Jump to content


Photo

Optimizer Textures


  • Please log in to reply
38 replies to this topic

#1 mothergoose729

mothergoose729

    Thane

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 462 posts

Posted 13 November 2012 - 12:25 PM

Optimizer Textures by AdPipino
http://skyrim.nexusmods.com/mods/12801

STEP currently recommends DDSopt for optimizing textures. I think DDSopt can often times be a superior tool, however I think Optimizer Textures would be a better fit for STEP.

The reason is DDSopt has problems with exceptions. To optimize a BSA you have to extract the BSA into loose files and optimize those, because otherwise DDSopt will ruin the BSA. If you select a file that DDSopt is not suited to optimize, than DDSopt can kill the file (read esm, esps, ect). When I optimized my own game using the tool, I noticed that the on camera blood effects from Enhanced Blood textures were corrupted, for example. DDSopt, if configured properly, can work all its magic and do none of its harm but the problem is the configuration process is somewhat involved, and not well suited for the average STEP user.

Enter Optimizer Textures. Optimzer Textures does not even need to be extracted from an archive to work. You simply select maximum strength, click BSA, click select all in the BSA tab, and run it. At maximum strength I was able to get my textures folder down to about 4.5gb, while DDSopt forced it down to about 3.95gb using recommend settings. DDSopt does slightly better job with mipmaps, but texture optimzer actually seemed leaner on VRAM, probably due to not including as many mipmaps. Another advantage is that Optimizer Textures takes about 15 minutes to process my texture folder, and about an hour to process all of my BSAs. To perform the same task with DDSopt took somewhere somewhere around three or four hours on my system, mileage of course will vary. 

Also, I want to note that in the PDF section 3.A.7 "Increase Overall Performance", the hyperlink that says "texture optimization" leads to this page:
http://wiki.step-pro...Graphic_Editors

I believe that is a mistake. EDIT: I see, it in the utilities tab. There really should be a separate page for this.

Advantages of DDSopt over Optimzer Textures:
Better compression
Better mipmaps

Advantages of Optimize Textures over DDSopt:
Works much more quickly
Much easier to use
Don't have to worry about exceptions - handles them on their own
Optimizing BSAs does not requires manual extraction and repackaging

cons of DDSopt:
Difficult to use
Need to worry about exceptions, and some of them may not yet be known
Takes a long time to run

I don't want to see STEP get rid of DDSopt or stop recommending it in the STEP guide, instead I want STEP to first recommend Optimzer Textures because it is easier to use and faster, and then I would like to see the community work on a better and more complete power users guide for DDSopt for the brave and daring willing to try it. I think that would give the best of both worlds.

Guide to using Optimizer Textures to optimize your skyrim game.

Download optimizer textures from the nexus.

Extract the archive into a folder. Then double click on ordenator.exe

Posted Image

In the window, click on the folder icon, and navigate to you skyrim data folder. For most of you, this will be in 'C://ProgramFiles/Steam/steamapps/common/skyrim'.

Posted Image

In the upper right under profiles, click on the menu and select "maximum". In the menu below it, select "skyrim".

Posted Image

Click on the box titled "BSA" and then on the tab called "BSA" to the right of "Textures". Check the boxes "Compress BSA", "unite internal files", and "Mark BSA". All of your BSA files will be shown to the right. Select all of them by checking each box.

Posted Image

When you have done this, click start. Optimizer Textures will run and optimize your entire skyrim install. A window will pop up showing its progress. Wait until it is finished.

Posted Image

My particular data folder has been optimized before, but there are a few textures that I have added sense the last time I ran it.

Optimizer Textures will create a back up of every file it changes and all your BSA in a folder called "Texture Backups" located in "C://TextureBackups". Your texture folder will be archived. To restore you old unoptimized texture just extract it to your data folder in skyrim. Your BSAs will be backed up and renamed with the file extension ".bak" added to it. To restore you old BSA, just rename the file so as to delete the ".bak" extension, and move it to your data folder in skyrim.

Posted Image
  • 0

#2 rootsrat

rootsrat

    Dragon Lord

  • Contributors
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,883 posts

Posted 20 November 2012 - 10:55 AM

I used it yesterday and it did improve my performance - at a first glance at least. More testing to be done soon, but I think it is worth it. It's also easy to use (thanks for your help on this, mothergoose :) ).
  • 0

#3 TechAngel85

TechAngel85

    Akatosh

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,279 posts

Posted 30 November 2012 - 04:43 AM

My textures are unoptimized so I'll use this tomorrow (later today when after I sleep...it's 3:43am) and give some specs on the outcome. FYI: this has been included in the wiki here: http://wiki.step-pro...n#tab=Utilities

#4 CiXwOw

CiXwOw

    Guard

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 51 posts

Posted 30 November 2012 - 07:01 AM

I've never used either tool, but I will try this one out now and see how it goes. Then I might try the other to compare.
  • 0

#5 CiXwOw

CiXwOw

    Guard

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 51 posts

Posted 30 November 2012 - 09:29 AM

Okay, so I ran this as suggested in the first post (maximum strength with all BSAs) and although I didn't do any thorough testing (mainly because I don't know how exactly to go about it) I did take a few notes, although probably not of much use, I figured I'd post them anyway. The file size of my Skyrim directory went down by about 400mb. From 27.2gb to 26.8gb. I'm not sure how significant this is, as as I mentioned before I haven't used DDSopt so I have nothing to compare it too. Performance wise I did notice an improvement. Although I'm not sure of the FPS impact (in which I may have gained a few frames, but I'm no good with averages and the like) it did definitely seem to be less choppy. I'm no tech expert, but I think I heard somewhere that a VRAM bottleneck may not necessarily be reflected in an FPS counter. But I may be remembering wrong. So as I said, probably not the best report. Due to my lack of a comparison and my general lack of technical knowledge, but hopefully it's useful to someone. I might do a test with DDSopt tomorrow if I have time so I have something to compare it too as, obviously, the results will vary depending on individual setups.
  • 0

#6 mothergoose729

mothergoose729

    Thane

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 462 posts

Posted 30 November 2012 - 02:31 PM

It should be noted that a texture optimizer does NOT improve your fps, it improves mimaps and reduces VRAM usage. Mimaps is what textures look like from a medium distance, before they are generated as LODs. Many textures do not have any mimaps generated and so look odd (like leaves disappearing from a tree) at distance. If your video card is not throttling its VRAM this tool nor another optimizer will have any effect on your skyrim performance. However, for those struggling from a lack of VRAM this can improve performance in that area dramatically.
  • 0

#7 TechAngel85

TechAngel85

    Akatosh

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,279 posts

Posted 30 November 2012 - 05:16 PM

Here are my results from using this optimizer:

Before Optimization:

FPS: 34
VRAM Used: 926MB
Data Size: 11.7GB / 12,626,129,661 bytes


After Optimization:

FPS: 34
VRAM Used: 880MB
Data Size: 11.2GB / 12,046,874,897 bytes

My results yielded no change in FPS and a slight reduction of VRAM usage, about a 6%. Same for the overall size of the files. I'm not sure if this will increase performance because I noticed as I continued to play the game the VRAM filled right back up. :confused:

#8 CiXwOw

CiXwOw

    Guard

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 51 posts

Posted 30 November 2012 - 10:58 PM

[quote name=''mothergoose729' pid='15970' dateline='1354303887']It should be noted that a texture optimizer does NOT improve your fps' date=' it improves mimaps and reduces VRAM usage. Mimaps is what textures look like from a medium distance, before they are generated as LODs. Many textures do not have any mimaps generated and so look odd (like leaves disappearing from a tree) at distance. If your video card is not throttling its VRAM this tool nor another optimizer will have any effect on your skyrim performance. However, for those struggling from a lack of VRAM this can improve performance in that area dramatically.[/quote']
Makes perfect sense. Now I feel a bit stupid. So I guess my VRAM usage is a bit high maybe. As I said my FPS didn't seem to change, but it looked like I was getting a bit less stutter. Although now I'm thinking I was just imagining things. But even still, a 400mb reduction in file size sounds like a good thing. So I guess it wasn't a total waste.
  • 0

#9 mothergoose729

mothergoose729

    Thane

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 462 posts

Posted 01 December 2012 - 01:39 AM

Make sure to select your data/textures folder when you optimize as well, if you are not already. If you are struggling for more VRAM using the tool to compress you textures helps a lot, although at a very noticeable loss in quality. I find limiting my textures to 2048x2048 worked very well for me, but you will see a reduction in texture quality in some cases. When I used the tool on my textures folder, I noticed a pretty consistent reduction in file size of about 25%. With texture reduction obviously a great deal more.
  • 0

#10 Starac

Starac

    Thane

  • Mod Authors
  • PipPipPip
  • 131 posts

Posted 02 December 2012 - 12:00 PM

Here are my results from using this optimizer:

Before Optimization:

FPS: 34
VRAM Used: 926MB
Data Size: 11.7GB / 12,626,129,661 bytes


After Optimization:

FPS: 34
VRAM Used: 880MB
Data Size: 11.2GB / 12,046,874,897 bytes

My results yielded no change in FPS and a slight reduction of VRAM usage, about a 6%. Same for the overall size of the files. I'm not sure if this will increase performance because I noticed as I continued to play the game the VRAM filled right back up. :confused:

If you use my mod, any kind of optimization is not recommended.
  • 0

#11 TechAngel85

TechAngel85

    Akatosh

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,279 posts

Posted 02 December 2012 - 04:39 PM

If you use my mod, any kind of optimization is not recommended.

Forgive my ignorance, I'm new to the community. Which is your mod?

#12 Besidilo

Besidilo

    Jarl

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 993 posts

Posted 02 December 2012 - 06:20 PM

If you use my mod, any kind of optimization is not recommended.

Forgive my ignorance, I'm new to the community. Which is your mod?

SRO.
  • 0

#13 stoppingby4now

stoppingby4now

    Sleepy

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,281 posts

Posted 02 December 2012 - 07:10 PM

SRO = Skyrim Realistic Overhaul

#14 TechAngel85

TechAngel85

    Akatosh

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,279 posts

Posted 02 December 2012 - 07:21 PM

SRO = Skyrim Realistic Overhaul

Thank you! I didn't optimize any of my textures in the texture folder unless the program did i automatically. I simply pointed it to the Skyrim folder and let it do it's thing.

#15 z929669

z929669

    Ixian Inventor

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,237 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 08:22 PM

DDSopt will be the preferred method for STEP in the end, as it can be scripted from the command line. It is also more accurate than OT. For now though, it will be best to rely on mod authors to process textures and not incorporate any texture opt into STEP. That can lead to problems unless we define all potential issues and package up a solution ourselves. Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users