU is using - some info here: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?56503-FGU-using-GPU-at-almost-100&p=551846&viewfull=1#post551846

[Paperclipkiller]

I reopened FGU today and it wasn't having the lagging like before. Now it's a case of it will hang for a second probably every 3-4 seconds. I notice it when typing as it will just stop for a bit and then suddenly catch up. It's pretty consistent.

My GPU drivers are all updated by the way.
My campaign size in Windows Explorer is about 1GB. I don't know if that's an issue or not.

[Weissrolf]

The original lagging might have been FGU compiling your data for the first time/run.

[Trenloe]

The original lagging might have been FGU compiling your data for the first time/run.
FGU or FGC doesn't do a first time compilation of data. The GM instance will process the selected ruleset file/s, extension files, module files, etc. the same way every time it loads a campaign.

[Weissrolf]

Interesting. So what causes the initial slag on the players' side when a player connects to a campaign for the very first time?

[Trenloe]

So what causes the initial slag on the players' side when a player connects to a campaign for the very first time?
Download of data - which is stored in the local cache purely for the player, not the GM. And this is updated as needed - the GM shares/unshares something, the ruleset or extensions are updated, etc... This is no compiling of any code/data on the GM side - neither in the code sense of compilation nor packaging/collection of data. The player instance compares the local cache data with what the GM has and downloads any new data as needed.

In regards to the problem mentioned by the OP, I believe they were just loading up a GM instance to work on their prep, so player caching of data wouldn't have an impact on anything here and the GM performance (as mentioned above) should be the same each time the campaign is loaded.

[Paperclipkiller]

In regards to the problem mentioned by the OP, I believe they were just loading up a GM instance to work on their prep, so player caching of data wouldn't have an impact on anything here and the GM performance (as mentioned above) should be the same each time the campaign is loaded.

Yup it was a GM instance for prepping. I won't be able to test the freezing when typing every few seconds for about a week, but if it continues should I post it here or just do a new thread since it'll be a week later and it's a slightly different issue then what it was originally? I can record it with OBS as well so that there is a visual for it.

[Trenloe]

... but if it continues should I post it here or just do a new thread since it'll be a week later and it's a slightly different issue then what it was originally?
If it's the same issue just continue this thread.

[Willot]

It was commented last night by my players that while they wouldn't classify FGU as being slow, they did say FGU doesnt seem as "snappy" as FGC

[Paperclipkiller]

Alright so update now that I had some time.

It seems like it is happening when FGU has to load a lot of things. When I was experiencing it in a story section when writing, it had 12,822 characters. Those made up 2,347 words over 160 lines. It would have the occasional lag when typing in that. When I made a new story module, the lag was minimal. So I would think the lag happens as you get more and more characters written in a story module.

Another example of the lag happens on character sheets. If I am opening up a Player Characters Action tab, it will take a few seconds to load. This is faster after it loads for the first time. It can be a bit annoying though waiting a few seconds to load a prepared spellcaster who is a high level and thus has a lot of spells to choose form. The less options in the Actions tab, the faster it loads. There was no lag in Fantasy Grounds Classic when loading it. Really this applies to every tab, but the Actions tab is the longest. It does take a second to load the Skills tab as well.

Basically, FGU doesn't feel as "snappy" as FGC does right now since this doesn't happen in FGC. The issue with lag when typing in a story section or on the character sheets.

This is all for 5e.
FGU v4.0.3
5e Ruleset v3.3.12
No Extensions
No Themes.

[Willot]

Yeah I too, find the tabs don't open as fast, especially the Action tab; but it isnt too bad.
I guess FGU has to deal with an extra layer or two shoving LUA through the unity stuff to keep backwards compatibility.
Buts thats just a guess. Thought the 64bit processing would of compensated for it.
Its ok though <shrug>

[Temmpest]

I recently switched from FGC to FGU. The game has really bogged down. It's not impossible to play, just very tedious to get through a combat session and movement through a map. I really enjoy the LOS feature and the effects are neat, but I'm not entirely sure it's worth the loss of performance. I really hope things improve.

[Temmpest]

Do you think that FGU's performance can be improved? Or will it continue to be sluggish to use? I'm more than willing to be patient if there's some light at the end of the tunnel.

[Moon Wizard]

Are you specifically looking at performance issues on a map?
What exactly is running slowly? Token movement? Something else?
Can you please try without any extensions loaded?
If it's still an issue, can you please zip up your campaign folder, place on a file share service, and provide us a link to the campaign files so we can try here.

Regards,
JPG

[Temmpest]

I noticed that FGU runs great as long as I don't have any players connected. Once the 3 players from my group log in it bogs down terribly. is there anything I can ask them to do on their end that might help?

[Moon Wizard]

It might have to do with extensions you are running; the number of modules that they are updating; the size of assets being transferred; etc. It's hard to tell without having more information, which is what I was asking for above.

Regards,
JPG

[Temmpest]

Are you specifically looking at performance issues on a map?
On the map, combat tracker and chat box. Die rolls are very slow and take a few seconds for the results to show up. And moving the tokens on the map causes FGU to freeze for a few seconds.

What exactly is running slowly?
The dice seem to roll in slow motion and results don;'t show in the chat box. Moving tokens causes FGU to lock up for a few seconds.

Token movement? Something else?
Token movement

Can you please try without any extensions loaded? I have not tried playing without extensions loaded but I will do so in the next session.

If it's still an issue, can you please zip up your campaign folder, place on a file share service, and provide us a link to the campaign files so we can try here. Will do.

[RunningHill]

We had an issue in a dungeon. I had put everything on the combat tracker but hidden and could just change visibility then they got close. Makes it easy for me as DM move around some enemies as they go about their business as well.
That didn't work out well. After 1-2 hours we had to restart FGU and delete everything from the map and combat tracker. Going back to use encounters that load as they enter. That works fine.

The issue for me is that I don't understand why it should slow down the program at all? The amount of data can't be that high. Even if it would send every token it's not like its big amount of MBs or the data thats connected. But somehow it build up something that after a while was to big to be handled. Computers...

[Trenloe]

Thought the 64bit processing would of compensated for it.
This is a frequent misunderstanding of moving from 32-bit to 64-bit computing. For most purposes 64-bit code is not faster than 32-bit code. The main difference is that the processor can process and store 64-bit numbers - one of which is memory addresses where data resides, thus allowing it to access much more memory than a 32-bit operating system/application (4 billion times more memory in fact) - remember the approx. 3.6GB memory limit in FGC? This is for all intents and purposes now gone and you can now use as much memory as your computer can handle. But 64-bit is no faster than 32-bit when doing normal processing - 2+2 still takes the same number of cycles.

With FGU it's actually now possible for it to appear slower than the 32-bit FGC. Why? Because GMs no longer worry about the pixel size of their images because FGU can now access lots more memory than FGC. So they load bigger maps and FGU now has to process a lot more pixels, so it runs slower (this is even without LOS enabled). GMs don't worry about loading every single module they have, so FG has to process more data. I'm not saying these are the roots of the perceived less snappiness of FGU compared to FGC. I'm just illustrating that 64-bit is not faster than 32-bit.

[Trenloe]

Do you think that FGU's performance can be improved? Or will it continue to be sluggish to use? I'm more than willing to be patient if there's some light at the end of the tunnel.
Moved this post to this thread. Please make sure you post in an appropriate thread. You posted this in a thread discussing FGU image panning bounds, nothing at all to do with performance. Please make sure if you post in a thread that it is completely relevant to your question, if not then start a new thread if you haven't already posted about this issue elsewhere - which in that case you have (see the post immediately above your post). I get it, you have frustrations with performance. But making off topic posts in addition to existing threads isn't going to help and is just going to cause wasted time and more frustration all round.

[Temmpest]

This is a frequent misunderstanding of moving from 32-bit to 64-bit computing. For most purposes 64-bit code is not faster than 32-bit code. The main difference is that the processor can process and store 64-bit numbers - one of which is memory addresses where data resides, thus allowing it to access much more memory than a 32-bit operating system/application (4 billion times more memory in fact) - remember the approx. 3.6GB memory limit in FGC? This is for all intents and purposes now gone and you can now use as much memory as your computer can handle. But 64-bit is no faster than 32-bit when doing normal processing - 2+2 still takes the same number of cycles.

With FGU it's actually now possible for it to appear slower than the 32-bit FGC. Why? Because GMs no longer worry about the pixel size of their images because FGU can now access lots more memory than FGC. So they load bigger maps and FGU now has to process a lot more pixels, so it runs slower (this is even without LOS enabled). GMs don't worry about loading every single module they have, so FG has to process more data. I'm not saying these are the roots of the perceived less snappiness of FGU compared to FGC. I'm just illustrating that 64-bit is not faster than 32-bit.

Do you think performance will improve? Or will it get worse as you add more modules, extensions, maps, tokens, etc.

[LordEntrails]

Do you think performance will improve? Or will it get worse as you add more modules, extensions, maps, tokens, etc.
Yes I think performance will improve with FGU. FGC had ~15 years to optimize performance. FGU has just gotten started. The devs have stated that performance is something they will continuously address and work on.

[Temmpest]

It's good to hear. Thank you!

[Weissrolf]

One problem is software aging. The longer FGU runs the worse/sluggish it gets.

Loading the Pathfinder 2 Bestiary

- from Launcher (with campaign start): 3.5 s
- right after campaign start: 8.5 s
- after 3 hours of gaming in the campaign: 47 s ("no response").

Same goes for removing NPC from CT and splitting party loot.

[Moon Wizard]

Most people don't load/unload modules during a session. They usually load at the beginning of a campaign; and then just leave them alone. This will not affect most people, though we will look at eventually.

Regards,
JPG

[Weissrolf]

And then you unloaded the Bestiary, because you thought it would not be needed, until one player asks for the stats of the Jade Serpent aka Giant Viper to be saved as link on his sheet. :P

Anyway, 8.5s at the beginning of a session vs. 47s towards the end points to some issue, both loaded during the session.

[Temmpest]

One problem is software aging. The longer FGU runs the worse/sluggish it gets.

Loading the Pathfinder 2 Bestiary

- from Launcher (with campaign start): 3.5 s
- right after campaign start: 8.5 s
- after 3 hours of gaming in the campaign: 47 s ("no response").

Same goes for removing NPC from CT and splitting party loot.

Yeah, I've noticed the same thing. I trust that performance will improve.

[Thes33]

My group has finally started switching over to FGU and trying it out. I have to concur with the general sluggishness. Every window seems to take longer to load and present its data. But by far, the worst is scrolling in the Story windows. Its not "snappy" at all and takes quite a long time to scroll through.
As much as I'd like to take advantage of the new map features, I cannot see us switching over as things currently perform. I'm quite disappointed. Frankly, I don't see how this optimization is considered a post-beta feature.

[Moon Wizard]

Your performance will vary based on the number of modules that you have loaded. Please unload modules that aren't being used; and performance will improve. I don't have that issue; but I also only keep a half dozen modules open at a time.
Also, campaign lists are cached, so the sluggishness should only be on first opening for those.

Regards,
JPG

[beseb]

I bought FGU Ultimate during kickstarter, tried it a couple times over 2020, but the performance was just really bad compared to classic so I never bothered migrating. Unfortunately, classic no longer works on Mac with Big Sur, so we are now forced to migrate to FGU. I have a pretty beefy machine and the lag is obnoxious. The worst of it has been narrowed down to the action tab on my character sheet. I have lots of entries on that tab, and if it's open, I can barely scroll through the list, or even move the character window smoothly. If I switch off that tab, everything speeds up quite a bit, but there is still that hint of lag that is annoying.

So, my recommendation to anyone who cares to listen is please fix performance issues before spending anytime on new features. I'm the only one that has purchased FGU so far in my group, and have been hosting the games, and so far, no one else wants to spend any money on this. :(

[Laerun]

Please tell us the ruleset and your specs. You might be suffering from having too many things open at once, or maybe some overkill? Read below Post #30.

[beseb]

5e, Ryzen 5 3600, 32GB ram. Radeon RX 5600 XT with 6GB VRAM

I launched initially with my normal loadout of modules, which is about 7. Based on reading here, I reduced that to about 3 essentials. Still having sluggish performance with everything closed except my character sheet and combat tracker. Playing with 4 other players.

The program also uses about 25% GPU during idle and anywhere from 1.5GB to 2GB of RAM, which I find astonishing. In fairness, my group report much less RAM usage (under 1GB), but everyone reports very high GPU usage.

Keep in mind, everything runs very smoothly in classic with all other things being the same, so the difference is really apparent.

Thanks for your attention.

[Thes33]

So, my recommendation to anyone who cares to listen is please fix performance issues before spending anytime on new features.

I second this. As of now the performance of FGU is a major roadblock to migration. I have used other Unity apps/games that do not suffer from these performance issues. The UI system needs to be properly optimized, and if possible migrated to a secondary event-engine thread separate from other graphical renderings. I understand how hard these issues can be, I've written a graphics engine and UI system before. They extremely complicated and difficult to debug. But this needs to be a priority. Snappy programs feel good to use, sluggish ones feel like they're broken.

I've been using FG since 2004 and is by far my favorite VTT and I'm rooting for you guys.