Tessellating tomatoes murders FPS, poor Jensen can't get none, and RAM spiking to 9GB in total:
Prague looks prettier at night
Prague looks prettier at night
another Digital Foundry video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uym9KOt_uGg
it looks like it's fairly decent with a GTX 950 2GB, should be good for a 30FPS lock, and this is far from lowest settings
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uym9KOt_uGg
it looks like it's fairly decent with a GTX 950 2GB, should be good for a 30FPS lock, and this is far from lowest settings
At that rate, may as well get a console. That 950 is starting to run out of puff. Which one first - will Mafia III or Watch Dogs 2 end it this year?
I think in this game it's doing better than in Doom; I guess DX11 helps.
PS4 will deliver a similar experience, but, PC is PC, even if you run with worse settings you still have advantages like being able to use mouse and keyboard, so...
PS4 will deliver a similar experience, but, PC is PC, even if you run with worse settings you still have advantages like being able to use mouse and keyboard, so...
^ you can run Mouse+keyboard on ps4 aswell.
Also, last time we had ps4 vs pentiumG+750ti battle. Now it is i3+950.
Looks like devs really start to push next gen optimizations. Finally ps3/360 support is letf behind. Can't wait to see what happens when they drop dx11.
Also, last time we had ps4 vs pentiumG+750ti battle. Now it is i3+950.
Looks like devs really start to push next gen optimizations. Finally ps3/360 support is letf behind. Can't wait to see what happens when they drop dx11.
not really, the digital foundry console equivalent has been i3 4130 minimum for years, 2 threads were a problem before the PS4 was launched; but yes, more recently the 750 ti started to fail to match the PS4 games often... software does look better optimized for the consoles now, which is to be expected I guess almost 3 years into this gen, and to match it you need more powerful GPUs, the CPU side not so much.
still if you look at the specs, needing a 950 to match the PS4 is not to impressive for the console.
keyboard and mouse on the PS4? I'm pretty sure the games don't actually support it and you have to use some crappy adapters that emulate the gamepad with mouse and keyboard, it's never going to be the same.
still if you look at the specs, needing a 950 to match the PS4 is not to impressive for the console.
keyboard and mouse on the PS4? I'm pretty sure the games don't actually support it and you have to use some crappy adapters that emulate the gamepad with mouse and keyboard, it's never going to be the same.
Not really. Seeing as how often it drops below 33.3ms frametime, this means 50ms frametime or 20fps when V-synced like on the consoles. In conclusion you need a beefier GPU than a GTX950 if you want to match consoles.
consoles are not using double buffering vsync for this they use adaptive vsync, when under 30FPS vsync is off
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlHFXnlOnQs&feature=youtu.be&t=1m46s
on the PC you can use the same with Nvidia cards, or other solutions
Red Hawk
Diamond Member
- Jan 1, 2011
- 3,266
- 169
- 106
You can turn off object highlighting in the gameplay options menu. But can you keep discussion of the actual game to the PC gaming thread, please?
I'm amazed you can be so completely wrong.
https://github.com/GPUOpen-Effects/TressFX
Version 3.1
http://gpuopen.com/tressfx-3-1/
TressFX didn't even end with Tomb Raider, 2.0 was used in other games, then we had 3.0 and now 3.1.
Except:
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/glimpse-of-the-purehair-hair-rendering-engine-at-gdc
It only takes a few minutes to research this instead of making so many incorrect claims.
Last edited:
OK I'm man enough to admit I was wrong about the TressFX being discontinued after Tomb Raider.. Happy now?
But I'm not wrong about TressFX's lack of scalability and its horrendous hair animation. Hairworks was used on several characters in the Witcher 3, including even Geralt's horse, and other horses. Hairworks for Geralt is also capable of becoming wet, and is completely physically animated unlike TressFX, which seems to use scripted animations in combination with physical animation..
So whilst the two have the same goal, they are not at the same level.
But I'm not wrong about TressFX's lack of scalability and its horrendous hair animation. Hairworks was used on several characters in the Witcher 3, including even Geralt's horse, and other horses. Hairworks for Geralt is also capable of becoming wet, and is completely physically animated unlike TressFX, which seems to use scripted animations in combination with physical animation..
So whilst the two have the same goal, they are not at the same level.
TressFX works on animals, one of the main examples of it is the bear demo on github. Its animation looks very good, have you seen it or just basing those off TressFX 1.0 in Tomb Raider 2013?
I mean even Nvidia thinks it works great:
PureHair
PureHair is Crystal Dynamics and Square Enix's hair rendering technology, which like our own HairWorks technology adds tens of thousands of hair strands to a character model. These hairs act realistically, swaying and moving in concert with character movement, and can be affected by water, wind and snow, and are lit and shaded in real-time by the scene.
In Rise of the Tomb Raider, up to 30,000 strands of hair are applied solely to Lara, with large groups of hairs controlled by master strands that dictate their movement and properties, preventing each individual hair strand from acting independently, and keeping physics calculation costs in check.
In-game, three options are on offer: 'Off' disables PureHair entirely, adding approximated hair rendering in its place; 'On' is the recommended detail level for most players, with a good amount of hairs visible and full physics and material interaction applied; while 'Very High' adds cinematic-quality PureHair to every moment of the game, increasing hair strand counts to 30,000 in close-ups.
http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/guides/rise-of-the-tomb-raider-graphics-and-performance-guide
You really should just stop. I don't know if it's purposeful or not but pretty much everything you're arguing against tressfx is wrong and based on the first implementation from 3 years ago, which was 2 years before hairworks was ever implemented. Starting with tressfx 2, fur and even grass was made possible. It's not limited to a single character but depends on how much the developer wants to use it. It is a physics based tech which is why the first implementation would bug out sometimes but the physics modeling has improved every iteration.
tressfx 2.0 was used in lichdom for hair and fur on multiple character/creatures.
https://community.amd.com/community...e-tressfx-hair-20-today-in-lichdom-battlemage
TressFX can do wet hair. In the latest tomb raider her hair will even collect snow when pure hair is on.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrhSVcZF-1I
Deus Ex also uses it on multiple characters. This is seen most easily at the train station.
I never said it couldn't work on animals. Just that we've yet to see it in actual games yet. I mean, there are loads of wolves, bears and what not in RotTR that they could have used it on but they didn't..
Demos can be deceiving. Here is a hair demo from way back in the Fermi days:
After all these years, we still don't have games that have such detailed hair and hair physics. The thing is, realistic hair rendering is extremely intensive. One day it will be overcome though, just like how cloth physics was overcome.
Again, saying something is possible is one thing, actually doing it is another. We've all seen spectacular hair rendering demos from both NVidia and AMD, yet we've yet to see that kind of quality actually implemented in games for aforementioned reasons.
Nowhere in that link does it say that TressFX 2.0 was used in Lichdom for hair and fur on multiple entities. In fact, I'm fairly certain Lichdom only has TressFX for the Gryphon, a single character (a human male or female) in the game.
Checked YouTube for videos with the keywords "Lichdom battlemage TressFX fur" and nothing came up.
I have this game, and I can confirm that it does support snow collecting on the hair. However, it doesn't really have wet hair to my knowledge.
I just booted it up before posting this to check, but if Lara goes underwater and then comes back up, the only difference is that her hair is darker. But it doesn't look wet in the sense that they are using wet shaders or something..
Contrast that to Geralt's hair with hairworks on and you'll see that wet shaders are used when he goes underwater or is exposed to rain and his hair not only looks darker, but looks shinier and more clumped together.
Can confirm that Deus Ex MD does use it on multiple characters, but the implementation isn't very advanced. Certainly nowhere near as advanced as what was used for Lara's hair in RotTR, much less the hairworks in the Witcher 3.
The challenge is to implement it without ruining performance, which is quite literally what you have been discussing for the past three pages.
Funny that, I thought it looked cartoonish that his hair changed color between white, sparkly-silver and grey depending on lighting and wetness. Especially the sparkly-silver part was way overpronounced imho:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVB9vY0r574
First 15 seconds show sparkly-wolf, with an instadry jumpcut to white-wolf. Kudos for the candlelight reflection at ~13 seconds, even if it just adds to the cartoonish feel.
That's the weird part about artistic style. I think the hair in MD is really close to how it could look in real life, at least if you apply enough hair spray. It feels less like a tech demo and more like a thoughtful implementation.
Wow that actually looks awful.
Pause @ 1:19 when he stands up and its like his hair is made out of cardboard with how it flows off the back.
Not to mention its flapping around while indoors more than Lara's in a blizzard:
https://youtu.be/wrhSVcZF-1I?t=42
Sorry but hairworks vs purehair, purehair looks much better and has less performance hit. See the above two videos
Red Hawk
Diamond Member
- Jan 1, 2011
- 3,266
- 169
- 106
There is an FOV slider, yes. There have been some user issues with 21:9 aspect ratio, in case that applies to you, though the recent patch supposedly addressed them. Discussion abut the gameplay should really be kept to the thread in the PC gaming section, though.
Red Hawk
Diamond Member
- Jan 1, 2011
- 3,266
- 169
- 106
Digital Foundry's full multi-platform "face off": http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-deus-ex-mankind-divided-face-off
They actually do make note of contact hardening shadows causing closer draw-in than regular shadows, calling it a bug and recommending that it be turned off.
They actually do make note of contact hardening shadows causing closer draw-in than regular shadows, calling it a bug and recommending that it be turned off.
That video was taken shortly after launch, where there were several problems with Hairworks which were eventually rectified.
It's far easier to make short hair look more realistic than long hair. That said, I think that PureHair 3.0 is very good
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Facebook
Twitter