Dismissing a demo made by the engine creators themselves who should know how to get around the worst bottlenecks is a mistake.
Also, all demos so far had massive FPS issues......
Is the demo intended to show the best possible performance of UE5? No. It's a tech demo, intended to show the brand new UE5 graphics technologies in their best possible light.
You're clueless if you think the tech demo developers sat down and rigourously optimised this demo for performance on every platform.
There's literally no impetus to do this. It's a free demo. Those manhours spent developing it are a marketing cost for Epic.
The aim of the demo was to push the boundaries of what was possible visually, which is expected to come at the cost of framerate. We should judge engines by shipping products, not tech demos.
This.
If you think general issues like the massive single thread dependency of Nanite/Lumen just exist because of the demo nature of the software you're in for a rude awakening....
That is one massive flaw the developers would not have left in a playable and benchmarkable demo if they'd had a choice.....
Makes one question if the official release didn't come too early.
This shit is why DF's Alex often does more harm than good. He makes unfounded sweeping conclusions about a tool-suite like UE5 based on a few small tech demos and what he sees looking at his PC CPU core monitoring tool in Windows.
Alex is not a developer and does not have access to the comprehensive suite of performance and profiling tools that developers have and very much do use to develop commercial games.
If this quick and dirty tech demo runs largely on a single thread, it's very likely because that is what the demo devs chose to do, not because it was the only option afforded them within the constraints of the game engine. Game engines don't impose such constraints and UE5 is no different.
Nanite and Lumen are both GPU compute driven technologies. Meaning, they run on the GPU. Meaning they are massively multi-threaded by fucking definition.
If Alex is seeing high CPU utilisation in these demos, it's likely because of a draw call demand on the CPU, which is more a function of what the demo devs decided to place within a given scene in the demo than any inherent performance limitation.
On commercial games, devs build and optimise to carefully manage the draw call demand on the CPU. That's clearly not going to be a major concern for tech demo creators who were tasked to produce a quick and dirty demo to show off the visual results of the new engine tech in a short time frame. Epic devs or not, it doesn't matter. The demo devs would not have bothered about that level of optimisation because the manhours spent on making these demos are a sunk cost for Epic, so they would not have given them copious hours to work on the demos. That's not how a profit-orientated business works... and Epic is a profit-orientated business.
www.eurogamer.net
