the only 2 people that really helped were zeOrb and for RyanTorant i test his version, meanwhile the version from him is building but the SSDO version didnt worked well and the VXGI version couldnt be opened, so 2 hours of compiling and building for nothing, thanks for that. only because Xerithas meant that it dont need such a graphic card but what is written here Xerithas? : NVIDIA VXGI 2.0.1 | NVIDIA Developer yes only this cards can handle it because of their maxwell architecture.
Well why don’t you try it then?
I’m using the VXGI branch myself with an AMD HD 7850.
I admit the gameworks thread is getting pretty long now, but you could try reading it.
Guys please keep on track on the thread and do not start insulting each other.
You need wait until the 4.8 release to check if the LPV final is here, if no you will need wait to the 4.9.
But you can check here Lighting the Environment in Unreal Engine | Unreal Engine 5.3 Documentation the LPV without use a custom build, you can use the 4.7 or 4.8 preview to check that from the launcher versions.
Sorry for being a bit ‘short’, just woke up and hadn’t had my morning coffee/smokes.
That compatibility list is really saying that those Maxwell GPUs are recommended for the best performance with VXGI, but as far as I know it works with any dx11 card.
If you like I’ll just do some quick screens that confirm it works on older hardware (I should probably do this anyway as it comes up often enough).
But I’m not saying the performance is good on older cards, mine struggles but it’s just the nature of the beast.
EDIT: Mike from Nvidia on things that require an Nvida GPU at the moment.
Well why don’t you try it then?
I’m using the VXGI branch myself with an AMD HD 7850.
I admit the gameworks thread is getting pretty long now, but you could try reading it.
[/QUOTE]
i tried it by myself ! i have an AMD RADEON HD 7770 2 GB and it dont work! 2-3 hours for nothing!
the lpv doesnt work with point light!
Did you follow Mike’s instructions?
Took me around 6 hours to build it, but my CPU belongs in a museum.
To be honest though I suspect even if you did get it running, that VXGI will crush a 7770.
I spend most of my time between 10 and 20 fps and the 7850 is quite a bit more powerful.
dont work. really are you all mentally ill or why nobody understand that i want DYNAMIC GI from DYNAMIC POINT and DYNAMIC SPOT LIGHTS! read before post.
No need to be so rude.
If you need this, VXGI is your option for now, it does work, but performance will be bad on your machine.
Yes I agree that more options would be nice, people are working on them =]
sorry but i was very angry because yesterday and today i must wait all in all 6 to 8 hours to build and compile… its frustrating and i wait since 4.2 for that feature and so many are wishing this that i must say that epic is stupid because they make only more and more stuff but many stuff nobody wanted so it makes me very upset that they dont read what the community want.
I understand that development is sometimes frustrating and that Epics priorities might now much those over every one in the community. As zeOrb, Hevedy and Xerithas stated GI is in place. So please keep the conversation polite, people are just trying to help.
Cheers,
Moss
I hope that diretional oclusion is good enough to simulate far shadows , so i dont have to use Ray Traced Distance Field Soft Shadows
I think you are mixing stuff 
. SSDO simulates short range occlusion and GI, is NOT a substitute for direct shadows. Totally different topic.
Bear in mind than many videgames dont have shadows on the distance , and more inportantly RTDF don’t support landscape , which casts the more noticeable shadows , so maybe ssdo could help a little with objects such as trees if is tweaked enough (maybe setting it to be darker on the distance if it is posible ) ,even if the result is not as good as raytraced distance field shadows .
Also anyone interested should check the post #24 of this thread which states that dfao is recieving a lot of optimizations , so directional oclusion could could also be achieved by extending dfao along with ssao .
A. DFAO =/= != DFGI
B. DFAO is different of the SSAO and SSDO
I was just saying that directional oclusion could be added to dfao too , because like ssao they are both types of ambient oclusion and i havent mentioned DFGI once , the post that i mentioned was talking about dfao even if the rest of the thread was not.