My system can’t handle the KiteDemo. I guess I’m not the only one not having the latest and finest hardware rig.
A low hardware friendly KiteDemo asset pack would be awesome.
cheers
What hardware do you have? You may just be too low end to run it at all. Like for instance if you have an Intel integrated GPU, like Intel HD 4400 then you wouldn’t be able to run almost any game these days.
Are you sure you meet the recommended hardware specifications?
You shouldn’t have problems if you have the minimum recommended hardware. It might take a while to load, but after this initial loading time it will load within seconds every time you load the map.
Windows 8.1 64bit
DirectX 11
AMD Radeon HD 8400
4 GB RAM (which is a bit low, I know)
Quad Core 2.5
Sorry, but your GPU is way too weak to run UE4 properly. It can’t even reach the performance of the Intel HD 4000 and only has about 512MB VRAM. That’s anything but a proper GPU, at least if the information I could gather is correct, but it should so yeah…I think it’s an OEM card, or not?
Hardware woes,
they evolve too fast. 
Really?, I don’t think so… you haven’t seen it in action.
Generally I don’t have any issues with running UE4. The Radeon HD 8400 is a capable graphics card and I never have to worry I can fry eggs on my rig. As to graphics settings, I don’t think there are many out there who take full advantage of maxed out graphics settings, then again, it’s all about aesthetic game design vs. high end graphics. What good is a game if the graphics are set to the if the game has no depth?
All I was asking is a low res version for the KiteDemo. I don’t plan on making a tech demo, but a game that is playable on the average device. I don’t have to because Epic does that already. So, thanks for the advise. In four days I have Birthday, but my wife ain’t gonna give me a new rig…LOL, but maybe next month I upgrade a RAM slot.
cheers
He’s correct. The GPU is your biggest weakness at the moment. Here’s yours, compared to the recommended minimum
PassMark - Videocard Comparison]=2582&cmp]=22
Also it’s 3Dmark scores aren’t too great either. I think the highest fire strike score I saw for that GPU was 391.
Recommended hardware: Linux Game Development in Unreal Engine | Unreal Engine 5.3 Documentation
I also expierienced unusual high load times for the maps. (20 minutes load time for the overview map) and about 10 minutes editor freeze for every asset that i was placing in the world for the first time.
I have an 8core CPU running at 4 GHz and 32 Gbyte RAM. GPU iis a GeForce 760GTX with 2 GByte.
So I might not be quite on the low end of the requirements, but still takes a long time…
I wonder why it takes so long though… 
The “BerlinFlat” project features assets with a far higher polycount but they load almost instantly…
That’s because the engine loads up the assets, many of which have 8k maps, and then makes them easier to access (I’m not entirely sure what this process does, but that’s how I understood it). Just let all the assets load once, which might take a lot of time, but after it’s done, you will have no problems afterwards. Many assets then open within seconds.
There’s an extremely big difference between not having the latest hardware and having an HD 8400.
I suppose the upside is that at the resolutions you’ll be using there is absolutely no point even thinking about using anything in the kite/open world demo.
That said a version with lower res textures might be nice if anyone at Epic has time to do it.
https://www…com/s/b2aubfldjkts1i6/UE4Game.wmv?dl=0
my screen capture is bad and I can’t show the frames/sec
I really support this idea please don’t flame low hardware because that is not the problem see this post:
https://answers.unrealengine.com/questions/208457/open-world-demo-collection-freeze-in-mac-474.html
My specifications :
Windows 7 64 bits
4096MB RAM
AMD Athlon™ II X4 640 Processor (4 CPUs), ~3.7GHz
GeForce GTX 760 4gb
Unreal 4 is intensive resources demanding requiring heavy hardware, your only option is to upgrade your PC.
Yours shouldn’t be too bad, GTX 760 is a very good card, but I’d be concerned about the RAM
I would say RAM and CPU could be upgraded, everything else looks fine. Also your graphics card is a proper dedicated card, while domi109’s card is an integrated solution by the looks of it.
I hope I didn’t sound like I’m flaming lower end hardware or anything (It’s not like my PC is that great).
In your case the CPU is pretty low spec (seems around the same as a Core 2 Quad from 7 years ago?) and 4GB of RAM isn’t doing you any favours.
As far as I know UE4 performance on mac is not the greatest either.
Have you tried loading the textures for the trees individually? (Doing the atlas last).
Though from that answer hub post Andrew Hurley did say they were looking to optimize the pack.
The thing is that these assets are high quality, and you need a high quality system (preferably a desktop Windows system) to have a good time using them.
Congrats on getting them loaded =]
I second this.
my CPU is a bit old but I have 16 GB of RAM and a Geforce GFX 970. it still took a huge time to load everything.
for me it’s not only the huge amount of time it took to load the first time (I left the PC on and went for a hike). every time I want to open a texture from the content browser just to see it, it takes up to a minute for the 8k ones. and the fact that the whole thing is over 6 GB for a handful of trees, rocks, plants and ground textures, seems excessive.
also despite the quality is extremely good, from the technical side I’m not all that happy about them.
some textures have almost half of the sheet with a solid color. others are just masks and yet they can go up to 8k.
diffusemaps have the roughness built into the alpha which is good, but I wonder if there’s really no place to pack the heightmaps so they don’t use up one whole texture (I guess Blue or Alpha channel of the normalmap can’t be used because of the NormalMapUncompressed setting?)
finally, I see many of the assets use a tiled detail normalmap which is nice for closeup detail. which is why I ask, are 8k textures really needed? we learned to make the most quality for terrains using detail textures many years ago, so why have the textures for environment assets and props escalated up to 8k now?
I know I might seem a little too picky on this, but the quality of these assets is so good that everyone and their mother will use them, analyze them, learn from them and use as example. and so I question if the example Epic wants to give is a set of assets that is hardly optimal for game purposes
Personally I like the way it is currently, giving people access to the full fat, uncut stuff lets people using the assets decide if they want to use them super high res or export and downsize them.
If they were all 1-2K then you’d be stuck with that.
So I like the way it is, but don’t think it would be bad if someone at Epic did have the time to make a cut down version (Someone in the community has already done this but cannot distribute it, seems like an easy win for Epic to grab that version and upload to launcher).