Im also weary of compile times , i5-3570 gtx 950 2gb , but honestly and not to be argumentative here, doesn’t UE use a lot more resources than blender, besides I’m not sure if this applies or adds to threads concerns, but for me,and my system is far from an old crawler blender ‘viewport’ is unusble if you want to work on a few MIL tri’s in edit mode, too slow, crawls to a stop. Reason I bring this up, its affecting tons of users, and it has its own thead at blenderartists , is I’m not sure given that fact and there is faik no ETA on fixing that, I cant see blender being used as a good yardstick for performance comparisons.
In general and this doesnt relate AS much to blender for reasons stated above, UE will crawl w/o top end system and plenty of ram, and of course,those posting here, is your project as complex as mine or more so ?
Doesn’t that play into slowness of material compile ?
The more cores/theads you can throw at code/material compile allegedly ( I can’t test until I get my new ryzen 5 system to know HOW much ) the faster you likely are going to see things happen.
Performance Notes
This list represents a typical system used at Epic, providing a reasonable guideline for developing games with Unreal Engine 4:
- Windows 10 64-bit
- 64 GB RAM
- 256 GB SSD (OS Drive)
- 2 TB SSD (Data Drive)
- NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
- Xoreax Incredibuild (Dev Tools Package)
- Six-Core Xeon E5-2643 @ 3.4GHz
More ram the better,and ofc fastest GPU you can handle, fastest of everything is all devs dream, but system above would be incredible UNLESS for raytracing builds,and faik minimum gpu on that i gtx 1050Ti but verify before you buy.
My dev time is crazy given I wait sevral seconds just to see player start on terrain etc.,but oh well system speed is the enemy of nearly all of us, and ofc compile time on code &/or materials, etal.