I'ld wait a while before you write its obituaryEither 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.
For comparison 125MB/s is about 6 times faster than what Insomniac use (20MB/s) for their streaming engine on Spider-man (PS4).
I wonder if one can enable this when using main branch.
I wonder if one can enable this when using main branch.
Certainly explains why the canyon didn't look like it was purely SSGI.
I'm curious to compile a distributable for myself but I always get some unnamed Windows SDK error. Does anyone have advice on which SDK that is?
... i'm no longer worried other engines would have issues to catch up. That's a very good thing.Lumen is way less interesting than I was hoping. Precalculated instead of proper texturing. There's papers, you can do volumetric UV mapping, in fact volumetric UV mapping has been around for years and is practically begging for use with virtualized geometry like nanite as well as signed distance fields.. And why do you have like 3 geometry representations and 2 texturing representations, and what's with the terrible trace distances?
UE5 feels... Nanite is awesome by itself, very efficient, runs damned well for me and seemingly for others to. The end result of Lumen is neat for artists once they get around the headaches. But glancing at the underpinnings reveals the Unreal Engine team as a kind of overly vast one all running different tracks and doing a lot of bodges to try and fit everything together, rather than any single person having an overall vision of what they're doing. Ah, well, large companies will be large companies, feels silly to whinge really.
Hardware RT Lumen is disabled by default btw, you have to enable these two settings from the project/engine settings to enable it:
Need to restart the project and it recompiles a bunch of shaders.
If it works how does it impact performance?
Lumen is way less interesting than I was hoping. Precalculated instead of proper texturing. There's papers, you can do volumetric UV mapping, in fact volumetric UV mapping has been around for years and is practically begging for use with virtualized geometry like nanite as well as signed distance fields.. And why do you have like 3 geometry representations and 2 texturing representations, and what's with the terrible trace distances?
UE5 feels... Nanite is awesome by itself, very efficient, runs damned well for me and seemingly for others to. The end result of Lumen is neat for artists once they get around the headaches. But glancing at the underpinnings reveals the Unreal Engine team as a kind of overly vast one all running different tracks and doing a lot of bodges to try and fit everything together, rather than any single person having an overall vision of what they're doing. Ah, well, large companies will be large companies, feels silly to whinge really.
Though that being said... how on earth are they planning to make Lumen work with foliage and multiple skinned characters? "Lumen runs slow without Nanite...". You know what I know the Lumen guys twitter. I'm sending him that volumetric UV paper and the one on detailed signed distance tracing. No more of this bodge nonsense.
It greatly impacts performance without much visual gain, at least in this demo.
Software RT
Hardware RT
Seems to be greatly VRAM constrained with h/w RT enabled, maybe the 3090 will perform better with this enabled.
They use models of reduced detail, and it's all static / rigid transformations. So i guess HW RT should be much faster than software SDF after they optimize.Maybe it's just because the demo is not optimized for Hardware RT.
the whole idea of software sdf is that we know it not as accurate but just faster than more precise hw rt ;dThey use models of reduced detail, and it's all static / rigid transformations. So i guess HW RT should be much faster than software SDF after they optimize.
And the framerate on your 3080?
I have never used sphere tracing, and games like Claybook proof it's really fast.the whole idea of software sdf is that we know it not as accurate but just faster than more precise hw rt ;d
45-50 FPS to 20 or so, I need to check. The VRAM is fully saturated though so the GPU isn’t performing at its best here.