Unreal Engine 5, [UE5 Developer Availability 2022-04-05]

[Dictator]

Would it be something like 480p scaled to 1080p or is that taking it too far?

It would be about 720p internal res I presume

 

[LordVulkan]

That was your video? Great comparison! They are strangely close together given the speed difference (125MB/s vs 7000MB/s). How much system RAM do you have and did you happen to note how much of it was in use when the transition began? I suspect large amounts of the required data were already cached thus reducing dependency on raw IO speed. If this was pulling the dark world entirely from disk at the point of transition I'd expect the difference to be much greater.

You can see how much RAM the process is using in the video.

 

[Proelite]

Can I throw a random request into the ether for someone to play around with Series S levels of base resolution upscaled to 1080p. Really curious as to how that looks.

This.

 

[JoeJ]

Played a bit with Lumen, did not download high res Assets to check out Nanite.

I'm not impressed from the lighting - it looks flat shaded for the programmer art test scene i've made.
However, i did not find anything hinting they would use a volume grid of probes like i have assumed.
But there is a surface cache, which we can visualize:



They call it automatic surface parameterization. Well, i worked on that for years but seems Epic is fine with... bounding boxes and triplanar mapping? No wonder it lacks some detail.
So i guess they project a texel on those texture cards to the model (precomputed), and then trace from there, using those texels also to cache irradiance and looking them up for ray hits. (Still guessing, did not read the manual)
Well, this GI is quite meh, but for selfish reasons i'm happy about that.

But i am very impressed about the reflections. Software tracing in action gives really good results, although character is missing while its shadow is visible.
This is new and was not in the older demo where reflections were blurry.

Edit: I'm also impressed from the soft shadows. Some SM method i think.

 

[Clukos]

The compiled binary seems to run much better (ofc )

6-7 GB VRAM / 3-5 gb RAM at native 4K

 

[Dictator]

I was comparing Hardware-RT vs Software RT with Lumen and this is just ridiculous.

Sorry for the different perspectives but it is kind of obvious to see that there are minimal improvements to image quality with Hardware-RT if any.

Yet, using Hardware RT completely destroys performance. From 34 FPS (top pic) to 5 FPS (bottom pic)

Either this is a bug or Epic single handedly made Triangle Based Raytracing and dedicated RT acceleration obsolete. Because Lumen looks damn good.

Maybe if you really search for differences and your name is Alex Battaglia, Hardware RT is still better in some scenarios, but seriously, if it tanks performance that much for no visual boost the average Joe can notice, Hardware-RT is completely useless when coupled with Lumen in UE5.

Really hope this is a bug and RT cores/ Ray accelerators will still have an important role to play in next gen titles.

You probably need a scene with more lateral and verical Occlusion - an indoor one in a building for example. Or one with multiple Light sources.Or one with dynamic objects which would only be covered in screen space in Software Mode.

A Single sky Light and sun Light with very little Occlusion out of screen space will not Show big differences - much like how staring at an object in screen space with SSR vs RT will not Show large differences as well.

Epic themselves describe the high end HWRT Mode as meant for high quality indoor lighting.

 

[Proelite]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/unreal-engine-5-dev-workflow-stream-today-5-26.431627/post-65799137

gofreak reduce RAM available and this is how Nanite looks with a low speed HDD(125 MB/s)

For someone who played Warzone for a year on the last gen Xboxes, this looks fine to me.

 

[DegustatoR]

I was arguing just a few pages back in this thread (and for months before) that additional system RAM could be used to mitigate the need for an ultra fast IO in many scenarios and this seems to prove that point (with which not everyone agreed). Its not ideal obviously from a cost, or initial load point of view, but its clearly a viable solution for those without fast SSD's or until DirectStorage is available. DDR5 hitting the market later this year with double the density of DDR4 should make these RAM capacities much more commonplace moving forwards too.

These specs scream lack of Direct Storage, high RAM to mitigate the slower IO and additional CPU cores to mitigate the lack of a hardware or GPU based decompressor.

I'd love to hear what kind of SSD utilisation the demo uses both on initial load and then once the RAM is fully loaded up. My assumption would be that on high RAM systems, once the RAM is filled the IO requirements are pretty reasonable. But the less RAM you have, the higher they get.

Worth remembering that there are 1) the UE5 editor and the demo running inside it and 2) the standalone demo built from the project inside the editor.
The 1) does require all that - 64GBs, SSD, etc.
The 2) seem to run just fine off an HDD while consuming about 5GBs of VRAM (1440p) and 4GBs of RAM.

 

[BRiT]

this is how Nanite looks with a low speed HDD(125 MB/s)

I love that we have progressed far enough that 125 MB/s is considered low speed.

 

[Andrew Lauritzen]

Played a bit with Lumen, did not download high res Assets to check out Nanite.
Edit: I'm also impressed from the soft shadows. Some SM method i think.

Yep, it's the new "shadow map raytracing" (SMRT): https://docs.unrealengine.com/5.0/en-US/RenderingFeatures/VirtualShadowMaps/
It's not perfect, but it's pretty good middle-ground in practice given the data limitations of shadow maps (one layer, etc).

 

[chris1515]

I was comparing Hardware-RT vs Software RT with Lumen and this is just ridiculous.

Sorry for the different perspectives but it is kind of obvious to see that there are minimal improvements to image quality with Hardware-RT if any.

Yet, using Hardware RT completely destroys performance. From 34 FPS (top pic) to 5 FPS (bottom pic)

Either this is a bug or Epic single handedly made Triangle Based Raytracing and dedicated RT acceleration obsolete. Because Lumen looks damn good.

Maybe if you really search for differences and your name is Alex Battaglia, Hardware RT is still better in some scenarios, but seriously, if it tanks performance that much for no visual boost the average Joe can notice, Hardware-RT is completely useless when coupled with Lumen in UE5.

Really hope this is a bug and RT cores/ Ray accelerators will still have an important role to play in next gen titles.

Lumen is demanding, they could use Ray intersection hardware for accelerating ray intersection detection against the signal distance field.

 

[cheapchips]

It would be about 720p internal res I presume

Based on no. of pixels I was going a bit too far. 480p is 16% of 1080p. 600p upscaled to 1080p would be around the same % as 1080p to 4k.

But that's assuming everything scales linearly, which is probably wrong.

Edit: why was I going that far with scaling when the S is around a third of the X. I really should have gone to bed earlier.

 

[DegustatoR]

Lumen is demanding, they could use Ray intersction hardware for accelerating ray intersection detection against the signal distance field.

They can't. There are no SDFs in DXR 1.1 BLAS, only AABBs and triangles.

 

[techuse]

I find this demo less visually impressive than Lumen in the land of Nanite. Looking forward to Siggraph papers. Also curious to see ramifications on hardware RT support/performance with such high geometry counts.

 

[chris1515]

They can't. There are no SDFs in DXR 1.1 BLAS, only AABBs and triangles.

They can use intersection shader on AABB and a custom shader when it hit the primitive.

 

[chris1515]

I was comparing Hardware-RT vs Software RT with Lumen and this is just ridiculous.

Sorry for the different perspectives but it is kind of obvious to see that there are minimal improvements to image quality with Hardware-RT if any.

Yet, using Hardware RT completely destroys performance. From 34 FPS (top pic) to 5 FPS (bottom pic)

Either this is a bug or Epic single handedly made Triangle Based Raytracing and dedicated RT acceleration obsolete. Because Lumen looks damn good.

Maybe if you really search for differences and your name is Alex Battaglia, Hardware RT is still better in some scenarios, but seriously, if it tanks performance that much for no visual boost the average Joe can notice, Hardware-RT is completely useless when coupled with Lumen in UE5.

Really hope this is a bug and RT cores/ Ray accelerators will still have an important role to play in next gen titles.

What is your GPU?

 

[manux]

I was comparing Hardware-RT vs Software RT with Lumen and this is just ridiculous.
Really hope this is a bug and RT cores/ Ray accelerators will still have an important role to play in next gen titles.

There is pretty long list under "Limitations of Software Ray Tracing" chapter in documentation. UE5 can use sw ray tracing where it works and then add rest with hw ray tracing. It seems to be a hybrid

https://docs.unrealengine.com/5.0/en-US/RenderingFeatures/Lumen/TechOverview/

 

[PSman1700]

I was comparing Hardware-RT vs Software RT with Lumen and this is just ridiculous.

Sorry for the different perspectives but it is kind of obvious to see that there are minimal improvements to image quality with Hardware-RT if any.

Yet, using Hardware RT completely destroys performance. From 34 FPS (top pic) to 5 FPS (bottom pic)

Either this is a bug or Epic single handedly made Triangle Based Raytracing and dedicated RT acceleration obsolete. Because Lumen looks damn good.

Maybe if you really search for differences and your name is Alex Battaglia, Hardware RT is still better in some scenarios, but seriously, if it tanks performance that much for no visual boost the average Joe can notice, Hardware-RT is completely useless when coupled with Lumen in UE5.

Really hope this is a bug and RT cores/ Ray accelerators will still have an important role to play in next gen titles.

Ye sony, ms, amd, nvidia and intel all made stupid decisions based on a single quick engine test by a random forum user.

 

[PSman1700]

The compiled binary seems to run much better (ofc )

6-7 GB VRAM / 3-5 gb RAM at native 4K

Impressive, looks better then last years ue5 demo for sure aswell.

 

[manux]

Something surprising and good in UE5. OpenXR support is great. Nanite and lumen don't support vr yet.

Unreal Engine 5’s Early Access release includes a new OpenXR-compatible VR template with support for Oculus Quest 1 and 2, Rift S, Valve Index, HTC Vive, and Windows Mixed Reality.

OpenXR is a broadly supported standard for VR development and Unreal Engine 5’s latest VRTemplate utilizing the framework means that some of the largest and most experienced VR developers are likely to start experimenting with it beginning today.

“We built the new VRTemplate using the OpenXR framework, the multi-company standard for VR development. The template is designed to be a starting point for all your VR projects. It includes encapsulated logic for teleport locomotion and common input actions, such as grabbing and attaching items to your hand,” Epic’s release notes for the template explain.

The release notes explain that the OpenXR plugin in Unreal engine supports “extension plugins, so you can add functionality to OpenXR that isn’t currently in the engine.” Epic also highly recommends developers “create your VR project using the VRTemplate in UE5, because the project settings and plugins are already configured for the best VR experience. In particular, Lumen is activated by default in UE5, but is not currently supported on XR platforms. Therefore, if you create a VR project without the VRTemplate, you must disable Lumen.”

https://uploadvr.com/unreal-engine-5-early-access-vr/