Lite Unitframes

Solstice · 05/25/07, 4:20 PM

A couple of days ago, when 2.1 was released, I went through the painful process of deleting my WTF and Interface folders and rebuilding my UI from the ground up. Since then, I've been having a problem with unit frames. I use x-perl, and all seems fine until I'm in a raid group and I relog, whereby WoW locks up on login and I have to close from task manager. Anycase, I temporarily disabled x-perl and my fps in raids pretty much doubled.

Problem is, I really like x-perl. I've been using them for a long time and some of the features I'd find it hard to play without. If anyone could recommend some unit frames with similar functionality that won't drain my CPU it'd be much appreciated.

Nite_Moogle · 05/25/07, 4:23 PM

http://www.wowace.com/wiki/PitBull

Cel · 05/25/07, 4:25 PM

Originally Posted by Nite_Moogle

http://www.wowace.com/wiki/PitBull

I second this... I changed from xperl to pitbull a few weeks back. It's not as easy to set up as x-perl, but once it's up and running it does a lot of what xperl did. It's designed to be light weight, too, so it's a win in my book.

Proeliata · 05/25/07, 4:28 PM

What is the functionality that you're looking for?

Everyone and their mom are migrating to PitBull these days, which is pretty good.

Pyre · 05/25/07, 4:31 PM

Are you asking for unit frames, or raid frames? I use X-perl for my unit frames (self, target, party, etc.), but I disabled the X-perl raid frames and use Grid for that functionality.

srg · 05/25/07, 4:31 PM

Has anyone switched from AG_Unitframes to Pitbull? I keep hearing about the mod, but I am wondering what I would actually benefit from using it.

Proeliata · 05/25/07, 4:34 PM

A lot of people have, myself included. To be honest, I'm not 100% sure what the improvement in functionality is currently, if any (I last used AG_UF in December) but PitBull does lots of neat little things that I like. For example, it colors red the unitframes of any member of your party who has aggro, it shows a castbar in the unitframe of your party members, etc.

And obviously it's highly customizable, yadda yadda yadda.

Edit: I imagine it's all been discussed a lot more in-depth in PitBull: New UnitFrame Addon , and we probably shouldn't turn this thread into a rehash of that one. Endin' my part of dis derail.

Brando · 05/25/07, 4:39 PM

The expected heal is a nice feature for a healer. Really it's just a good reliable unit frame where you can turn on what you like and leave off what you don't.

Solstice · 05/25/07, 4:46 PM

Aye, I also use grid for raid frames and have X-perl raidframes disabled..... still, even the unit frames use an ungodly amount of cpu resources. It's not like my system is lacking either (Intel 3.4 ghz, 2gb ram, ati x850 agp gpu etc) but still the difference in fps using xperl is huge.

The functionality I'm looking for in particular is integrated druidbar, party targets, targets target and focus frames, also I really like being bale to customise and pick what info I need and where it's displayed.

Anycase, will give pitbull a shot. Thanks for the tip.

• Shadowed · 05/25/07, 4:53 PM

PitBull isn't a very good UF if you want something thats light on CPU/Memory, when someone tested last I heard it was something like 4x more CPU and 6x more memory then AG_UF.

UF's are resource hogs in nature though.

Nuke · 05/25/07, 5:28 PM

Originally Posted by Shadowed

PitBull isn't a very good UF if you want something thats light on CPU/Memory, when someone tested last I heard it was something like 4x more CPU and 6x more memory then AG_UF.

UF's are resource hogs in nature though.

Wrong,it consumes if not less then same amount of memory,because of modular basis.Not to mention that it got flexible system of inheritance which means that only frames you use are taking the resources,what you dont need - you can switch off.

• Chicken · 05/25/07, 6:37 PM

Originally Posted by Brando

The expected heal is a nice feature for a healer. Really it's just a good reliable unit frame where you can turn on what you like and leave off what you don't.

The regen 'spark' in your mana bar is pretty neat as well, not terribly useful on my Paladin the way I usually play when healing though (Not to mention the abysmal spirit you get), but nice for taking a look at and determining whether I can get in a full regen tick when solo or not.

Also makes for a pretty accurate yet non-obnoxious energy ticker on my rogue. (I dislike most of the stand-alone ones as a fully visible bar filling up every two seconds distracts me too much, a spark moving along my energy bar is far less annoying)

• Shadowed · 05/25/07, 6:56 PM

Originally Posted by Nuke

Wrong,it consumes if not less then same amount of memory,because of modular basis.Not to mention that it got flexible system of inheritance which means that only frames you use are taking the resources,what you dont need - you can switch off.

No then you've bought into what the group thinks.

Just because something is modular doesn't make it better, and "flexible" typically means "had to add a bunch of extra code to get it that way". i'll bug someone to run the actual numbers compared to both but you'll find that PitBull uses far more resources then you think it does.

Brick · 05/25/07, 7:39 PM

I've switched to Pitbull from AG, previously from Perl Classic, and Discord (1.11).

My only current issue with Pitbull is the Raid Frames are very CPU intensive with much of their functionality enabled. You're best off keeping them fairly stripped down by disabling a fair number of modules. For raid frames, you're likely better off using something like Grid which is much less CPU intensive and is wonderfully compact.

Pitbull I found to be as lightweight as AG for player, pet, target, tot and party frames though, with great functionality. The aura cooldown counts are absolutely wonderful, the power spark is clean and well done, integrated druid bar support and you get much more flexibility than AG without having to create a layout from scratch.

Daboran · 05/26/07, 7:55 PM

Originally Posted by Brick

I've switched to Pitbull from AG, previously from Perl Classic, and Discord (1.11).

My only current issue with Pitbull is the Raid Frames are very CPU intensive with much of their functionality enabled. You're best off keeping them fairly stripped down by disabling a fair number of modules. For raid frames, you're likely better off using something like Grid which is much less CPU intensive and is wonderfully compact.

Pitbull I found to be as lightweight as AG for player, pet, target, tot and party frames though, with great functionality. The aura cooldown counts are absolutely wonderful, the power spark is clean and well done, integrated druid bar support and you get much more flexibility than AG without having to create a layout from scratch.

Part of the problem with the raid frames is that there is just too much functionality. 25 frames all with expected heals, castbars, buff timers etc is always going to run hot. I'd advise them to default the options to off and let people enable stuff themselves.

Anyway, another vote here for Pitbull - I dropped agUF on patch day and haven't looked back. I use Pitbull for everything except 25man raid frames, in which case it's the ever-reliable Grid. I would love an option to adjust how many people in raid before Pitbull hides/shows raid frames.

Malan · 05/26/07, 9:26 PM

Originally Posted by Shadowed

No then you've bought into what the group thinks.

Just because something is modular doesn't make it better, and "flexible" typically means "had to add a bunch of extra code to get it that way". i'll bug someone to run the actual numbers compared to both but you'll find that PitBull uses far more resources then you think it does.

Well the author of AG-uf even posted saying that he'd use Pitbull over his own project due to the improvements in functionality and performance, so take from that what you will.

Morde · 05/26/07, 9:28 PM

Originally Posted by Shadowed

PitBull isn't a very good UF if you want something thats light on CPU/Memory, when someone tested last I heard it was something like 4x more CPU and 6x more memory then AG_UF.

UF's are resource hogs in nature though.

Originally Posted by Shadowed

No then you've bought into what the group thinks.

Sorry, I just thought there was some irony in this.

By nature modular addons are easier on resources as the modules aren't use if you don't enable them. Sure if you boot up all the modules Pitbull has (and it has a LOT), then you'd probably find it eats a little more than the other UnitFrames, but if like me you disable most of the useless stuff (I don't really care much for pvp flags etc), then it is more than likely a lot less intensive.

Wodahs · 05/27/07, 2:46 AM

Originally Posted by Shadowed

No then you've bought into what the group thinks.

Just because something is modular doesn't make it better, and "flexible" typically means "had to add a bunch of extra code to get it that way". i'll bug someone to run the actual numbers compared to both but you'll find that PitBull uses far more resources then you think it does.

Not really, and if your going to spread FUD please back it up with something.
Pros on pitbull, for me, are I am already using all the libraries it uses, so that portion is not a significant overhead jump. Its modular in the sense that if you do not want portraits on players, you can skip loading that portion. If you do not want mana bars, aggro alerts, etc etc etc, you do not have to load that feature.
Cons, well the more you ask it to do, the more work your ui is doing, the more resources it takes. You always pay for features in some manner or another though.
I also fail to see how your definition of flexible has anything to do with the conversation. If someone makes something flexible, they do not 'typically' add extra code to get it that way, if its designed with that in mind.

• Shadowed · 05/27/07, 4:32 AM

Originally Posted by Wodahs

Not really, and if your going to spread FUD please back it up with something.
Pros on pitbull, for me, are I am already using all the libraries it uses, so that portion is not a significant overhead jump. Its modular in the sense that if you do not want portraits on players, you can skip loading that portion. If you do not want mana bars, aggro alerts, etc etc etc, you do not have to load that feature.
Cons, well the more you ask it to do, the more work your ui is doing, the more resources it takes. You always pay for features in some manner or another though.
I also fail to see how your definition of flexible has anything to do with the conversation. If someone makes something flexible, they do not 'typically' add extra code to get it that way, if its designed with that in mind.

Well I don't really see you posting any facts either, but I happen to be incredibly bored and watching Penn & Teller: B.S! isn't as fun as this.

First off I am a developer and I've looked into Ace2, released a couple of mods some which are relatively popular, I do actually know what I talk about and try to improve the performance of my addons when possible.

So heres what I did, I deleted all of my addons except for ResourceTools and ran some common events that accure for the player/targets, I ran the tests against level 63 - 64 spiders in Terokkar on my level 70 Rogue with Deadly Poison x 2 and Hourglass which is why the auras events are a bit off since I can't control proccing of thoses but wanted something to at least give a decent test method, I also meant to give the information of all events fired but forgot to do it for the first two tests and it's 1:00 AM so I don't really feel like redoing all of them right now.

agUF includes pretty much everything by default inside the folder itself, so theres no cheating by disabling different modules you don't want through the addon menu, all of the event and memory information is after combat ends I try to keep the data as close as possible and reran a few that were off by a large amount (UNIT_HEALTH being called 60 times vs the 25-30ish of the rest) and did what I could to make sure the data wasn't flawed in a way, combat lasted around 25-35 seconds.

When I say no modules enabled I mean they are disabled through the character select screen, so they aren't loaded at all.

No addons installed:
Memory: 265 KB (Which is all ResourceTools)
PLAYER_REGEN_ENABLED: 0.070 seconds, called 1 times
PLAYER_REGEN_DISABLED: 0.072 seconds, called 1 times
PLAYER_AURAS_CHANGED: 68.670 seconds, called 8 times (8.58 avg)
PLAYER_TARGET_CHANGED: 16.037 seconds, called 2 times (8.0185)
UNIT_HEALTH: 15.234 seconds, called 35 times (0.435 avg)
UNIT_AURA: 11.978 seconds, called 29 times (0.413 avg)

PitBull + Aura, Combat, Health, Rest, Spark modules enabled:
Memory: 3.24 MB (102.23 KB is ResourceTools)
PLAYER_REGEN_ENABLED: 0.508 seconds, called 1 times
PLAYER_REGEN_DISABLED: 0.613 seconds, called 1 times
PLAYER_AURAS_CHANGED: 77.237 seconds, called 9 times (8.581 avg)
PLAYER_TARGET_CHANGED: 17.283 seconds, called 2 times (8.641 avg)
UNIT_HEALTH: 16.817 seconds, called 28 times (0.600 avg)
UNIT_AURA: 11.563 seconds, called 25 times (0.462 avg)

PitBull, no modules enabled:
Memory: 2.44 MB (100 KB is ResourceTools)
PLAYER_REGEN_ENABLED: 0.198 seconds, called 1 times
PLAYER_REGEN_DISABLED: 0.208 seconds, called 1 times
PLAYER_AURAS_CHANGED: 50.889 seconds, called 6 times (8.481 avg)
PLAYER_TARGET_CHANGED: 17.218 seconds, called 2 times (8.609 avg)
UNIT_HEALTH: 10.422 seconds, called 24 times (0.434 avg)
UNIT_AURA: 8.277 seconds, called 20 times (0.413 avg)

agUF, no modules enabled:
Memory: 2.00 MB (100 KB is ResourceTools)
PLAYER_REGEN_ENABLED: 0.304 seconds, called 1 times
PLAYER_REGEN_DISABLED: 0.201 seconds, called 1 times
PLAYER_AURAS_CHANGED: 85.758 seconds, called 10 times (8.575 avg)
PLAYER_TARGET_CHANGED: 15.668 seconds, called 2 times (7.832 avg)
UNIT_HEALTH: 11.712 seconds, called 22 times (0.532 avg)
UNIT_AURA: 2.8 seconds, called 29 times (0.096 avg)

Overall:
Memory: agUF is 0.44 less with no modules enabled in PitBull, and 1.24 less with 5 of the modules enabled.

Originally I was going to list all of the events and the differences. Basically agUF beats PitBull with 5 modules, agUF loses in a few events to PitBull with no modules, and PLAYER_AURAS_CHANGED was the same for pretty much all of them including the default ui.

Ace2 mods are not instantly better then non-Ace2 mods, some Ace2 mods are better, some are worse.
Flexability means that you have to code the addon to handle the module being added/removed so instead of coding around it you have to add extra code to make the modules work with being added and remove.
Memory isn't a very useful factor in determining how good an addon is, except for rare cases it's mainly the fact that the addon has to use a large amount of memory for how it works, for example WoWHead gatherer has to store loot information, mob information and so on.
Since I did say it was 4x CPU/6x Memory that was someone elses tests and I'd have to ask them to find out what modules were enabled and how they were testing, my guess is they had everything enabled however and weren't isolating it to only the UF mods.

So theres my facts, can you provide yours?

Bakxs · 05/29/07, 7:15 PM

Originally Posted by Shadowed

No addons installed:
Memory: 265 KB (Which is all ResourceTools)
PLAYER_REGEN_ENABLED: 0.070 seconds, called 1 times
PLAYER_REGEN_DISABLED: 0.072 seconds, called 1 times
PLAYER_AURAS_CHANGED: 68.670 seconds, called 8 times (8.58 avg)
PLAYER_TARGET_CHANGED: 16.037 seconds, called 2 times (8.0185)
UNIT_HEALTH: 15.234 seconds, called 35 times (0.435 avg)
UNIT_AURA: 11.978 seconds, called 29 times (0.413 avg)

PitBull + Aura, Combat, Health, Rest, Spark modules enabled:
Memory: 3.24 MB (102.23 KB is ResourceTools)
PLAYER_REGEN_ENABLED: 0.508 seconds, called 1 times
PLAYER_REGEN_DISABLED: 0.613 seconds, called 1 times
PLAYER_AURAS_CHANGED: 77.237 seconds, called 9 times (8.581 avg)
PLAYER_TARGET_CHANGED: 17.283 seconds, called 2 times (8.641 avg)
UNIT_HEALTH: 16.817 seconds, called 28 times (0.600 avg)
UNIT_AURA: 11.563 seconds, called 25 times (0.462 avg)

PitBull, no modules enabled:
Memory: 2.44 MB (100 KB is ResourceTools)
PLAYER_REGEN_ENABLED: 0.198 seconds, called 1 times
PLAYER_REGEN_DISABLED: 0.208 seconds, called 1 times
PLAYER_AURAS_CHANGED: 50.889 seconds, called 6 times (8.481 avg)
PLAYER_TARGET_CHANGED: 17.218 seconds, called 2 times (8.609 avg)
UNIT_HEALTH: 10.422 seconds, called 24 times (0.434 avg)
UNIT_AURA: 8.277 seconds, called 20 times (0.413 avg)

agUF, no modules enabled:
Memory: 2.00 MB (100 KB is ResourceTools)
PLAYER_REGEN_ENABLED: 0.304 seconds, called 1 times
PLAYER_REGEN_DISABLED: 0.201 seconds, called 1 times
PLAYER_AURAS_CHANGED: 85.758 seconds, called 10 times (8.575 avg)
PLAYER_TARGET_CHANGED: 15.668 seconds, called 2 times (7.832 avg)
UNIT_HEALTH: 11.712 seconds, called 22 times (0.532 avg)
UNIT_AURA: 2.8 seconds, called 29 times (0.096 avg)

Overall:
Memory: agUF is 0.44 less with no modules enabled in PitBull, and 1.24 less with 5 of the modules enabled.

Originally I was going to list all of the events and the differences. Basically agUF beats PitBull with 5 modules, agUF loses in a few events to PitBull with no modules, and PLAYER_AURAS_CHANGED was the same for pretty much all of them including the default ui.

Ace2 mods are not instantly better then non-Ace2 mods, some Ace2 mods are better, some are worse.
Flexability means that you have to code the addon to handle the module being added/removed so instead of coding around it you have to add extra code to make the modules work with being added and remove.
Memory isn't a very useful factor in determining how good an addon is, except for rare cases it's mainly the fact that the addon has to use a large amount of memory for how it works, for example WoWHead gatherer has to store loot information, mob information and so on.
Since I did say it was 4x CPU/6x Memory that was someone elses tests and I'd have to ask them to find out what modules were enabled and how they were testing, my guess is they had everything enabled however and weren't isolating it to only the UF mods.

So theres my facts, can you provide yours?

Sorry, please excuse my ignorance, but I'm just curious how much this directly (or indirectly) affects FPS. What does .44 less really mean?

Thanks.

• Shadowed · 05/29/07, 10:41 PM

0.44 and 1.24 are just 0.44 MB and 1.24 MB.

The fact that people say less memory is more efficent is wrong, being able to save 0.5 KB isn't going to be a noticable effect even if you have 100 addons saving that much, you're simply not going to notice a 50 KB increase in memory usage.

As long as you have a decent computer that meets the minimum system requirements, you shouldn't have performance problems unless you're running a ton of data gathering mods at once, or you have a lot of other programs open, also garbage collection was improved in 2.1 so it really shouldn't be that much of an issue.

Now, while memory doesn't mean it's more or less efficent theres still times where an addon is 5 MB big when it only needs to be 2 MB, but you can't directly say that less memory = more efficent addons, even though people have been saying that for a while it's a lie.