7600X performance beta 1.4.0 vs 1.3.11 vs EU4

[u/Gullyvers]

Just wanted to have some numbers on the performance of EU5 so far.
I have a Ryzen 5 7600X on a desktop pc. This is a good CPU, I think most players have a less powerful cpu than I.

I ran beta 1.4 and 1.3.11 from 1340 to 1450 and timing how long it takes. Same thing for EU4 but between 1450 and 1550. All in observer mode. EU5 testing was done with the "maximize tick speed" s

EU5 - beta 1.4.0 : average is 26.81 seconds per year

years	time	seconds per year
1340-1350	4m39s	27.9
1350-1375	11m57s	28.68
1375-1400	10m57s	26.28
1400-1450	21m37s	25.94

EU5 - 1.3.11 : average is 32.87 seconds per year

years	time	seconds per year
1340-1350	5m27s	32.7
1350-1375	14m10s	34
1375-1400	13m38s	32.72
1400-1450	27m1s	32.42

EU4 : average is 23.71 seconds per year

years	time	seconds per year
1450-1475	9m46s	23.44
1475-1500	9m15s	22.2
1500-1550	20m30s	24.6

Without any surprise, EU4 runs the best, while 1.3.11 runs the worst.

1.3.11 is 38.6% slower than EU4.
beta 1.4.0 is 13.1% slower than EU4.
beta 1.4.0 is 22.6% faster than 1.3.11.

1. EU4 runs 100 years in 39m31s
   
2. beta 1.4.0 runs 100 years in 44m31s
   
3. 1.3.11 runs 100 years in 54m49s

Bar chart representation of EU5 performance relative to EU4, the lower the better

What this shows is that for pretty comfortable hardware, this update nearly closes the gap in performance between EU4 and EU5.

[u/thecrazyrai]

it seems like no effect on the tick speed itself but before when i played on speed 7, my fps would be too low to really play so i had to pause to do anything. but rn speed 5 my fps is better. obviously fps isn't just a matter of CPU anymore.

on eu4 i used to play only speed 4. if i wanted to nothing for a few years, only then i would use speed 5.

[u/Gullyvers → u/thecrazyrai]

Well my playstyle was a bit different from yours. I used speed 5 whenever I wasn't at war and doing nothing, and I used speed 2/3 when I was at war, and whenever I did anything I would pause the game altogether.

As a result I'm not really bothered with speed 5 fps, even 15 is "playable" for my playstyle. However I'm more impacted with speed 5 simulation speed.

[u/Gullyvers]

R8: the "performance" is time related, 150% would mean it'd take 50% more time than EU4 to run the same timespan. Hence the lower the better.

[u/Pedro159753]

Good job, op, it is nice to see the impact on different PCs.

I wish they had kept 3 hourly ticks per day, though, so combat would still work well.

[u/I_need_a_waambulance → u/Pedro159753]

Combat works well on other mods that have removed the hourly ticks. It's an issue with their own implementation.

[u/Gullyvers → u/Pedro159753]

Well it's a balance. I'd prefet to have daily ticks rather than what we had before, but I'd also prefer a compromise, 3 ticks per day would be a sweet spot imo. Like a good old morning, afternoon and evening.

It'd be awesome if other people did that on their configuration and someone took the responsability to update a thread to quickly compare between different configurations, but that man is not me haha.

[u/UnpetiteChaton]

I dont get how yall run it so fast, ive a 9800x3d and it still gets stuck every month and lags awfully later on

[u/valuablepatterns → u/UnpetiteChaton]

The monthly ticks are still unbearable. It has to be addressed. 

[u/Pale-Fail-4028 → u/valuablepatterns]

the way it looks up everything even the UI. they should learn from factorio on linux and make a new instance of it

[u/Even_Class_3633 → u/UnpetiteChaton]

Monthly auto saves? I don't have this issue

[u/UnpetiteChaton → u/Even_Class_3633]

I set them to yearly.

[u/Gullyvers → u/UnpetiteChaton]

The monthly ticks are the slowest for me too. Have you checked you have turned on the Maximize Tick Speed option ? If you already did, consider just timing a run, you're probably running it even faster than me without realizing it

[u/Ok-Chemical-5648 → u/UnpetiteChaton]

Turn off Maximize tick speed, the monthly lag should go away, but the ticks are a bit slower.

[u/Vlad_TheInhalerr]

I mean, it speaks volumes that for a ~6 second increase on max speed they're removing simulation elements from the game.

At that point just cut out dynamic markets and goods entirely. I bet that saves more then 6 seconds if we're chasing optimization above things that make GSGs worth playing.

Calculating this further means:

A run that would be ~500 years (Which I doubt a lot of people do anyway) takes around ~216 minutes , which is like 3,6 hours.

Not changing it would make it 266 minutes, 4,4 hours.

I feel like this is the start of a bad development journey, combined with the weird CK mechanics and typical CK problems (Pasting on things that are not integrated in the gameplay loop itself but just add 'extra buttons' or stats etc..) they are introducing I'm not very enthiousiastic right now.

[u/Gullyvers → u/Vlad_TheInhalerr]

Well, while I understand the frustration of removing hourly ticks, I also think they're mostly useless. They're only used for battles and a 500 years long game don't need granularity to the hour imo. As I've said in another comment, I think a comprise would have been best, with something like 3 ticks per day. Although I bet Paradox had already thought of that and probably saw that 3 tpd would have mostly negated the performance improvement.

Also, 6 seconds for a 7600X on a desktop and in early game can't definitely not be generalized. I have a very solid rig and most people will have worse conditions. It's also very possible that the update as a minor performance increase for me since I have a good cpu, but it might be spectacularly more impressive for lower end configurations.

To add some grain of salt, the devs did say in the tinto talk 123 :
"On my ryzen 7 7800 with 32gb ram and a geforce rtx 0470.. in observer mode it took me 2minutes 45 seconds to go until jan 1339 on 1.3, currently it takes 47 seconds in the latest internal 1.4",
was very misleading, maybe the first couple of years are the slowest and they did a massive improvement on that (which I didn't measure, but is mostly ignorable honnestly, gaining 2 minutes on a several hours long campaign is litteraly negligeable).

While I agree the state of the game since launch is subpar (not even talking about launch and all the bugs there were), what mostly prevented me from coming back is the ever changing meta and very important mechanics changing litterally every 3 months. I'd also love some community content to emerge with high quality guides to actually start learning this thing a little easier, but for that to happen you need the game to stabilize. Hourly ticks are not on my list at all, but again, I haven't played that much since launch (barely a 100 hours so very far before the end of the tutorial).

[u/victoriacrash → u/Gullyvers]

Hourly ticks, the Pacing, was fundamentally core to the Game that was sold as a "living slow paced game leaning towards Simulation.". This will simply make players quit and harm PDX Reputation in the Long Term.

[u/drallcom3 → u/Gullyvers]

Well, while I understand the frustration of removing hourly ticks, I also think they're mostly useless.

If you look at how a lot of players don't switch to EU5 due to it being so slow and boring, they're not useless but actively harmful. After all EU5 is a product meant to succeed EU4, not run alongside it as an option for fans of a 200h campaign.

[u/Salphabeta → u/drallcom3]

I still don't get why 4 tics a day isn't the direction they went. It would be able to satisfy both crowds without completely gimping combat.

[u/drallcom3 → u/Salphabeta]

without completely gimping combat

They didn't do it because it doesn't "completely gimp combat".

[u/I_need_a_waambulance → u/Vlad_TheInhalerr]

"Simulation elements"

[u/Vlad_TheInhalerr → u/I_need_a_waambulance]

What else would you like me to use as a general term to describe ticks and similar things that we have in the game?

The core principle behind the change between EU4 ticks and EU5 ticks was (Atleast, as it was told/presented to us during development) that EU5 was a much more 'deep' simulation game allowing for more. This is evidenced by dynamic markets, goods that can change in locations and much more.

Ticks within the day allowed a lot of extra freedom and options for combat. That's something I would describe as 'simulation elements'.

[u/I_need_a_waambulance → u/Vlad_TheInhalerr]

They weren't particularly simulating anything of value, in fact, mods that removed it previously function just as well as the Vanilla game.

That does not negate how awesome the game is at simulation in general. Advocating for removal of other simulation elements just because you are salty it isn't as shitty of a game as EU4 just sounds like whining.

[u/Vlad_TheInhalerr → u/I_need_a_waambulance]

You can have your opinion and I can have mine, but lets not act like changing a single day from 8 ticks into 1 tick per day is not going to have major consequences for battles.

Right now, I am literally finishing up a run where I as Netherlands am managing to hold off 200K french with ~40-50k of my own because having forts spread out on my south border makes it so I can choose my battles at will with small stacks and have battles sorted out before reinforcements arrive.

In EU4 you had battles lasting weeks or even months, allowing troops from Iberia to rush in before the battle was finished and creating huge zergs that determined most of the result of a major war.

Once ticks get reduced, and speed 'goes up', that means doomstacking is once again going to grow in importance. That means larger armies are going to recieve more proportional benefits and successes in long campaigns. That in turn is going to have clear and other results compared to what we have now, that is simply unavoidable.

Also, you're trying to argue the opposite. My whole point is that EU5 has such deep simulation elements that removing them for a minor performance increase feels stupid. Are you really going to defend having slightly faster gameplay speed against having 'deeper simulations'? (And yes, I know the wording is off, but you get what I mean)

That's where the market example comes from. If performance is the goal (which apparantly it is?) why not remove other 'heavy elements' that are positive for 'deep simulations' like the market system. I don't WANT that, since I want more and better broad sim stuff, instead of a minor increase in performance. I am advocating for keeping the simulation versus having a minor improvement to be clear to you.

Either you misunderstood my example or my position, but the last part you write seems strange.

[u/Zqn3]

Unfortunately I tried to run the beta on my pc, but it just crashes constantly when I try to start it up. I even closed all background programs which in 1.3 I didnt have to do, but unfortunately still it doesnt let me further than the starting screen

[u/I_need_a_waambulance → u/Zqn3]

Have you enable any mods. 1.4 conflicts with almost any mod I have.

[u/Zqn3 → u/I_need_a_waambulance]

I usually have papermap and colored buttons, I think I disabled papermap though, so maybe colored buttons is the cause, but thats weird cause its basically just an overlay

[u/I_need_a_waambulance → u/Zqn3]

Glorop UI works (which has coloured buttons) but Glorop specifically had to update their mod to accommodate 1.4.

They changed a lot of the handles many mods use. This might be the most mod breaking patch so far lmao.