dynmap alternatives
currently looking to switch from dynmap to an alternative
doing a little research but hard with reddit in private (starting to wish i followed subreddits omg...)
I see people are using pl3xmap, bluemap, or square map
Anyone run any kind of performance tests between these? (storage, render speeds, page loads, tps, mspt, cpu/ram usage)
Or am i missing a better alternative?
39 Replies
Dont use squaremap
Has a mem leak afaik
We used bluemap for a few months, but it’s very performance heavy, especially when loading new chunks, so we are going to change it pl3xmap to see how it goes
Bluemap is client rendered
Didn't see what your seeing when I used it ever
Could be because it was fully pregenned with a worldborder
We had a 1.20 world expansion event, to load 5k more blocks. When bluemap was on the server, we crashed within 3 minutes. When I removed bluemap we never crashed
It used like 20 gb of memory
What was xmx
How about storage space?
Bluemap client rendered, so I’m assuming a lot less data being stored on server side?
its huge, same size as world if not bigger
Well relative to dynmap
no idea, but i assume bigger because it has 3d rendering
Dynmap also had 3D rendering, but I’d turn those off
3d Mode of bluemap is insane tho
Yeah it looks 100x nicer
Than dynmaps
as you can fly around in first person
Bluemap 3d map beats dynmap everyday of the week
Oh ufck
Hmm
U also have individual block texturing and selectability
So I’m guessing a lot more than dynmap than lmao
In terms of disk space
I would guess so. But bluemap is cool, so if you dont care about disk size, peformance hit and world expansion, it's a great alternative.
Any insight on pl3xmap?
I don't, but I am going to switch to it ASAP, so I can update you in a few months
haha thanks lmao, I kinda wanna run some profilers on these and rate them
You mind sharing your bluemap link?
We turned it off because of lag, but it was https://map.vanillymc.net/
I kind of did a small little test on the following map plugins. This test was relatively small, however should scale linearly (i think?).
Dynmap, BlueMap, and Pl3xmap.
I'm kind of gonna rate each based on the following categories: Render Usage/Speed, Storage Volume, Player Experience
For Rendering, i broke it down in two parts, Initial and live render. imo, the initial render isn't too important as this should be done before any players are on
For context, this was ran on AMD Ryzen 7 3800X. 8gb Dedicated DDR4. 1 player online afk. The map was 2500x2500. The world was pre-generated before the use of each plugin. For storage, I used the default file format.
Initial:
- Bluemap: (complete render)
Speed: Slow (30m) MSTP/TPS: Negligible- Dynmap: (only 2d)
Speed: Extremely slow(35m) MSTP/TPS: Negligible- Dynmap: (only 3d)
Speed: Extremely slow(45m) MSTP/TPS: Negligible- Pl3xmap (only 2d)
Speed: Extremely fast (<2m) MSTP/TPS: Small (from 8mspt -> 17mstp)Live rendering: (a player moving and updating chunks) All 3 plugins had negligible affect and were quick to update tiles in pregenerated chunks. I did not test updating chunks while they were being generated. (ie. players generating new chunks, and the maps rendering the tiles) Storage Volume: - Bluemap: (complete render)
Extremely large: 2gb- Dynmap: (only 2d)
Large: 319mb- Dynmap: (only 3d)
Larger: 500mb- Pl3xmap (only 2d)
Extremely small: 98mbUser Experience: (hard to get stats on this, as this is pretty opinionated) - Bluemap:
By far the coolest. However can be a little complicated to use for newer players, and rendering the page can be a little wonky. Use needs to have hardware acceleration enabled for full effect. Since the user is basically rendering the game in the browser, they'll have full control in resolution, light level. You can walk/fly around the world as if you were playing.- Dynmap:
Simple design and relatively easy to use. Does offer 3d render, however its static. The server owner picks the angle, and thats all you get.- Pl3xmap:
Strictly a 2d map. for 2d map, its a 10/10. The ui is basically dynmaps, but nicer. you're able to adjust and view different height, biome, light maps.================================================================== After this small test, I'd say dynmap was quite the worst performing, both from the servers end, and the players end. As for the other two, they are kind of hard to compare I believe they server different purposes. If you're looking for just a map, pl3xmap is by far the best. Its very lightweight and stores minimal data, and easier on the user. If you're looking you're looking for a great tool to view your world outside of the game. Blue map is the perfect fit. It pretty heavyweight for the user, but extremely optimized for the server. The storage is extremely hefty tho, (storage is cheap, but you'd probably want to offload it to somewhere else which can be complicated depending on your host) TLDR: Bluemap: Extremely cool, with lots of bells and whistles. I think its insane.. like jaw dropping... but not really needed. Pl3xmap: Simple and limited, but perfect for just a map. Feels like just an upgraded and more optimized dynmap. Dynamp: Outdated, but can be a happy medium between pl3xmap and bluemap if you're looking to also incorp some 3d renders My personal rating: 1. Pl3xmap 2. Bluemap ... ... Last: Dynmap Project Pages: https://www.spigotmc.org/resources/bluemap.83557/ https://www.spigotmc.org/resources/dynmap%C2%AE.274/ https://modrinth.com/plugin/pl3xmap
My Pl3xMap is 2.72 GB size, when our world sizes are 39gb, 8 gb and 14 gb
https://map.vanillymc.net/
Which is really low considering the other map plugins right?
Yes, super small. Our bluemap was pretty much same size as all maps combined.
Yeah, pl3xmap just seems like the best
I asked the developer for an Addon for plotsquared and he coded it in like 20min
So he’s super active and seems nice
Damn thats crazy. Yeah I think we are going to stick with Pl3xMap as well
full rendering bluemap in 30 minutes is not really slow
ur doing 3d, hdres, etc
What would u consider full?
Just found this .. Great comparison :)
Only, if i may ask how you got those 2GB for BlueMap? ^^
From my experience I would expect ~500MB (at max 1GB with caves) for a 2500x2500 map 😇
i used the latest bluemap version on the latest paper build (at the time of sending that message) I used the default config, and default storage option. For easiness sakes, I did test it on my personal machine which is on windows, so it *could be diff on the standard Linux setup (don’t think should matter for storage, but correct me if im wrong). I also only ran 1 test, so I understand it can be different and it might be an outlier.
When I get back home I can double check the sizes and send u the world seed along with plugin/paper version
Windows shouldn't matter, i just think you might have looked at a folder containing more than one rendered map by accident or something.. As i can't imagine such a small map taking that much space :D
But maybe I am wrong too, it just made me curious :)
inside the
web folder should be a maps folder with multiple folders one for each map .. :)Yup this is strictly the world, all the other worlds were barely rendered, still 2gb
For context, here’s the size of the world file
alright .. weird
I’ll rerun it on a new world and double check my test wasn’t an outlier