Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Epic Games Releases April 2011 Unreal Development Kit Beta

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • replied
    Originally posted by Blade[UG] View Post
    Well I'd expect that the renderer is going to be doing some different things even if there's no difference between the scenes at all.
    Which was what I was saying ( although visual difference would have been better ). If DX11 is enabled, things are not handled the same.

    Crolus, do you have DX11 enabled? If so, disable it and test again, your 4890 card is not a DX11 card.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    So why with 4890 is that performance problem?

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Well I'd expect that the renderer is going to be doing some different things even if there's no difference between the scenes at all.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Did a comparison hoping to see a difference.
    [SHOT]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/11331437/UDKImages/DXCompare.jpg[/SHOT]
    ( Full Res PNG )

    Visually there is very little difference if any. Yet with DX11 enabled, I take a 7 FPS performance hit ( which would imply that something changed ).

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    NightAndDay map was built long before any DX11 support was in. I don't know if it was updated after that.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    I think it takes advantage of the technology if available as most good programs do. It usually has a fallback method that is decent as long as you aren't forcing it. ( did you try or are you running UDK in DX11? I'm not sure if it will let you, but because your card isn't capable, you should have AllowD3D11=False and try it )

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Ah! So between day and night map udk is designed for dx11 gpus.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    The colour is of little consequence, I can adjust that to look over saturated. I made no changes to the map, so this is how it was designed ( I am a programmer and most of the modifications I do to maps break things ).

    I included a second shot that was as close in timing as I could get to your first with little effort.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    The colors are not the same. Probably is with no dynamic lights.

    If i not wrong, the deferred rendering of dx11 is for a lot of many lights without performance low.

    But i remember, that rendering technology needs a big bandwith in vram for many buffers. A high level gpu: 5750 or more.

    I referer to gddr5 256 bits at fast speed (mhz) and fast (mhz) chip.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    [SHOT]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/11331437/UDKImages/UDK%202011-04-30%2009-25-26-57.jpg[/SHOT]

    [SHOT]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/11331437/UDKImages/UDK%202011-04-30%2009-25-23-09.jpg[/SHOT]

    45 was at 1680x1050, these are 1920x1080 and it was between 37 and 43 throughout.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    But in the exact moment you watch the flower? Can you test it now?

    In the full scene are about 10-15 fps with dynamic lights ON. The problem is the poor DOF postprocess filter: too bad performance.

    http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4797500/Scre...amed_31207.jpg

    http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4797500/Scre...named_5794.jpg

    http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4797500/Scre...amed_13076.jpg

    http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4797500/Scre...amed_23657.jpg

    http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4797500/Scre...amed_22527.jpg

    http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4797500/Scre...amed_19141.jpg

    http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4797500/Scre...amed_10097.jpg

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Given the performance difference we are seeing in that scene, I would say there is a definite corelation. I'm seeing 22x higher performance from that scene than you are and between the 2 cards, the major differences are SM5 and DX11 support.

    Turn off DX11 support in UDK and see what happens to the performance. ( Mine goes up to 60FPS )

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Oh! So that level, night and day, was made with dx11 native features? The new bokeh dof is better in performance?

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by Crolus View Post
    I Would like my computer can run it fine as past august version, and olders.

    I think the problem is the postprocess effects. The dof mainly.

    Maybe when run the .exe of games developed with udk would have a common graphic menu options? At launch the game, like obliv***, f3, far c** and others. For udk also.

    Advanced setup should be cool for all of us! Default options can be the same adjust of game creator by default with high specs.

    And i would like also optimized postprocess effects at medium please that improve console permormance ever.

    But the most big problem is dynamic lighting. Its performance improve with deferred rendering in dx11?

    Example of both problems with ati 4890, 2 fps. See top right corner:
    [SHOT]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4797500/Screenshots/UDK%202010-12-16%2023-48-22-11_renamed_3939.jpg[/SHOT]


    ----------- when are ready...

    And last, new render features for better visual quality running under dx9/open gl 2 for actual consoles, and dx10.1/ogl 3.3 for ipad 2 or future 3 and iphone 5 and ngp.


    ------
    ...the folliage system is out today?
    The 4890 is not even a DX11 card therefore does not support DX11( or OpenGL 3.3 ) and while the drivers may allow it, you can't expect good performance from it. ( I have a Radeon 5850 and in DX11 I get 45FPS at the same point you have in your SS )

    Please use the SHOT tag instead of IMG.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Very interesting. Continue please.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X