Which devs are you talking about? Game devs, or the engine programmers?
Game devs, or the engine programmers?
Reading the documentation. Most game devs that are releasing UE5 games with trash performance in low 40s without lumen.
Truly a riddle that solves itself
@Arkiras You can pm me or edit in a explanation(non-lumen thread bloat) as I don’t get what you’re trying to say(Currently it seems directed to me but hopefully not. I’m not the best communicator).
They should optimize their games, the same way you should optimize yours too, not only asking the engine programmers to do all the optimization work.
2 Likes
Yeah, I wanted to see “the scene”, if it had anything special in it - but it doesnt, its really just a simple scene where the trees dont even have leaves etc.
Also, please use cooked shipping builds for performance comparisons, in editor and standalone is meaningless.
Addition to this
I was interested in this because your and my scenes overall partition in terms of “milisecond distribution” is as different as I expected. (I pay a lot for translucency etc. that you dont have there at all, so my performance numbers are “fine” if that is taken into account.)
All of the debug-stuff running in background is completely screwing performance to an extent where the data shown in stat unit etc. are worthless.
If I do this in Editor, I gets “20ms” (for gpu), which would equal 50 fps, but in reality, I do get 60-61 (1440p that is) - which is a big difference, just from making a build.
My game runs with 20-25 fps in Editor and standalone (while showing weird numbers in stats), while the shipping build runs as fast as your hardware allows it to
Also, you already noticed: Engine was downsampling stuff in viewport, so I dont need to point at it.
I also noticed large visual differences between the two versions, as if they are not running on the same settings at all. (PS: Anti-Aliasing wouldnt hurt 
)
I would go and take a look at the city sample, but its meaningless because of my 6900 XT. (It doesnt really seem to care much from what I gathered.)
I also have been fighting with UE5s new physics the entire day… lets say, it was exhausting. 
This heavily depends on the scene.
yes, in a simple scene with just a few buildings etc. it will work - but as soon as you introduce a decent amount of foliage and other things (which games usually have), you are paying a lot more for translucency than in the city sample etc.
While I agree, that the recently released UE5-games are jokes in terms of performance, especially since they dont even allow to disable Lumen and just say “get a 2080 and turn DLSS/FSR on, you consoomer”… the city sample really is “simple”.
I have no idea how they manage to pull this off.
Even I managed to make the game run “just fine” on 10 years old graphics cards as long as you leave lumen disabled, with nanite enabled…
In fact, someone recently made it work on a GT 1030, allthough the 2GB VRAM couldnt handle the Trees and the fps went trash when he got close, but otherwise were fine. (I think he also used TSR, but then again, a 1030 is really potato tier - a GTX 960 is like 4x as fast.)
It is certainly possible to get “the best of both worlds” with small tradeoffs on both ends, but some effort has to be put in.
I see, I’m with you now. I want to avoid bad-talking the engine devs, I think with all the considerations of the next-gen, including Unreal’s newer usage as a film production tool, Moore’s law making performance gains gen-on-gen smaller, and the staggering tech base they support, they’ve done a pretty phenomenal job. That’s not to say there aren’t legitimate ways the engine could do better, but in a lot of the analyses I’ve seen of UE games with bad perf, it’s way more often how the devs optimized their work than any sort of fundamental engine limitation (with shader compilation stutter being a partial exception).
1 Like
One of the key reasons that lumen runs as well as it does in the city sample is that all the meshes are modular for culling and watertight against eachother-almost no overlap, which keeps BVH traversal low. Never mind the far-field letting them cull thousands of instances while still keeping distant GI. If anyone’s kitbashing large, complex meshes together without proper HLOD, they should expect HWRT performance to suck.
Perhaps this is unnecessary, but I think developers and the public are getting the wrong message if they look at these these tech demos and only take away 'Unreal can do this. What I wish Epic did a better job illustrating is ‘Unreal can do this, only if you tune your content, optimize your scene, and set your visual bar accordingly’.
1 Like
What is it, specifically, that you think you need in order to better optimize your project?
Lumen has probably over a hundred cvars exposed that allow you to control everything from the downsampling factor of screen probes, the placement and resolution of the radiance cache, the resolution of the surface cache cards, the density of the translucent lighting volume probes, whether to do spatial filtering between radiance probes… the list goes on and on… Individual components of lumen can be enabled/disabled wholesale even.
1 Like
Wait, you said you had two 3060s. Are they connected via SLI?
One thing I will never say about UE5 is that it lacks optimizationability.
Every now and again I run through the CVar list for lumen, just to see if there’s any way to claw performance back or enable new features. You can absolutely make it run better and look better if you can dedicate the time to it. I’ve gotten to speak with a handful of AAA devs who were in the early stages of getting their upcoming titles working in UE5: they were trying out every CVar they could to claw back performance at an acceptable overhead. Optimization doesn’t look like your PPV settings as much as tuning the engine to have exactly what you need, and carry the cost of nothing else.
Deleted
The problem with your posts is that you don’t really seem to have anything to say other than “Make FPS go up. No upscale. No TAA.”
Yet you post these screeds like you’re hitting Epic with some hard truths they need to hear and you’re the only one with the courage to tell them, but in reality you’re just stating the obvious. Everybody wants better performance without sacrificing quality. Literally everybody. Which is why Lumen has continued to make steady improvements to both quality and performance since early access to this day and no doubt that trend will continue in the future, with or without your daily diatribes.
In any case, you will do as you please. I’m done with this.
5 Likes
TAA and temporal AA methods are cancerous, and should never forced on people.
The lumen team needs to add motion vectors to their Lumen temporal accumulations. That way we don’t have to rely on TAA or TSR to fix lumens flickering issues.
Moving meshes have serious issues when you raise the temporal accumulation too much(to stop it from flickering).
This topic is becoming way too negative in my opinion.
How about we stop turning this into a toxic landfill that buries all the useful information in here that is still valid today?
3 Likes
Tbh, the last comment I made was pretty relevant.
Lumen has poor lighting effects for Skeletal Mesh.
Lumen’s documentation seems to indicate that it does not support Skeletal Mesh.
Does Unreal Engine have plans to improve it? Currently, most animation projects using Unreal Engine use Skeletal Mesh for character animation import.
Lumen is very important to animation projects, hope to get relevant support as soon as possible.
Could you guys just leave and fight it out somewhere else? This is a feedback thread, developers are looking for useful informations here, not for your debates. Thank you.
2 Likes
Lumen supports skeletal meshes, the surface cache and mesh distance fields do not, which means they can’t bounce light from off-screen and in software raytracing mode they will also not be visible in off-screen reflections.
In order to get the best results from Skeletal Meshes in Lumen you should use hardware raytracing (with hit lighting for reflections) in direct lighting if they are going to be visible in reflections.
3 Likes
The devs mentioned improved skeletal mesh support being on the docket at some point, but there’s no timeline on that.
I wonder if/how the capsule shadow system would talk to lumen.
1 Like
I have seen that on other things. If you go to the Lumen’s 5.3 normal-geo visualization.
That same area with be highlighted green.