PSM speed

Monkey Targets Forums/PSM/PSM speed

smilertoo(Posted 2014) [#1]
Does anyone know how fast monkey is on new PSM compared to Sonys original PSM SDK offering? That was incredibly slow and was put to shame by my old windows phone 7.


FelipeA(Posted 2014) [#2]
I've made a couple of tests with Flixel. It runs pretty good, at least for 2D games.
You can see this two video, both of games made in monkey:
This is a game I made LINK
This is from the examples of Flixel, Mode LINK
both run at 60fps


Goodlookinguy(Posted 2014) [#3]
From experience testing my own games, I can also attest to the 60 FPS. I also got 60 FPS before so maybe you weren't programming something correctly or were making it too heavy.


smilertoo(Posted 2014) [#4]
I should hope simple 2d stuff would hit 100s of fps.


Goodlookinguy(Posted 2014) [#5]
Eyes can only see at a rate equivalent to 13 FPS. There's no reason to go that high. That's why 13 frames is enough to make something look like it's in motion and 60 frames is to deal with the inconsistency between "frames" that our eyes capture.


smilertoo(Posted 2014) [#6]
13 is enough to create the illusion of motion, but eyes can see well over 60fps.


Goodlookinguy(Posted 2014) [#7]
No they can't. If they could we wouldn't perceive 13 FPS as motion. Imagine you see at the equivalent of 60 FPS and what you were watching was 15 FPS. You would see the object stop for 4 frames of your eyes and then move again and pause, move again, pause, etc. We see smooth motion because our eyes can not in fact see at that rate. 13 FPS is still blazing fast. That's 77 ms between frames which is correct considering it takes about that much time for our brains to transform that information into what we see.


Nobuyuki(Posted 2014) [#8]
@goodlookingguy
This synopsis seems to disagree with you: http://www.jneurosci.org/content/23/17/6681.full.pdf

Think about how fast a wheel or propeller has to spin to observe a stroboscopic effect. ~10ms is well within the range of most people's understanding of what a human's temporal visual acuity is on a perceptible level. That seems to coincide with the majority of people considering 60hz to be "close enough" to what they see IRL to merge completely imperceptibly, rather than 'strobe' (and have our brain fill in the gaps), while a small minority of people seem to prefer a higher hz rate than that because they are able to notice the effect. Same thing goes for LEDs and fluorescent lights which also strobe at 60hz (in the US, anyway)


Goodlookinguy(Posted 2014) [#9]
My username only has 2 letter 'g's. People always seem to add an extra 'g' though.

This synopsis seems to disagree with you


It's not disagreeing with me, if anything it's minutely disagreeing with the professor who taught me. I learned what I wrote in college.

Same thing goes for LEDs and fluorescent lights which also strobe at 60hz (in the US, anyway)


I hate fluorescent lights because I can see them strobe. It's irritating to my eyes. I've never seen LEDs do that.

----
More to the point though, regardless of what I wrote about eyes, I still think above 60 FPS is absurd. In fact, more often than not I still run things in 30 FPS. It all looks smooth to me. I can't imagine there being a huge need to be any faster, especially on mobile devices as they currently are.

Also, smilertoo, I will assume that you haven't done much research on the PS Vita and how it handles things under it's VM. I'll tell you straight up that the processor speed is down-clocked and memory is constrained. You can increase it a bit manually, but it does not yield a whole lot of extra space. The PS Vita very much relies on using threaded code to get your games running the way you want them to. As Monkey can not yet, or maybe ever, take advantage of this, it's likely all code running on the system will never be as fast as you want it to be.


smilertoo(Posted 2014) [#10]
I believe people run monitors above 60hz to reduce processing lag which can be pretty massive on some screens, but the advertising never mentions processing delay, instead they quote stupidly massive dynamic contrast levels etc.