| Page 31 of 33 |
JBeckman
VIP Member
Posts: 34986
Location: Sweden
|
 Posted: Thu, 17th Sep 2015 18:06 Post subject: |
|
 |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 17th Sep 2015 19:19 Post subject: |
|
|
Very cool of them since people have always requested the Unreal tech demos to be released.
TWIN PEAKS is "something of a miracle."
"...like nothing else on television."
"a phenomenon."
"A tangled tale of sex, violence, power, junk food..."
"Like Nothing On Earth"
~ WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO SAY CAN ONLY BE SEEN ~
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHTUOgYNRzY
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 17th Sep 2015 19:44 Post subject: |
|
|
Was this the one that nVidia claimed (read: flatout lied through their teeth) ran realtime on a single GTX680? Because the comments are less than flattering about performance.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 17th Sep 2015 19:47 Post subject: |
|
|
I think it runs on the newer and more demanding engine since you have to compile it yourself. It's not a snapshot of the 2013 build.
edit from the link:
| Quote: | For those of you who are stuck at 95% when loading the scene, open your task manager and check your memory usage and CPU load. It took my PC well over 10 minutes to compile all the shaders. Once the scene had fully loaded it was using up around 18 GB of system memory as well as maxing out my GPU. It looks absolutely amazing!
Realtime performance is around 25-45 FPS with everything maxed out, 1080p on a GTX780 |
Surely this can't be normal. What is there to fill 18GB of RAM in a techdemo that has no AI etc. just precompiled assets? World's biggest memory leak? 
TWIN PEAKS is "something of a miracle."
"...like nothing else on television."
"a phenomenon."
"A tangled tale of sex, violence, power, junk food..."
"Like Nothing On Earth"
~ WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO SAY CAN ONLY BE SEEN ~
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHTUOgYNRzY
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JBeckman
VIP Member
Posts: 34986
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Thu, 17th Sep 2015 20:15 Post subject: |
|
|
Open world? the Kite demo can use upwards of 16 or was it 32 GB of VRAM I believe if you use the editor version instead of the precompiled runtime due to the size of all the assets (It's a 60 GB download.) and the huge amount of data loaded when it's not streamed dynamically but instead loaded into the UE4 editor itself.
EDIT: Pretty sure the editor version of Kite also recommends something like 24 or 32 GB of RAM for editor usage.
EDIT:
| sabin1981 wrote: | | Was this the one that nVidia claimed (read: flatout lied through their teeth) ran realtime on a single GTX680? Because the comments are less than flattering about performance. |
Wasn't that the UE3 Samaritan demo?
(It was never released - even when the UDK became available to for general usage.)
This I believe was demoed on either the 970 or 980 but I don't remember if it was SLI or single-GPU.
(Might even have been tri-sli for all I know.)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 17th Sep 2015 20:20 Post subject: |
|
|
No bud, that was another one yes, but Infiltrator definitely was something nV "claimed" ran on a single 680;
http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/infiltrator-gtx-680-powered-unreal-engine-4-tech-demo-unveiled
My next card will be an AMD one. I'm sick and tired of nVidia's shitty practices and constant lies.
| consolitis wrote: | | I think it runs on the newer and more demanding engine since you have to compile it yourself. It's not a snapshot of the 2013 build. |
Maybe, but egh, I still don't believe it. I didn't believe it then and I don't believe it now.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 17th Sep 2015 20:56 Post subject: |
|
|
| JBeckman wrote: | Open world? the Kite demo can use upwards of 16 or was it 32 GB of VRAM I believe if you use the editor version instead of the precompiled runtime due to the size of all the assets (It's a 60 GB download.) and the huge amount of data loaded when it's not streamed dynamically but instead loaded into the UE4 editor itself.
EDIT: Pretty sure the editor version of Kite also recommends something like 24 or 32 GB of RAM for editor usage.
EDIT:
| sabin1981 wrote: | | Was this the one that nVidia claimed (read: flatout lied through their teeth) ran realtime on a single GTX680? Because the comments are less than flattering about performance. |
Wasn't that the UE3 Samaritan demo?
(It was never released - even when the UDK became available to for general usage.)
This I believe was demoed on either the 970 or 980 but I don't remember if it was SLI or single-GPU.
(Might even have been tri-sli for all I know.) |
Ah, so that dude must be running it from the editor rather than running a standalone compiled version.
TWIN PEAKS is "something of a miracle."
"...like nothing else on television."
"a phenomenon."
"A tangled tale of sex, violence, power, junk food..."
"Like Nothing On Earth"
~ WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO SAY CAN ONLY BE SEEN ~
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHTUOgYNRzY |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JBeckman
VIP Member
Posts: 34986
Location: Sweden
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JBeckman
VIP Member
Posts: 34986
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Thu, 17th Sep 2015 21:55 Post subject: |
|
|
Actually it looks like it might not be fully compatible with 4.9.1 yet, I can't seem to get any of the 4.9.0 compatible projects to load but the editor works fine if I create a new project so it's probably that.
(4.9.1 is some hotfix I guess and it accidentally broke compatibility with these showcase projects? or maybe compatibility is so finicky that the projects have to be compiled against 4.9.1 strictly? I think that's only for major revisions though.)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Thu, 17th Sep 2015 22:47 Post subject: |
|
|
4.9 already? So what's next, 5.0? That would be considerably less dramatic than previous major versions launches...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 17th Sep 2015 22:49 Post subject: |
|
|
4.10
TWIN PEAKS is "something of a miracle."
"...like nothing else on television."
"a phenomenon."
"A tangled tale of sex, violence, power, junk food..."
"Like Nothing On Earth"
~ WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO SAY CAN ONLY BE SEEN ~
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHTUOgYNRzY
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Thu, 17th Sep 2015 22:57 Post subject: |
|
|
Epic is waiting on Nvidia 
Back at GDC, Fable Legends -an Nvidia game-, which runs on UE4 -strong relationship with Nvidia- was used as a showcase for D3D12. The engine already had a load of D3D12 optimisations then. The ironic part is that they were using AMD hardware - for Fable anyway, most of the other, simpler examples were running on Intel's Iris. One of the key demos was about UAV barriers, which in D3D12 are no longer forced on you in a sequential manner, allowing you to render stuff...wait for it...asynchronously. Gee, I wonder why they were using AMD hardware 
AMD had a near fully functional driver mid June already, current driver is fully functional.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Fri, 18th Sep 2015 00:17 Post subject: |
|
|
Retarded.
But then again, 10.10 and now 10.11.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 18th Sep 2015 07:00 Post subject: |
|
|
It's not retarded, that's how software versioning works. This is Unreal Engine 4. It's going to remain 4.x until they announce Unreal Engine 5 (which is probably 5-6+ years away).
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Fri, 18th Sep 2015 10:02 Post subject: |
|
|
And what, it couldn't be 4.1.2? It had to be 4.7 4.8 4.9 4.10 4.11?
Clearly they have no need for that "4" anyway, so why not drop it and that's it. Sweeney has been interviewing how there will not be big feature releases in the future, just steady stream of additions.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sanchin
Posts: 764
Location: Poland
|
| Posted: Fri, 18th Sep 2015 11:01 Post subject: |
|
|
First number after the dot is a release of new things to a already working base, but nothing too major or incompatible. 4.1.2 would be a patch (hotfix etc) for 4.1 - so we had 4.0, released 4.1 and fucked up a few things, so we had to release two patches - 4.1.1 and 4.1.2. Usual practices are:
| Quote: | Given a version number MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH, increment the:
MAJOR version when you make incompatible API changes,
MINOR version when you add functionality in a backwards-compatible manner, and
PATCH version when you make backwards-compatible bug fixes. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Fri, 18th Sep 2015 11:05 Post subject: |
|
|
And what is the MAJOR feature added to 4.9? Point light to mobile? Whoop dee doo. The changelog is very basic. Doesn't really follow any logic of the classic versioning scheme. Like Facebook app versioning, they are now at what, 39? They just plus plus the major. And Chrome, and Firefox...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Fri, 18th Sep 2015 11:15 Post subject: |
|
|
But they didn't increase the major version Leo? They increased the minor version, which is when you add functionality...which is what they did. This is semantic versioning, something used widely nowadays.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Fri, 18th Sep 2015 11:17 Post subject: |
|
|
It started from me not liking "4.10".
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Fri, 18th Sep 2015 11:28 Post subject: |
|
|
Well that just stems from you looking at the version as a decimal rather than a string
I must admit it took me some getting used to, but it's still better than a major version bump just because you're treating it as a decimal. Without this, you can only have 100 iterations of any one version - including patches and hotfixes. That's really not a lot 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Fri, 18th Sep 2015 11:32 Post subject: |
|
|
Not true. 12938912378.9.2
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JBeckman
VIP Member
Posts: 34986
Location: Sweden
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 18th Sep 2015 12:43 Post subject: |
|
|
It's also brought about by their switch from closed, AAA-only commercial focus to broader, psuedo-open source/indie focus to grab some of Unity's marketshare. Coupled with the fact that they launched lacking a lot of features, the new model encourages them to push updates out constantly, rather than just amalgamating updates to big releases once or twice a year. So whereas Unreal Engine 3.5 probably took a few years from first release to turn up, 4.5 only took a few months.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
konkol84
Posts: 3678
Location: Po(o)land
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JBeckman
VIP Member
Posts: 34986
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Fri, 3rd Jun 2016 18:15 Post subject: |
|
|
https://www.unrealengine.com/blog/unreal-engine-4-12-released
Been a while since I posted here but 4.12 is out now with a huge list of changes, of course it's going to require games actually using this version of the engine so for now I think only Epic's own Paragon game is on this branch.
(While say Ark is still on 4.5.1 and Solus Project which is one of the most recent UE4 game releases is using 4.10 I believe.)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 3rd Nov 2016 01:34 Post subject: |
|
|
Last edited by Interinactive on Mon, 4th Oct 2021 10:21; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 31 of 33 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
