hi

i have a question about the inkscape performance, and how to improve that?

i mean i have quiet a good pc-system with lots of power
but still whenever i do really huge pictures things really get slow!

i mean for example i did a large landscape picture
which has about the size of a regular pice of paper.

so i added trees, fireworks, sky, ground, whatever.
in the end when the picture was almost done
inkscape was not abe to handle that picture
when i moved it around it took like forever
to redraw the picture on the other/new position
on the screen etc.

what could i improve to avoid this issue?
or what could/should i tweak on my machine to avoid this?

maybe a even better CPU?
or even better GPU?
or tweaking my system, or inkscape`s settings?

PLS help!

i have a amd 5600 x2 plus 2gb ddr2 ram(fast ram)
geforce 8500 256mb(+256mb shared)=512mb max.

1. Use layers and hide those you don't need right now.
2. Use as little geometry as possible. The more nodes there are the longer it takes to render.
3. Try 0.46 (SVN) - blur is faster there.
4. Toggle the view mode with Ctrl+KP_5 before panning/zooming around.
5. Use the outline mode to identify invisible leftover geometry and remove it.

Other than that... you should have enough RAM. A faster CPU would help, however. Unfortunately Inkscape is single-threaded right now. That means it cannot use more than one core.

THX aho!
for your reply i will try to use your tricks/tweaks to see if it helps.
(i guess i did not care too much to decrease these things so far, it might help)

okay, i am surprised that a up to date machine still seems to be not enough for semi-pro artwork.
anyways i thought i`d have some things left to improve, since there are plenty of inkscape artists
out here who did very similar artwork than i do, except my machine almost dies when the picture
is getting done.
so i thought maybe those people (who also do these big complex pictures like the guy who did this 70s retro-comic book and movie)
have certain tricks or tweaks, or maybe they just use even bigger cpu`s than i do?

still i wonder would it help to get a bigger graphic card?

for example if i run the geforce-demo (made for the big 8800 cards)
well this frog-demo i can tell that in full screen+full color it is kind of
slow on my PC.

so, i was guessing that the huge vector-parts of my drawings act similar
than this geforce-frog demo.

what i`m trying to say is, if the frog is in full 24bit color AND large
it is getting slow, when i draw large circles and move them within
inkscape they also move slow ... just like the frog.

so, if the frog is displayed in a smaller resolution it runs smooth,
if i draw smaller objetc (e.g. cirles) and move them around
within inkscape they move smooth.

so, my idea was getting a larger geforce like the 8600 GT/GTS maybe?
(with native 512mb or even 1024mb ddr3 memory?)
with faster pixel-pipes and faster core, etc...
so, that this switch might solve my problem?

or is it really that much dependant on the CPU only?

***HINT***HINT***HINT***HINT***HINT***HINT***HINT***

example:
try this for yourself

open inkscape and draw a large circle withe size of a CD
and move it around fast.. it will flicker, slow down, etc.

i hate that, yikes lol

***HINT***HINT***HINT***HINT***HINT***HINT***HINT***

A faster graphics card won't help. Even a Geforce1 would be good enough.

The rendering is done in software. So, basically everything is done by the CPU alone. It will take years before we can see hardware accelerated SVG rendering in Inkscape or anywhere else. The primary reason for that is that most graphic cards aren't suited for that kind of thing, because it would require massive shader power... and many cards which are still used today don't support shaders at all. Eg older notebooks or office machines with old Intel integrated chipsets.

Apart from the hardware issue there is also a driver issue. Most drivers simply aren't as good as Nvidia's.

Inkscape slows down unbearably for me too when working on any complex document, which is a big shame because Inkscape is probably my favorite piece of software. Aho's list above gives some great tips on how to prevent / reduce the impact of this slowness, but can anyone add to these? Has anyone got any other tips or workarounds that may help in this situation?

Three that I can add are:

1. Rather than dragging an object with the mouse to move it's position, click on it and move with the arrow keys instead. For some reason this doesn't cause Inkscape to slow down at all, compared to dragging which can grind my (2 gig ram, 3ghz cpu) system to a halt.

2. Use separate documents for different sections of your work and only edit each one at a time. For example, when designing a website you could have one document containing the header and one for the body. Obviously this just reduces the number of paths & points in the document.

3. Perhaps obvious, but use the 'vacuum defs' feature whenever you feel Inkscape starting to slow, then save and reload the document. This removes unused gradients, patterns, etc.

Any more, guys? Even if you think it's a little wacky!

Save it all, close all of inkscape down, and start fresh. Clears all the undo history etc, not totally sure it does anything much, but it always feels faster

@ Simarilius

Save it all, close all of inkscape down, and start fresh

What do you mean by start fresh?

Just mean to completely close inkscape down, then start a new session.

hi me again

here`s a sample .. which is not finished yet since the cpu-load is too high.

btw, closing inkscape doesn`t work
my projects are big so usually i have to save in order to get them done,
still the same issues.

someone told me i should save the picture as png, then reload it within inkscape
(to save cpu) and then to finish my art on top of the png.
but i`d like to save the whole thing as a inkscape project in order to redo/undo
everything afterwards etc.

artfreak wrote:someone told me i should save the picture as png, then reload it within inkscape
(to save cpu) and then to finish my art on top of the png.
but i`d like to save the whole thing as a inkscape project in order to redo/undo
everything afterwards etc.

Maybe the suggestor meant that you put the vector version in a seperate layer, turn off visibility for it, import the bitmap version, continue working and when your done, delete the bitmap and turn on the layer with all the blur again (i.e. use the bitmap as a temporary guide).

???

no! it was only a hint in order to save cpu-load!

i did this face from scratch, by using only 1-layer.
if i`d split the face into 10 layers does that save cpu???

i mean the problem is that i cant finish the picture!
when i load this picture(ink-project)
it takes ages for inkscape to display the whole picture,
and even if the picture is loaded.. i can`t finish my work.
since like i said.. inkscape is getting REAL slow
and .. overloads my computer etc.

so i wonder, what am i doing wrong here?

is it..

A. that i except too much from inkscape and it can only handle small but very limited projects?

B. do i need to tweak inkscape settings, or change my workflow in order to get my pictures done?

can`t get it done with a 100% cpu-overload ... which is quiet dissapointing when working with inkcape.
still i wonder how other people get their work done just fine (by using inkscape)???
is it that most of those people start a projcet with inkscape and then finish their stuff with adobe software?

artfreak wrote:no! it was only a hint in order to save cpu-load!

That's right. It sounds like whilst it's a little clumsy it should work. But you know your work flow better than I to know if it would help or not.

if i`d split the face into 10 layers does that save cpu???

Yes, if you hide all layers you don't need to see to continue your drawing.

A. that i except too much from inkscape and it can only handle small but very limited projects?

It's not the size of your project that is slowing it down, it's the amount of blur you've used. So Inkscape can only handle a limited amount of bluring effects.

B. do i need to tweak inkscape settings, or change my workflow in order to get my pictures done?

Yes and yes. I don't think it has been suggested in this thread yet, but if you go to the Inkscape Preferences and the Filters, you can set the blur quality to Lowest quality (fastest). This will only effect the quality of the blur displayed in Inkscape, when you export the image it will always be the highest quality. Changing your workflow as suggested will also help.

But why doesn't the developer using OpenGL for rendering? It does all the shit work of drivers, and what are the downside of this?

drsounds wrote:But why doesn't the developer using OpenGL for rendering? It does all the shit work of drivers, and what are the downside of this?

Your answer can be found at - OpenGL rendering