Them adding Vulkan support would essentially fix the graphical glitches... would be nice :)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: liamdaweI've tweeted the issue to Unity and one of their Linux developers to highlight it.

Awesome, thanks Liam! :)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: elbuglioneagain?

To protect your privacy, external media requires approval to load.

Source: www.gamingonlinux.com

View cookie preferences.
Accept & Show Accept All & Don't show this again   Direct Link

is not funny anymore

C'mon now, it's hands down the best Gaming On Windows site out there :D

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: elmapuli dont think being beta menas they are commited, it only means its not fully tested/functional, bug free, or it can improve the performance in the future.

We've already seen it does improve performance, especially in CPU bound games, even in these beta releases.

Quoting: elmapulas i said, DX12 is older, if an game takes 3 years to be developed, you show what you're doing at the year 1, and say something like: its still in beta that means you're more commited to it than someone that waits until the game is almost finished to show any screenshots/video of it?

I do understand your point, and agree that we'll have to wait a few years to *really* see how things are going. However, the fact that we now have three separate AAA companies with major figures saying DX12 is a complete waste of time and resources and offers no significant benefit, even if you're building a game for Windows and Xbox One, is very telling of what many game devs think of DX12.

Quoting: elmapulalso, we cant compare the POV of an indie with the one of an AAA developer.

I personally am not too concerned about indie devs as far as the advantages of Vulkan or DX12, since most indie games will not benefit from Vulkan too much, if at all, except maybe on Android. I'm personally more focused on AAA titles and their development, since they will be the ones who primarily benefit from Vulkan, which again we have three studios (with probably more to come) saying DX12 is a waste and that Vulkan is the way to go. I'm unaware of any AAA dev saying DX12 is the way to go and that Vulkan is a waste of time and resources... because it would be quite ridiculous for them to say such a thing without some really good evidence to back it up.

But, like you said, and I agree, we may have to wait a year or two to see how it all shakes out. :)

However, half of the PC gaming market is still running Windows 7, which runs Vulkan and can't run DX12... So, unless Microsoft can get all of the Windows 7 users to switch to Windows 10, or unless they make DX12 available on Windows 7, I personally think the writing is on the wall. If you were a AAA game developer and half of your market was on a machine that only ran Vulkan, and will stay there for the next 4-5 years, which API would you choose?

edit: Added clarity to the post

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: natewardawgI don't want to deflate anyone's excitement just yet. I'm super excited about Vulkan too :)

With that said, I reported a bug from the 5.6 beta (reported from 5.6.0f1) because the Vulkan API wouldn't initialize due to a missing unity file which should have been automatically included in the build process. This was tested on 2 different machines building from the editors on both Ubuntu 16.04 and Windows 10.

https://fogbugz.unity3d.com/default.asp?894318_t2urddj83u6m06f3 [External Link]

I'm downloading 5.6.0f3 right now and will report back if anything has changed :)

The bug still persists. :( I just built out of Unity 5.6.0f3 under Windows 10, tried to run it in Ubuntu 16.04 and immediate crash... it's not my systems as it runs all of the other Vulkan ports just fine :)

edit: I have two computers that both run every stable Vulkan thing I've thrown at them, they will not run a Unity build with Vulkan as the only graphics API.

If you know how to use Unity and want to test, make sure you DON'T just drag the Vulkan API target to the top. You need to remove OpenGL Core from the graphics APIs list, or else you'll think Vulkan is working, when in fact it has fallen back to OpenGL.

edit: It's probably also worth noting that the same game builds and runs fine on Linux with OpenGL, and builds and runs fine with Vulkan under Windows. It's just Vulkan on Linux that doesn't work.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Gaming On Windows 10!!! Too funny Liam! :D

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: tripy

Quoting: natewardawgIf I remember, I will post my stats when I get it running on my other machine. I may do it at 1920x1080 though.

Thanks. Much appreciated.

Edit: wups.. It was wishful thinking, but I've got a GTX 960, not 970.
Damn, time to get some Z I guess too.

Here it is... I actually did the benchmark at both 720p and 1080p with normal quality.

Specs:
i7-6700K
GTX 960
32 GB RAM

720p:
avg: 80.905754
min: 57.537403
max: 87.573341

1080p:
avg: 81.353348
min: 64.316956
max: 86.662621

Yep, almost exactly the same... so this scene is definitely CPU bound. So, I'm pretty sure upgrading your system with a Ryzen chip would cause this scene to outperform my system even with the same GPU. I'm going to do some more tests for the other two quality levels, at some point :)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: tripyI run a (very) old AMD FX 8120 Bulldozer with a gtx 970 and for me Vulkan gave a few fps more, but nothing tremendous.
It's still pretty choppy overall in the normal preset at 720P, with some regions with the frame rate boosting to the hundreds fps.

"benchmark 2" gave me an average of 32 fps in Vulkan and 28 fps in OGL.
I was a bit underwhelmed, I admit...
Probably time to jump on the Ryzen train.

I ran my benchmarks in 720p also and got 33.5 fps under Vulkan for benchmark #2, but on an 860M which is far inferior to your GTX 970. I do have a GTX 960 with an i7-6700K, it just hasn't downloaded Mad Max yet on that system for me to benchmark it :)

So, I agree, it's probably CPU bound, because I got better results and according to http://cpubenchmark.net/ [External Link] your CPU scores in the 6000's and mine scores in the 8000's, which would explain why I got a better framerate on a significantly inferior GPU :)

If I remember, I will post my stats when I get it running on my other machine. I may do it at 1920x1080 though.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

edit: [Solved] Just needed to install libvulkan, the unity file had nothing to do with the error. Every other thing I ran was linking against the Steam Runtime... of course :p

I don't want to deflate anyone's excitement just yet. I'm super excited about Vulkan too :)

With that said, I reported a bug from the 5.6 beta (reported from 5.6.0f1) because the Vulkan API wouldn't initialize due to a missing unity file which should have been automatically included in the build process. This was tested on 2 different machines building from the editors on both Ubuntu 16.04 and Windows 10.

https://fogbugz.unity3d.com/default.asp?894318_t2urddj83u6m06f3 [External Link]

I'm downloading 5.6.0f3 right now and will report back if anything has changed :)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Adam_eMOh by the way, do you know any applications that can show FPS'es and stuff while running a game? I know of GLXOSD but it doesn't show any output when running the Vulkan beta. And also, it seems to stuck on 60fpses in any game.

Steam has a basic FPS counter you can turn on under Steam > Settings > In Game > In-game FPS counter

Obviously it's quite basic. I would also like to know if there's something available that overlays other thing too like CPU usage. :)

View this comment - View article - View full comments