Say you don’t know anything about rendering, without saying it…
Here’s one easy way to crush a system: Make that render target camera render at 8196x8196 and update every frame… Then downscale to the smaller window that you see in the vendor screen.
Realistically, they need to set the vendor/inventory screens to be capped at 60fps or something (the rest of the game can stay high). Right now, it seems like the render targets are rendering every frame.
This is also why true planar reflections are pretty rare in games(mirrors): They are EXPENSIVE as hell, unless you degrade their quality real far.
1 Like
Everything you just said means it’s a game issue. Meaning blizzard can control it and it’s not the client side hardware.
Dense.
That’s not an issue, but could be optimized. Your GPU isn’t in danger running at 80C, it’s just inconvenient to you. Personally, I always try to design and code systems with power consumption optimizations in mind (things like limited main menus to a fixed 30 or 60fps, even if the game is set to run at 144)
Have you ever heard a PS4 Pro before when you’re playing a game in 4k? It sounds like a hair drier. I’d bet money it’s sitting they’re pegged at a thermal throttled 90C. Guess what, you can do that for years on end on those consoles… Are you going to call a company like Naughty Dogs dense for letting it do that?
2 Likes
That is literally a game development issue
1 Like
That isn’t literally anything, but it is a design choice, overlooked or not. Again, the compromise would be to add another checkbox, like they did for cutscene fps, to limit the update rate of the render targets in the vendor/inventory screens.
If you keep chasing down that rabbit hole, then all modern games would have PS4 level graphics right now and the GPUs would be running at 50C. Or you’d have to wait 2-4 more GPU generations to run today’s games at cooler temps, on high settings and refresh rates lol…
1 Like
It literally is when something that should be minimally GPU intensive is maxing out to the point of hitting the limiter while the rest of the game hovers around 45%.
It’s an issue that they clearly overlooked.
1 Like
I hate to be that person, but you’re not educated enough in the matter to formulate an actual opinion on it. There’s a lot more to the equation than you’d think and I’ve barely scratched the surface of it with what I’ve talked about.
But I will emphasize it again in saying that it’s a lot more taxing than you’d think.
Because they over looked it. It would be one thing it the game itself was taxing and required a lot of Utilization throughout or even during any other point. It’s a complete design and development issue.
1 Like
Here, I whipped up a quick example to show you what I’m talking about. This is only using a 2048x2048 render target, but this is how much it can crush the GPU when updating every frame:
https://imgur.com/a/AE6rRvc
Compression kills the quality, but it was vsync locked to 120fps(probably more head room if I removed the cap) and when I open the inventory, it drops to 50fps. Granted, this is a pretty extreme example, but this is what I’m talking about: It’s not as simple and cheap as you’d think.
1 Like
Thank you for proving that it is without a doubt a developer issue.
Even if I cap it a lower rate, to where it’s only updating the render target at 30fps, it will still increase load but a large amount.
So like I said earlier, it’s the price you pay for having pretty menus with animated characters in it.
1 Like
Which again means it’s a game issue. They are able to control how taxing it is on the GPU. Where it is the single most point of GPU stress in the game by a very very large margin.
You think you are proving me wrong, when in fact you are doing the opposite.
Whatever you have to tell yourself to cope with it…
Which is it? 3D characters in the menus shouldn’t cost anything and are easy on the GPU or they are the most stressful thing the game can experience… I need that meme with the guy sweating and the two red buttons…
2 Likes
Cope? You are the one here telling people to cap FPS to 60 on a game that is not taxing whatsoever. That’s a bandaid to the problem.
You are legit white knighting and every argument you made is proving my point to be true.
You can cap the overall game lower, yes. But my actual proposed solution is to have the render targeted things have an option to be capped, which the devs should do. The game would still render at like 120fps, but any of the animated things in the vendor screen or inventory screen would be capped to something lower like 30-60 updates per second. Your frame rate would still show you getting 120fps, but the animated scenes in the menus, would be rendering at a lower rate internally. This would be the win-win-win between being able to keep frame rates higher, keep power consumption from spiking and help keep the planet cooler.
Outside of that, it’s a non-issue and it’s not going to brick your card or anything, you just don’t like being annoyed with fans making more noise.
2 Likes
It’s rendering a damn character model. Do you think that should turn our PCs into jet engines???
Seriously dude, stop saying that’s a “solution”. It’s not a solution. It’s a patch. If you keep vendor screen opened, the temperatures will keep raising. This bug is EXTREMELY dangerous and you are here saying it’s nothing. This bug has already broke some pieces of hardware. Please, stop. Stop defending Blizzard.
2 Likes
I know that, which is what makes it a game issue. My god you are dense.
It would be one thing if the game itself was just demanding, big fights with a lot going on or even scenery; however, that’s not what’s happening. The GPUs utilization is jumping from 45% to 90% from an inventory window. This was clearly not intended.
If the game itself was demanding then telling people to lower setting and cap FPS lower would be a valid suggestion. This isn’t it. I could set the game to LOW on everything and cap the FPS to 145, the issue would still occur.
Again, everything you are saying is pointing to a game/developer issue. Get off the copium.
1 Like
No it didn’t faulty hardware did. The game just exposed those flaws.
With lighting and scene composition. It’s not free… I’ve already demoed that in the video I posted showing a quick and dirty example that was only using a 2k render target being updated every frame. I could probably strip some features down out of the render target capture, but even still, it’s going to increase GPU usage by a lot. This is part of the reason why VR games are so demanding: They have to render the scene twice from different angles.
Or an artistic design choice. Much like games that have a lot of volumetrics that destroy frame rates, they still opt to keep them in the game because they feel it adds enough to the scene to warrant keeping it high; even if it means lower performance or higher GPU usage.
1 Like
The game and it’s poor design was the catalyst to the faulty hardware. It literally played a part in it.
No one said it should be free. No one. You are the one who keep arguing this point. It should not go from 45% to 90% on a GTX 3080. Period. We understand it would take up resources, but you can’t seriously be defending it using up that much. Who knows how much it would actually take up if the GPU didn’t throttle from it hitting the thermal limit.
No, you are white knighting. There is no chance they intended for it to be this GPU stressing when the rest of the game comes no where near it.
I’m obviously not going to convince you and you’re definitely not going to convince me, someone who has many years experience working with game development. We can just leave it at that, you’ve said your under-informed opinions and I’ve said mine based off of knowledge and experience. No point in further clogging the drain.
1 Like