Better performance in MP then SP?

I have the impression that the performance in MP (e.g: 104th) is better than SP. Is this a fact? I don't get it because MP missions do also have a fair amount of AI units, so performance should be comparable.

104th missions have less AI units than you'd think: the groups are not all active at the same time, they don't move, there's limited AI flights, AND the AI routines that have to be there are being run on the server - not on your machine. Similarly, the aerodynamics and such of each player plane is run on that player's machine, so your machine doesn't have to do that work as it would for singleplayer.

I have the impression that the performance in MP (e.g: 104th) is better than SP. Is this a fact? I don't get it because MP missions do also have a fair amount of AI units, so performance should be comparable.

Client performance in MP is few times better than if you would play the same mission in SP... Fps might not differ, but the CPU load and stutter wise its almost like night and day!

This is because the server handles all the ground units, AI and etc... So yes, you are right in your observation :)

I wonder if in future computers could share this load? I mean, 8 or 16 computers is vastly more computing power than just one server. The downside would be increased traffic between all players.

Mission generator could also have some sort of meter that shows required computing for AI (just based on the type and number of AI).

104th missions have less AI units than you'd think: the groups are not all active at the same time, they don't move, there's limited AI flights, AND the AI routines that have to be there are being run on the server - not on your machine. Similarly, the aerodynamics and such of each player plane is run on that player's machine, so your machine doesn't have to do that work as it would for singleplayer.

Client performance in MP is few times better than if you would play the same mission in SP... Fps might not differ, but the CPU load and stutter wise its almost like night and day!

 

This is because the server handles all the ground units, AI and etc... So yes, you are right in your observation :)

Oh yes.. haven't thought of that! Well.. a reason to go often online! Thx for your answers.

And MP missions are played with a low detail visual setting, so people with different computers could have good FPS.

What are your settings in SP?

My settings are around medium with lots of editings in the graphic file. But for me (and I think most) cpu is the bottleneck. With AI controlled by server is almost like flying on an empty map.

And MP missions are played with a low detail visual setting, so people with different computers could have good FPS.

 

What are your settings in SP?

Most settings in the graphics options in the game options all set by the client, not the server. One big one that is set by the server, however, is the scene setting. This is set to low in the 104th server and some other servers. If you are playing a SP mission with scenes on high, there will be a big difference.

You can override the scene settings manually if you want. For example to have low scenes always, even if the server or SP mission has high scenes then do this...

navigate to ...FC2\Bazar\Terrain\Scenes

backup High.scn

make a copy Low.scn

rename the copy of Low.scn to High.scn

I too feel the same. I get 35 to 45 FPS in SP depending upon view and height. In MP on any server I get more than 40 or 50 anytime.

I wonder if in future computers could share this load? I mean, 8 or 16 computers is vastly more computing power than just one server. The downside would be increased traffic between all players.

 

Mission generator could also have some sort of meter that shows required computing for AI (just based on the type and number of AI).

You mean clustering?