Support NeoGAF

[winjer]

It is very weird people trying to cancel NX while accept Alex with the same results.

Hypocrisy.

The only hypocrisy is from you.
You are comparing Alex's lowest frame rates, while driving. To NXGamer's highest frame rates, while standing still.
And even in this case, Alex's numbers are higher.
This is one level of dishonesty, I would never expect from you.

And no one is trying to cancel NXGamer. We just want him to fix his benchmarking methodology, because it clearly has issues, that other reviewers don't.

 

[yamaci17]

The only hypocrisy is from you.
You are comparing Alex's lowest frame rates, while driving. To NXGamer's highest frame rates, while standing still.
This is one level of dishonesty, I would never expect from you.

they have already prepared their arguments, if i do a side by side comparisons, they will say "oh that part is brighter! that part is darker! that cant be right!!1 yours are lower!"

i will prep the video regardless.

 

[ethomaz]

The only hypocrisy is from you.
You are comparing Alex's lowest frame rates, while driving. To NXGamer's highest frame rates, while standing still.
This is one level of dishonesty, I would never expect from you.

And no one is trying to cancel NXGamer. We just want him to fix his benchmarking methodology, because it clearly has issues, that other reviewers don't.

Alex said the framerate drops way below 30fps… not just 26fps.

C’mon… stay on facts.

 

[PaintTinJr]

Has anyo

GI2 vs GI3

Imgsli

imgsli.com

1) GI3 works and makes a difference over GI2
2) I get similar 38-39 FPS on both

if you say my GI3 is not matching his GI3 (because he himself says console uses GI3 and uses GI3 on his video), then there's nothing i can say anymore. it seems like we've gone from facts to %800 pixel peeping to make arguments ouf of this discussion?

On the precompile demo I've used a setting of 3 looks like your GI - with better performance - and a GI setting of 4 looks like nxgamers - whatever they map to from editor levels I don't know because it wasn't compiled by me.

He may have been referring to editor levels - which going by a beyond3d post are +1 on compiled ini settings

 

[Shmunter]

Alex said the framerate drops way below 30fps… not just 26fps.

C’mon… stay on facts.

Facts are only good if they serve personal causes

 

[ethomaz]

Has anyo

On the precompile demo I've used a setting of 3 looks like your GI - with better performance - and a GI setting of 4 looks like nxgamers - whatever they map to from editor levels I don't know because it was compile by me.

He may have been referring to editor levels - which going by a beyond3d post are +1 on compiled ini settings

Alex said the same on B3D… Epic (3) and Cinematic (4) are different between these that are compiling and these that are getting the compiled exe.

These that are compiling using the Editor get what the documentation says.

 

[winjer]

Alex said the framerate drops way below 30fps… not just 26fps.

C’mon… stay on facts.

Dude, you have the video of him driving around, and the frame time graph, showing exactly the numbers.
Sometimes it goes near the top 20´s, sometimes it goes to the low 20's. But the average is in the mid twenty's.
For the same situation of driving around, NXGamer was getting in the mid teens.

Not only that, I also have my numbers. And mine are also higher than NXGamer.
And we also have the numbers from GameGPU, and their numbers are also higher.
And we also have numbers from yamaci17. And his numbers are also higher.
And other users here on this forum.

You are the one that is blatantly obfuscating facts.
You don't even show your own benchmarks.

 

[winjer]

Alex said the same on B3D… Epic (3) and Cinematic (4) are different between these that are compiling and these that are getting the compiled exe.

These that are compiling using the Editor get what the documentation says.

NXGamer said in his video, and wrote on screen, that he was using settings 3.
So unless he is the only that is lying, everyone is using the same settings (3)

 

[ethomaz]

Dude, you have the video of him driving around, and the frame time graph, showing exactly the numbers.
Sometimes it goes near the top 20´s, sometimes it goes to the low 20's. But the average is in the mid twenty's.
For the same situation of driving around, NXGamer was getting in the mid teens.

Not only that, I also have my numbers. And mine are also higher than NXGamer.
And we also have the numbers from GameGPU, and their numbers are also higher.
And we also have numbers from yamaci17. And his numbers are also higher.
And other users here on this forum.

You are the one that is blatantly obfuscating facts.
You don't even show your own benchmarks.

So he lied about he says on the video and wrote in the article and B3D?

Do you really know how to watch DF videos with where they only show a very small part of their test and explain the overall talking and in the articles?

The guy said what I said and you keep denying his words lol

 

[winjer]

So he lied about he says on the video and wrote in the article and B3D?

Do you really know how to watch DF videos with where they only show a very small part of their test and explain the overall talking and in the articles?

The guy said what I said and you keep denying his words lol

Just look at the f**** video with the frame time graph. There is no lying there.
Just you denying reality.

 

[ethomaz]

NXGamer said in his video, and wrote on screen, that he was using settings 3.
So unless he is the only that is lying, everyone is using the same settings (3)

Use 4 in your test if you are using somebody compiled please.
You will understand.

Just look at the f**** video with the frame time graph. There is no lying there.
Just you denying reality.

Man LISTEN to him and read the ARTICLE.

 

[Shmunter]

Just look at the f**** video with the frame time graph. There is no lying there.
Just you denying reality.

Why keep up this charade, for what benefit? What do you get out of this ongoing nonsense?

 

[winjer]

Use 4 in your test if you are using somebody compiled please.
You will understand.

If he used settings 4 on PC, to compare against the PS5's settings 3, then he is skewing results against the PC.
That means his whole comparison was based on false assumptions.

Man LISTEN to him and read the ARTICLE.

Where in that article does Alex say he got 14 fps, like NXGamer?

 

[yamaci17]

Has anyo

On the precompile demo I've used a setting of 3 looks like your GI - with better performance - and a GI setting of 4 looks like nxgamers - whatever they map to from editor levels I don't know because it was compile by me.

He may have been referring to editor levels - which going by a beyond3d post are +1 on compiled ini settings

here's the same comparison with GI 4

tones, colors may look different on different configs. i hope you're aware that. also, that's a literal youtube low bitrate shot. but again, argument is an argument. i still get similarly high framerates with GI at 4.





35/23 = %52 (and at times %60) worse results on his end

 

[PaintTinJr]

NXGamer said in his video, and wrote on screen, that he was using settings 3.
So unless he is the only that is lying, everyone is using the same settings (3)

Well then he's undersold the settings, because that imagine looks nothing like my image with a GI setting of 3 in the ini file, and more importantly GI of 3 isn't a match for the PS5 image either. It looks more like Spiderman performance mode on my PC with a GI of 3 in the ini file.

Another thing that's different is the vehicle movement versus speed on my PC compared to Ps5. On PC even when travelling at 30mph it feels like 10mph(going by speeds in meters/sec), and in nxgamers video there is an exact match between PC and PS5, and the same car on the PS5 side has travelled - what looks like - twice the distance into the foreground.

 

[ethomaz]

If he used settings 4 on PC, to compare against the PS5's settings 3, then he is skewing results against the PC.
That means his whole comparison was based on false assumptions.



Where in that article does Alex say he got 14 fps, like NXGamer?

PS5 is not exactly 3… it is Epic that have some confusion if it is 3 or 4 because the demo shows different results based how you compiled or used the Editor.

By documentation Epic is 4.

Alex said that:

“according to UE documentation setting 3 is high, 4 is epic, 5 is cinematic ^^ - and if you want to find the exact settings console uses from a visual standpoint I recommend doing the comps.”

But that lead to some inconsistencies by people using the compiled Demo… the Editor seems to use 3 as Epic.

But the compiled turn off Lumen GI at 1 that should be 2 if Epic is 3 by documentation.

 

[Md Ray]

i will do a one to one comparison with nxgamer's video tonight in the exact place he drives his car when he gets 20 fps. i already downloaded his entire video. situation will get ugly but i have to do this, otherwise there's no valid way to get them to understand the difference

if he ends up deny this video, there's nothing that can convince him otherwise and it will my final attempt at doing so

a small demo of what is to come. (3.7 ghz + 3000 cl15 kits)

What is NXG's resolution and your resolution here? 1080p? 1440p? 4K?

 

[winjer]

PS5 is not exactly 3… it is Epic that have some confusion if it is 3 or 4 because the demo shows different results based how you compiled or used the Editor.

By documentation Epic is 4.

Alex said that:

“according to UE documentation setting 3 is high, 4 is epic, 5 is cinematic ^^ - and if you want to find the exact settings console uses from a visual standpoint I recommend doing the comps.”

But that lead to some inconsistencies by people using the compiler Demo.

“Hmm, so you are indeed infected with the 3=high virus too, I see Do not worry, I will cure you! :-D

Is that UE documentation up to date? If you run it at Epic scalability settings in the editor, it looks and performs exactly the same as config file 3 would (and compiled version also defaults to 3 like it does in the editor to Epic). If you set it to Cinematic, it will perform much worse, both in the editor at Cinematic and in the compiled version running at config file 4.

Also if Epic is 4, then 2 must be medium, which turns Lumen GI completely off (according to Epic's documentations as well) However, in the sample Lumen GI turns off at 1 and not at 2.

I am also pretty sure there is a performance and visual quality difference between 1 and 0, but I still have to test that!”

Alex stated and showed in his video that the consoles are running at the same settings as on the PC demo. Meaning everyone is using settings at 3, except a few settings.
Consoles are using lower temporal resolution, lower shadow resolution and lower motion blur quality.

Just watch the video at minute 9:00

 

[yamaci17]

What is NXG's resolution and your resolution here? 1080p? 1440p? 4K?

its 1080p but 4k is the same story

with more gpu usage XD

i dunno about nxg. he himself says resolution is irrelevant since its a cpu bottleneck

 

[Self_Destructive]

*sigh*

 

[DenchDeckard]

Well, it looks like the Internet will get to the bottom of it. If there is an issue with nxgamers testing I hope he would have the decency to own up and take down the video to edit it. People make mistakes so we would all understand it. There seems to be too much evidence coming forward showing issues with his PC footage. Not a good look.

 

[PaintTinJr]

here's the same comparison with GI 4

tones, colors may look different on different configs. i hope you're aware that. also, that's a literal youtube low bitrate shot. but again, argument is an argument. i still get similarly high framerates with GI at 4.





35/23 = %52 (and at times %60) worse results on his end

Even at a glance those two images have completely different frustum setups - probably by you changing the camera settings. Lumen's three tiered lighting are tied to position of the near and far planes of the frustum, and the performance - in heavy geometry - is tied to the size of the volumes that each lighting method has to fill.

In your image, the front of the frustum - where Lumen HW ray tracing is used - you have made it a very narrow empty volume, whereas in the nxgamer image you've grabbed, the entire car rear is in a wide volume at the front of the frustum. Why would I expect those two different workloads to produce similar results? fly all the way out to the edge of the water and look back at the city and watch your frame-rate gain 20fps - even with a normal frustum setup if you doubt that.

 

[yamaci17]

 

[VFXVeteran]

Seems like it has some of the heaviest shaders ever in a game, or tech demo.
Almost as if it was made for offline rendering.

Unreal Engine 5 revealed

Yeah it doesn't feel right... so you dont even look at whats happening, and end up with old tech cards. Sorry! Ive been on this site for half my life....

forums.guru3d.com

Yeap. Now people on here understand what film asset creation and shader complexity is like. These GPUs truly are not strong enough for what I want to do.

 

[PaintTinJr]

Well, it looks like the Internet will get to the bottom of it. If there is an issue with nxgamers testing I hope he would have the decency to own up and take down the video to edit it. People make mistakes so we would all understand it. There seems to be too much evidence coming forward showing issues with his PC footage. Not a good look.

Why?

He's a genuine positive gamer doing analysis as a jump of point to discuss gaming from what I can see, he doesn't want to control any narrative or tell anyone this is great, this is crap, does he? It would just be another thing to talk about. No harm, no foul, assuming anything was wrong to begin with, which doesn't appear to be the case IMO.

 

[DenchDeckard]

Why?

He's a genuine positive gamer doing analysis as a jump of point to discuss gaming from what I can see, he doesn't want to control any narrative or tell anyone this is great, this is crap, does he? It would just be another thing to talk about. No harm, no foul, assuming anything was wrong to begin with, which doesn't appear to be the case IMO.

Well if people with similar spec pcs are seeing a 8 to 10 fps increase over what he is reporting on in a technical breakdown video and discussing an engine, comparing it to other devices. He needs to make sure his data is absolutely correct or he is doing nothing but spreading miss information on how the engine actually performs.

That's not good.

 

[VFXVeteran]

Who's we? I made no claim, the poster is referring to general performance of this demo. Now he has his own theories, unless you want to do a deep dive into the code your guess is as good as his right?

Not pointing you out. My bad. I was trying to mean the forums and me together.

There is no way I'll look through that code and troubleshoot it on my own free time.

 

[yamaci17]

Even at a glance those two images have completely different frustum setups - probably by you changing the camera settings. Lumen's three tiered lighting are tied to position of the near and far planes of the frustum, and the performance - in heavy geometry - is tied to the size of the volumes that each lighting method has to fill.

In your image, the front of the frustum - where Lumen HW ray tracing is used - you have made it a very narrow empty volume, whereas in the nxgamer image you've grabbed, the entire car rear is in a wide volume at the front of the frustum. Why would I expect those two different workloads to produce similar results? fly all the way out to the edge of the water and look back at the city and watch your frame-rate gain 20fps - even with a normal frustum setup if you doubt that.

 

[yamaci17]

oh maybe i should change lanes. that should halve the framete

i refuse to answer any more questions and post any further messages. im done with this thread, it just became a goalpost change contest. everyone can have a good day.

 

[StateofMajora]

Why are so many peeps salty about this unfinished demo?

 

[DenchDeckard]

Why are so many peeps salty about this unfinished demo?

I don't see people salty over it. I see people showing a large difference to a publicly released video and investigating how that's happened.

 

[StateofMajora]

I don't see people salty over it. I see people showing a large difference to a publicly released video and investigating how that's happened.

I thought it was because people like ethomaz are worried about PS5 performance or something.

Also is that yamaci17 even testing with a 2700x, or a zen 2 chip? There's seriously some misinformation in here like 3700x barely being better than 2700x... It's a good 25% better.

 

[PaintTinJr]

Just out of interest, did you compile the sample yourself - like nxgamer did to make sure you aren't using DLSS accidentally? It just seems odd that you both have the same GPU and CPU, and even though I would guess at your test being after you had shader stutter earlier and nxgamer's being as he found it - the performance delta even at your low point of 28fps when five cars passed on the other side of the road does seem big.

Did you make any other changes like disable the default motion smoothing - which hits performance a bit IIRC?

 

[ethomaz]

I thought it was because people like ethomaz are worried about PS5 performance or something.

Also is that yamaci17 even testing with a 2700x, or a zen 2 chip? There's seriously some misinformation in here like 3700x barely being better than 2700x... It's a good 25% better.

I mean none of my posts has anything about PS5 at all lol

 

[PaintTinJr]

Well if people with similar spec pcs are seeing a 8 to 10 fps increase over what he is reporting on in a technical breakdown video and discussing an engine, comparing it to other devices. He needs to make sure his data is absolutely correct or he is doing nothing but spreading miss information on how the engine actually performs.

That's not good.

It isn't intended for end user PC consumption even like a console beta demo - otherwise Epic would have released it as a demo themselves. It apparently takes 5Hrs to compile with over 100GBs of files, so anyone expecting 100% like for like need to stop an think.

nxgamer seems to be pretty transparent about what he has done and says many times about further testing - implying recompiling too - and doesn't claim to understand everything or know better than Epic, so how is he spreading misinformation about a sample not intended for non-UE5 developers. Anyone able to use it will keep their own council in all likelihood.

The video just drives good conversation about gaming in the future, no?

 

[winjer]

There's seriously some misinformation in here like 3700x barely being better than 2700x... It's a good 25% better.

Is it really? 25% better?

And this is on older games. The 3700X never beat the 2700X, in games, by 25%.

 

[StateofMajora]

Is it really?

Generally yes.

Double the l3 cache, all 8 cores on a single ccx, IPC and clockspeed improvements.

Again, what is that poster in here even testing with? If it's not a 2700x, then it's a worthless example.

 

[winjer]

Generally yes.

Double the l3 cache, all 8 cores on a single ccx, IPC and clockspeed improvements.

Again, what is that poster in here even testing with? If it's not a 2700x, then it's a worthless example.

The 3700X and 2700X both have the same CCX layout. Zen3 is the one that has a single CCX.
The rest is true. But those IPC improvements don't show that well in games. Just in productivity applications.

As you can see by reviews in games and in this benchmark, the performance difference between Zen+ and Zen2 is small.
But regardless, yamaci17 just showed his 2700X doing much better than the one in NXGamers PC.

 

[yamaci17]

Generally yes.

Double the l3 cache, all 8 cores on a single ccx, IPC and clockspeed improvements.

Again, what is that poster in here even testing with? If it's not a 2700x, then it's a worthless example.

yes I test with 2700x at 3.7 ghz (quiter fans, saner head, enormously lower power consumption). i can ran it at 4.1 ghz @1.4v but i dont need to. if i did, i'd get even a better performance lmao

 

[StateofMajora]

yes I test with 2700x at 3.7 ghz (quiter fans, saner head, enormously lower power consumption). i can ran it at 4.1 ghz @1.4v but i dont need to. if i did, i'd get even a better performance lmao

Really I was just asking a genuine question, if you were actually using a 2700x. Wasn't insinuating you were lying.

 

[StateofMajora]

The 3700X and 2700X both have the same CCX layout. Zen3 is the one that has a single CCX.
The rest is true. But those IPC improvements don't show that well in games. Just in productivity applications.

As you can see by reviews in games and in this benchmark, the performance difference between Zen+ and Zen2 is small.

Ok, so looking at hardware unboxed benches, I do see it's not always 25%. And my memory was a bit hazy, yes zen 3 was first with 8 core ccxs.

Still there are examples that show the 3700x is much faster. Your examples are gpu limited. I was not arguing that you will always see 25% gains, just that it is generally that much faster, when pushing both cpus.

As per Hardware unboxed 5800x review :

Watch dogs legion 57fps low on 2700x, 72 fps on 3700x. Greater than 25% improvement in lows.

Rainbow six siege - 334 average on 2700x, 426 on 3700x.

Star wars squadrons - 200 avg. fps on 2700x, 245 on 3700x.

CSGO - 396 2700x to 565 3700x fps.

Anyways, it seems yamaci17 was indeed using a 2700x, so I can believe NX gamers results were wrong... not that I ever said they weren't.

 

[winjer]

Ok, so looking at hardware unboxed benches, I do see it's not always 25%. And my memory was a bit hazy, yes zen 3 was first with 8 core ccxs.

Still there are examples that show the 3700x is much faster. Your examples are gpu limited. I was not arguing that you will always see 25% gains, just that it is generally that much faster, when pushing both cpus.

As per Hardware unboxed 5800x review :

Watch dogs legion 57fps low on 2700x, 72 fps on 3700x. Greater than 25% improvement in lows.

Rainbow six siege - 334 average on 2700x, 426 on 3700x.

Star wars squadrons - 200 avg. fps on 2700x, 245 on 3700x.

CSGO - 396 2700x to 565 3700x fps.

Anyways, it seems yamaci17 was indeed using a 2700x, so I can believe NX gamers results were wrong... not that I ever said they weren't.

Yes, there are some games where Zen2 is significantly stronger than Zen+
But as you can see by the benchs from yamaci17 and GameGPU, the results from NXGamer are way off.

 

[yamaci17]

Ok, so looking at hardware unboxed benches, I do see it's not always 25%. And my memory was a bit hazy, yes zen 3 was first with 8 core ccxs.

Still there are examples that show the 3700x is much faster. Your examples are gpu limited. I was not arguing that you will always see 25% gains, just that it is generally that much faster, when pushing both cpus.

As per Hardware unboxed 5800x review :

Watch dogs legion 57fps low on 2700x, 72 fps on 3700x. Greater than 25% improvement in lows.

Rainbow six siege - 334 average on 2700x, 426 on 3700x.

Star wars squadrons - 200 avg. fps on 2700x, 245 on 3700x.

CSGO - 396 2700x to 565 3700x fps.

Anyways, it seems yamaci17 was indeed using a 2700x, so I can believe NX gamers results were wrong... not that I ever said they weren't.

yes this is undeniable. official zen 3 versus zen 2/zen+ benchmarks are also misleading, zen 3 can fly away at times (literally)



its all because of the ccx situation. in certain games and cases ccx murders the performance on both zen and zen 2 (zen 2 has 70 ns cross ccx delay, zen+ has 120 ns cross cxcx delay. zen 2 has significantly less delay but still a huge delay nonetheless)

if a game is specifically ccx aware, this penalty can be reduced to some extent, which will have to be a priority tasks when games are being developed for ps5/xbox series x

this demo for example seems like ccx aware, since i'm not seeing aggresive performance penalties on my chip compared to zen 3/11th/12th gen chips

some emulators that lack ccx awareness runs very bad on these chips, namely rpcs3

and story goes on like that

 

[StateofMajora]

yamaci17 What cpu are you looking to upgrade to mate? Or are you waiting for new sockets/ddr5 price drops?

 

[yamaci17]

yamaci17 What cpu are you looking to upgrade to mate? Or are you waiting for new sockets/ddr5 price drops?

I look forward to getting a r5 5600 for a huge bargain in the future. But I have no rush, can wait a couple more years, for now I'm very content with this CPU's performance, as a matter of fact, it became a personal curiosity, I really want to see how long I can keep going with this CPU. If UE5 games really end up running like this on this CPU (not particularly unhappy about 30 FPS but rather unhappy about the overall frametime performance), I might have to give up

If I can weather the storm long enough, I can even jump directly to DDR5+AM5, who knows? Fact of the matter is, my pockets do not run deep and I got this CPU for very cheap (iirc for 120 dollars in black friday sale 3 years ago). I'm very happy that my mobo supports 5600/5600x though. It will be a huge upgrade once I find a good deal and if I decide to pull the trigger. 5600 is very cheap but it can always be even cheaper. maybe once 3d cache chips become more frequent, they might see more aggresive price drops.

having 2700x for now helps me to gauge how well my PC fares against consoles in a similar context. for now, its pretty neck and neck. if it can keep that up, potentially I can keep it until the end of the generation (lol) in other words, i aim to experience how well or bad this cpu ages compared to consoles myself. this is why I'm so interested in topics like these.

 

[StateofMajora]

I look forward to getting a r5 5600 for a huge bargain in the future. But I have no rush, can wait a couple more years, for now I'm very content with this CPU's performance, as a matter of fact, it became a personal curiosity, I really want to see how long I can keep going with this CPU. If UE5 games really end up running like this on this CPU (not particularly unhappy about 30 FPS but rather unhappy about the overall frametime performance), I might have to give up

If I can weather the storm long enough, I can even jump directly to DDR5+AM5, who knows? Fact of the matter is, my pockets do not run deep and I got this CPU for very cheap (iirc for 120 dollars in black friday sale 3 years ago). I'm very happy that my mobo supports 5600/5600x though. It will be a huge upgrade once I find a good deal and if I decide to pull the trigger. 5600 is very cheap but it can always be even cheaper. maybe once 3d cache chips become more frequent, they might see more aggresive price drops.

having 2700x for now helps me to gauge how well my PC fares against consoles in a similar context. for now, its pretty neck and neck. if it can keep that up, potentially I can keep it until the end of the generation (lol)

I know what you mean about wanting to see how long a processor can last... it's satisfying when you can make it go further. Like I said I was on phenom 2 for a while... didn't have much money back then lol. Even had a 1050ti with my phenom 2 x6 briefly. Man... it was time for an upgrade way before that haha.

Hopefully the 5600 hits around $150 eventually, though I wouldn't want to go from 8 to 6 cores. But even so the 5600 is better for games.

EDIT : meaning like a mental thing, going from 8 to 6... because 5600 is still better than 2700x even in production stuff. Best case, 2700x ties it in a few tests.

 

[Dampf]

If anyone is using the build with DLSS I linked at earlier in this thread then I have to tell one word of caution: if you wish to compare performance with that build to another, press 1 to switch to TSR ( or native rendering if you've set screen percentage at 100% in the ini). The shipped demo including DLSS defaults to DLSS Quality, so r.screenpercentage is being ignored if you are not pressing 1.

 

[avin]

But as you can see by the benchs from yamaci17 and GameGPU, the results from NXGamer are way off.

I agree. This was clear a while back, but we haven't gotten an explanation. There can be many reasons for this sort of discrepancy, and it would be good to understand what happened here.

avin

 

[avin]

If anyone is using the build with DLSS I linked at earlier in this thread then I have to tell one word of caution: if you wish to compare performance with that build to another, press 1 to switch to TSR ( or native rendering if you've set screen percentage at 100% in the ini). The shipped demo including DLSS defaults to DLSS Quality, so r.screenpercentage is being ignored if you are not pressing 1.

You guys rock. Your posts also make me want to take my new PC out back and quietly shoot it, but perhaps I won't do that just yet.

avin

 

[staticshock]

It’s so obvious. As soon as I/o on consoles is mentioned and in this context freeing up cpu resources, deliberate misunderstanding takes place.

Dictator seems threatened by your level of insight.

It isn't intended for end user PC consumption even like a console beta demo - otherwise Epic would have released it as a demo themselves. It apparently takes 5Hrs to compile with over 100GBs of files, so anyone expecting 100% like for like need to stop an think.

nxgamer seems to be pretty transparent about what he has done and says many times about further testing - implying recompiling too - and doesn't claim to understand everything or know better than Epic, so how is he spreading misinformation about a sample not intended for non-UE5 developers. Anyone able to use it will keep their own council in all likelihood.

The video just drives good conversation about gaming in the future, no?

It takes about 30 mins to compile. Has anything you said in this thread been accurate?

The lengths people go just to defend someone because they propagand their plastic box is amazing!