Vulkan was the right choice

[Boringnick]

Seems there's some controversy here regarding Vulkan.

First of all: I am running this game on a GTX 970 and a i-5 6500 and have smooth frame rates (everything set to high, no AA). If you have a 1070 and the game stutters, then the problem is probably a bazillion of auto-start programs eating up your CPU or outdated drivers.

Also, Vulkan was the only sane choice for a new engine. It's comparable to DX12 in feature set, but isn't restricted to just Windows 10. So, by not using Vulkan, they either would have to do basically TWO engines (a legacy DX11 one, and a DX12 one) or use DX12 exclusively and restrict themselves to Windows 10!

Given that many machines still run Windows 7 and 8.1 (and for good reasons: https://betanews.com/2018/11/27/windows ... ia-player/) such a restriction would have been PURE MADNESS. If you're making a new engine from the get-go, Vulkan is the sanest choice for your graphics API. Unless you want restrict your product to exactly one version of one OS.

[Kalantris]

They also added SLI support to the new Vulcan allowing developers to create their own SLI profiles for their games. I'm eagerly awaiting SLI support .

[GBlair4811]

Seems there's some controversy here regarding Vulkan.

First of all: I am running this game on a GTX 970 and a i-5 6500 and have smooth frame rates (everything set to high, no AA). If you have a 1070 and the game stutters, then the problem is probably a bazillion of auto-start programs eating up your CPU or outdated drivers.

Good for you but don't assume because something works for you then it should for others. I have a way better computer than you and the game chugs like hell half the time, especially in battles. And it's nothing GPU related.

[GBlair4811]

They also added SLI support to the new Vulcan allowing developers to create their own SLI profiles for their games. I'm eagerly awaiting SLI support .

Whats the point? I have 2x SLI Gigabyte 980ti, but using only one of them the game never goes above 5% GPU use. Why would you need more?

[Kalantris]

They also added SLI support to the new Vulcan allowing developers to create their own SLI profiles for their games. I'm eagerly awaiting SLI support .

Whats the point? I have 2x SLI Gigabyte 980ti, but using only one of them the game never goes above 5% GPU use. Why would you need more?

Because I have dual GTX880m and SLI is nowadays the way I get acceptable framerates in new games. Sucks, but I'm not planning on replacing them anytime soon. Not without replacing the whole rig anyway, which is way more than I'm willing to pay these days .

[Jaswolf]

Honestly, I'm not convinced so far.
I'm paraphrasing myself from another thread:

"I can play X Rebirth with max graphic settings (AA x8) @1080p and my GTX980Ti doesn't break a sweat (vsync on - 60 fps super stable) the lighting/shaders are gorgeous (GPU max load 67-70% according to MSI Afterburner monitoring)

In X4, SMAA x2 is the maximum that I can afford for keeping a steady but not 100% stable 60 fps and the lighting/shaders are "okay" but less impressive than XR.
(GPU max load 99% according to MSI Afterburner monitoring)"


And I would add that in both games big fleet battle murder my fps (CPU get pounded to death i7 6700K OC @4.4Ghz)
I think that it's the core design of there game that can't handle too many ships in real time on screen.
It struggles to update on time: AI , pathfinding, collision detection, game logic, all projectiles, turrets, damage, drones, visual FX, sounds... etc.

In a AAA game, they would have implemented a hard limit on how many ships you could have on screen, to give all players the same level of performance.
Egosoft is more open minded and give us more freedom but we suffer the consequence of over flooding the engine beyond its nominal safe zone.

I'm sure they will achieve more and more optimisation overtime but I don't expect something revolutionary.

[JediOmen]

In a AAA game, they would have implemented a hard limit on how many ships you could have on screen, to give all players the same level of performance.

Oh god, isnt this the truth. AAA is so bad these days, I really dont know how they can still manage to generate the same garbage year after year. Patching takes months (if ever). Egosoft can do it in just a couple of days!

[niksenior]

5% gpu, bull, or you system is ******.

[GBlair4811]

5% gpu, bull, or you system is ******.

X99-II Motherboard, i7-6850k, 2x SLI Gigabyte OC'd 980ti, 2x 500gb SSD, 1x 1TB SSHD, 1x 4TB Mechanical.

Not really. I can't get it to use more than 20% CPU and 5-6% GPU. It can't pick onboard graphics because my mobo has no onboard. Latest drivers.

[LennStar]

And I would add that in both games big fleet battle murder my fps (CPU get pounded to death i7 6700K OC @4.4Ghz)
I think that it's the core design of there game that can't handle too many ships in real time on screen.
It struggles to update on time: AI , pathfinding, collision detection, game logic, all projectiles, turrets, damage, drones, visual FX, sounds... etc.

Actually that should be the part Vulkan is best at afaik

Anyway, how good Vulkan works is based heavily on which GPU and driver you have.

I have a RX 470 and a Ryzen 1700. GPU is under official minimum and the Ryzen not much better bc of low single speed.

I run the game fine on high settings most of the time. In stations it drops to 25fps for whatever reason, but hey, it's not like I play reaction time games on a station, right?

I stil have to see battles between two huge fleets, but 2 dozen fighters against 2 destroyers didn't crush the performance.

[Jaswolf]

...
Actually that should be the part Vulkan is best at afaik
Anyway, how good Vulkan works is based heavily on which GPU and driver you have.
I have a RX 470 and a Ryzen 1700. GPU is under official minimum and the Ryzen not much better bc of low single speed.
I run the game fine on high settings most of the time. In stations it drops to 25fps for whatever reason, but hey, it's not like I play reaction time games on a station, right?
I stil have to see battles between two huge fleets, but 2 dozen fighters against 2 destroyers didn't crush the performance.

Sorry, I wasn't clear enough concerning the big fleet battle I mentioned.
My GPU was fine (70% max load) It's the CPU that took the hit. my fps dropped from 60 to sub 25 (stuttering)

This battle: Xenon vs Argon (AI only)
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/ ... 1583211927


From memory:
Xenon: 3 K, 30+ fighters
Argon: what you see on the screenshot, and more than 50+ fighters, drones
Hundred of projectiles/lasers/missiles

This would have been amazing to watch at a steady 60fps.

[Raztax]

They also added SLI support to the new Vulcan allowing developers to create their own SLI profiles for their games. I'm eagerly awaiting SLI support .

Whats the point? I have 2x SLI Gigabyte 980ti, but using only one of them the game never goes above 5% GPU use. Why would you need more?

Are you checking the gpu load by alt-tabbing out of the game? If you do it this way you will get inaccurate results . I find it hard to imagine that a 980ti never goes above 5% when my GTX 1080 is usually pegged at 100% (or close to it) in game. However, if I tab out, gpu load drops to about 3%.

If you use a program like Afterburner to monitor your GPU load, you will likely notice that the 5% you are seeing is what the load drops to when you tab out of the game.

[ADMNtek]

5% gpu, bull, or you system is ******.

X99-II Motherboard, i7-6850k, 2x SLI Gigabyte OC'd 980ti, 2x 500gb SSD, 1x 1TB SSHD, 1x 4TB Mechanical.

Not really. I can't get it to use more than 20% CPU and 5-6% GPU. It can't pick onboard graphics because my mobo has no onboard. Latest drivers.

i call bull i have one if the fastest 980Ti's ever made (Zotac GeForce GTX 980 Ti AMP! Extreme) and i get to 98% load.
i also have a X99 6/12 cpu and while the total is like 20% that is only because the game only use like 4-5 threads with thread 1 being pinned at 90+%.
so unless you show screenshots i call bull. unless of course you have the game run at potato graphics.

[Nexuscrawler]

I have a 1060 (3GB) and my GPU is at around 35% with max graphics.
No clue how yours are either barely used (5%) or completely burning (98%).

[KextV8]

I have a 1060 (3GB) and my GPU is at around 35% with max graphics.
No clue how yours are either barely used (5%) or completely burning (98%).

Turn off vsync and your GPU will be pegged at max too. That or your CPU will be.

[Nexuscrawler]

What exactly is the point behind that? (sorry if I missunderstand something there)
VSync syncs the framerate with the update rate of your monitor.
Why would you want to go beyond that to begin with and deactivate VSync?
Why do you need more frames than your monitor can display?

[KextV8]

What exactly is the point behind that? (sorry if I missunderstand something there)
VSync syncs the framerate with the update rate of your monitor.
Why would you want to go beyond that to begin with and deactivate VSync?
Why do you need more frames than your monitor can display?

Makes the game smoother and you'll notice frame dips less. You tend to get more consistent performance since instead of the GPU intentionally throttling itself, it just goes at its work as best it can.

[DogyAUT]

I am playing at 1440p 165hz here (with 4xMSAA) and G-Sync.

RTX 2080 Ti @2050MHz Core/7500MHz Memory
i7-6850K @4,2GHz
32GB RAM @2666MHz CL15 (Quadchannel and Dual Ranked Memory)

My FPS is in a range of 70-140 FPS.
GPU usage is mostly in a range of 60-80% - CPU at 40-70% on all 12 threads.

Playing with 2xSSAA (which results in 5K resolution @1440p) my FPS range is about 35-65 FPS with 100% GPU Load.

My CPU atm is my bottleneck - will anyways replace this next year with a Ryzen 7 3700X and faster memory (3200MHz CL14).

[StoneLegionYT]

I have a 1070 and have hit 80-100% GPU it also depends on the setting. People wanting to max out that AA though would benefit a lot with a second GPU.

[leecarter]

I'm running a 2080 at 4k ultra settings with AA off (always off at 4k), G-Synced at 60 FPS in most areas with occasional drops into the high 30s when things get busy in-game. I haven't bothered monitoring my Ryzen 2700x's usage, but the fan controller is only kicking on intermittently so it can't be getting worked too hard.

My 2080 peaks at 98% usage, so I'm not sure how a 980ti manages 6% regardless of my being in 4k, but whatever.