3 ms·

Blueprints have terrible performance. They just do. Even trying to compile them into c++ doesn't work well. Blueprints run at least 100x-1000x slower than equi

by pfisch 3y ago

Blueprints have terrible performance. They just do. Even trying to compile them into c++ doesn't work well. Blueprints run at least 100x-1000x slower than equivalent c++. This isn't even discussing working with multiple coders and version control, which is also a disaster. If you are making a simple game then they can work. If you aren't then they are not great.

peterashford 3y ago
1000x slower? No. Just no.
- pfisch 3y ago
  Do some kind of looping math operation and benchmark it. https://youtu.be/8gVixDglpQ4?t=75 https://youtu.be/8gVixDglpQ4?t=75 Blueprints are extremely slow vs C++
johnnyanmac 3y ago
>Blueprints run at least 100x-1000x slower than equivalent c++. they are slower but unless you are doing literal math in the blueprints this is a huge exaggeration... which is exactly what one AAA game I worked on did. sigh. And they wondered why we couldn't hit 60fps (tho, that wasn't even the biggest detractor to performance). Now, BP's in general usage when you're not doing literally everything in them is about 10x slower. But when you properly use blueprints, you can mitigate this a lot. BP's in a large project work best when you expose existing c++ code to BP and make sure any designer code is piped through c++ first. The main exception tends to be UI code, but UI is rarely a performance bottleneck in large 3D games to begin with. >This isn't even discussing working with multiple coders and version control, which is also a disaster. yup, that's my 2nd biggest gripe. Nothing worse than trying to submit code and the BP you changed one node in is locked, with the owner of the lock being out for the day.
- pfisch 3y ago
  Even calling BP code from C++ goes through an interop layer and is still much slower vs the equivalent C++. I'm not saying never use BP, but everyone should realize the performance cost of using BPs is quite high.

by pfisch 3y ago

peterashford 3y ago

1000x slower? No. Just no.

pfisch 3y ago
Do some kind of looping math operation and benchmark it. https://youtu.be/8gVixDglpQ4?t=75 https://youtu.be/8gVixDglpQ4?t=75 Blueprints are extremely slow vs C++

johnnyanmac 3y ago

>Blueprints run at least 100x-1000x slower than equivalent c++. they are slower but unless you are doing literal math in the blueprints this is a huge exaggeration... which is exactly what one AAA game I worked on did. sigh. And they wondered why we couldn't hit 60fps (tho, that wasn't even the biggest detractor to performance). Now, BP's in general usage when you're not doing literally everything in them is about 10x slower. But when you properly use blueprints, you can mitigate this a lot. BP's in a large project work best when you expose existing c++ code to BP and make sure any designer code is piped through c++ first. The main exception tends to be UI code, but UI is rarely a performance bottleneck in large 3D games to begin with. >This isn't even discussing working with multiple coders and version control, which is also a disaster. yup, that's my 2nd biggest gripe. Nothing worse than trying to submit code and the BP you changed one node in is locked, with the owner of the lock being out for the day.

pfisch 3y ago
Even calling BP code from C++ goes through an interop layer and is still much slower vs the equivalent C++. I'm not saying never use BP, but everyone should realize the performance cost of using BPs is quite high.