http://www.tomshardware.com/news/geforce-experience-support-opengl-vulkan,34372.html (http://www.tomshardware.com/news/geforce-experience-support-opengl-vulkan,34372.html)
cool but more importantly they should get rid of that variable framerate nonsense.
Do they still force you to create an account to use GFE?
think so.
pricks.
Quote from: passerBy on May 10, 2017, 03:08:10 PM
Do they still force you to create an account to use GFE?
yep, recently has that locked, what is so hard ? if you use YTB you have a google account...if you google people most probably you have a facebook account :)
I dont use their "optimal" settings, only read about new drivers/other stuff in the app
Quote from: vali_grad on May 10, 2017, 03:43:33 PM
Quote from: passerBy on May 10, 2017, 03:08:10 PM
Do they still force you to create an account to use GFE?
yep, recently has that locked, what is so hard ? if you use YTB you have a google account...if you google people most probably you have a facebook account :)
I dont use their "optimal" settings, only read about new drivers/other stuff in the app
The less accounts I have, the better. Also, I don't want to share details of my Google account with nVidia just because they want me to. Or did you mean it like "if you have one account, it should be ok for you to make a thousand"? That's some flawed logic. Also, I don't have a facebook account and don't understand those who do.
Quote from: passerBy on May 10, 2017, 03:08:10 PM
Do they still force you to create an account to use GFE?
Yes. It bothers me too, but on the other hand you're not obliged to use your google account and once you've created the GFE account, you can probably forget you have as it logs you in automatically.
To me the only news is that their recording stuff may work with GPB now.
Quote from: HornetMaX on May 10, 2017, 06:36:43 PM
Quote from: passerBy on May 10, 2017, 03:08:10 PM
Do they still force you to create an account to use GFE?
Yes. It bothers me too, but on the other hand you're not obliged to use your google account and once you've created the GFE account, you can probably forget you have as it logs you in automatically.
To me the only news is that their recording stuff may work with GPB now.
Creating accounts is a pain... But you are right. And after all, this seems to be the most fluid way of capturing.
Piboso never mentioned switching to DX? Sticking to OGL seems a little bit archaic now. Not to mention MXB is way more laggier than GPB (and than it should have been). Could probably benefit a lot from that.
Quote from: HornetMaX on May 10, 2017, 06:36:43 PMTo me the only news is that their recording stuff may work with GPB now.
that was always possible. you just had to use windowed mode and enable windows aero.
the variable framerate stuff made me switch to obs and i won't go back.
Quote from: vini97 on May 10, 2017, 07:35:57 PM
Quote from: HornetMaX on May 10, 2017, 06:36:43 PMTo me the only news is that their recording stuff may work with GPB now.
that was always possible. you just had to use windowed mode and enable windows aero.
I know, but that sucked big time.
Quote from: passerBy on May 10, 2017, 06:47:48 PM
Piboso never mentioned switching to DX? Sticking to OGL seems a little bit archaic now.
DX is not any newer/better than openGL.
At best, what matters is which version of openGL (or DX) the game is using (and if the engine uses the possibilities offered by the more recent versions of the API).
If I recall correctly, PiBoSo wanted to stick with openGL because its cross-platform.
He also added that porting the current engine to a more recent openGL (or Vulkan) would be a lot of work.
Quote from: HornetMaX on May 10, 2017, 09:15:27 PM
Quote from: passerBy on May 10, 2017, 06:47:48 PM
Piboso never mentioned switching to DX? Sticking to OGL seems a little bit archaic now.
DX is not any newer/better than openGL.
At best, what matters is which version of openGL (or DX) the game is using (and if the engine uses the possibilities offered by the more recent versions of the API).
DX is closer to the hardware, at least in Windows. And if I can remember correctly, you can't have exclusive full screen access in the pure OGL under Windows without resorting to DirectDraw surfaces. Or did something change over the years?
QuoteIf I recall correctly, PiBoSo wanted to stick with openGL because its cross-platform.
He also added that porting the current engine to a more recent openGL (or Vulkan) would be a lot of work.
For a sim series that sticks to Windows, that can hardly be seen as a right decision, unless he has plans to open a Linux branch.
As for the porting process, I guess so. Maybe switching to some other readily available graphics engine would be worth it? After all, GPB's or even MXB's looks are not something I would consider worth retaining, and I can't even use MXB in full graphics, because that adds to the input lag considerably. Even having 60 fps in it has that effect. And I have a feeling that OGL could be partially responsible for that.
DirectX and OpenGL only expose the capabilities of the graphics hardware to the OS, its up to the driver/SDK/developer to make good use of them :)
Quote from: h106frp on May 11, 2017, 04:01:00 PM
DirectX and OpenGL only expose the capabilities of the graphics hardware to the OS, its up to the driver/SDK/developer to make good use of them :)
But as far as I can remember, OGL doesn't do that straightforwardly enough... After all, if you want better cross-platform capabilities, you have to give up something... like the performance :)
Though as far as I can remember from my own experiments with both interfaces, DX can be a handful to deal with. On the other hand, using OGL I had to deal with DirectDraw surfaces, so it was still a bother :) I was doing that when DirectX was still version 3, I believe, so I'm not sure if there was any refinement of usability done to either.
Speaking about drivers, it should be safe to assume that DX is better supported than OGL... Correct me if I'm wrong.
Only things that are really closer to the hardware are probably DX12 and Vulkan (ex Mantle). But to run these you do need a recent GPU.
Anyway, even if OGL has drawbacks over DX (9/10/11, which to be honest didn't seem to be PiBoSo's point of view), the work is already done in GPB/KRP/MXB/WRS to cope with that.
So, unless there's a big incentive in moving ....
A Linux/MacOS version was something PiBoSo indeed mentioned (as a possibility, nothing confirmed).
Quote from: HornetMaX on May 11, 2017, 04:47:19 PM
Only things that are really closer to the hardware are probably DX12 and Vulkan (ex Mantle). But to run these you do need a recent GPU.
And that's why it could be worth moving to a recent GPU. Luckily, we both have a recent enough one (you also got a GTX 970, as far as I can remember).
QuoteAnyway, even if OGL has drawbacks over DX (9/10/11, which to be honest didn't seem to be PiBoSo's point of view), the work is already done in GPB/KRP/MXB/WRS to cope with that.
So, unless there's a big incentive in moving ....
Well, I'd say switching to 64 bit is more important, of course. But seeing how poorly MXB, which looks marginally better than GPB, performs on my 970, I can't help but think that a better graphical engine/newer API might help a lot with that.
I suppose you also own a copy of MXB. What do you think of its performance?
QuoteA Linux/MacOS version was something PiBoSo indeed mentioned (as a possibility, nothing confirmed).
That's interesting. Would prefer switching to Linux when it comes to simming, but it doesn't seem to properly support FFB.
Quote from: passerBy on May 11, 2017, 05:17:11 PM
I suppose you also own a copy of MXB. What do you think of its performance?
You get lower FPSs than GPB, but MXB tracks have deformation, that's probably what makes it go down.
I cannot judge if moving to a more recent openGL o(or DX) would make this any better, but it's not sure that the culprit is the old openGL.
Quote from: HornetMaX on May 11, 2017, 05:30:24 PM
Quote from: passerBy on May 11, 2017, 05:17:11 PM
I suppose you also own a copy of MXB. What do you think of its performance?
You get lower FPSs than GPB, but MXB tracks have deformation, that's probably what makes it go down.
I cannot judge if moving to a more recent openGL o(or DX) would make this any better, but it's not sure that the culprit is the old openGL.
After unchecking the checkboxes in the Lighting block, turning the 3D Grass off and bringing the Textures down to Medium, I'm getting the same silky smooth performance I'm used to in GPB (and even higher, according to the frame rate indicator). Doesn't look like the problem might lie with the deformable terrain. Also, I think that the Afterburner showed that my GPU had quite a problem processing the graphics, while my i5 was pretty much slacking it off.
It's a real pity to bring MXB's already not very impressive looks to the level of MXS', but it looks like with it I need every single millisecond of input lag removed in order to ride those bikes in DS, and for some reason it's quite noticeable even at 60 fps on the mouse alone. Well, the question of input lag still remains somewhat an arcane knowledge to me. Probably has something to do with my computer monitor being very old (at least it's still a good flat panel).
Quote from: passerBy on May 11, 2017, 06:36:33 PM
Quote from: HornetMaX on May 11, 2017, 05:30:24 PM
Quote from: passerBy on May 11, 2017, 05:17:11 PM
I suppose you also own a copy of MXB. What do you think of its performance?
You get lower FPSs than GPB, but MXB tracks have deformation, that's probably what makes it go down.
I cannot judge if moving to a more recent openGL o(or DX) would make this any better, but it's not sure that the culprit is the old openGL.
After unchecking the checkboxes in the Lighting block, turning the 3D Grass off and bringing the Textures down to Medium, I'm getting the same silky smooth performance I'm used to in GPB (and even higher, according to the frame rate indicator). Doesn't look like the problem might lie with the deformable terrain.
Don't see why you say that. Maybe the def terrain puts extra load on the GPU and to get back your fpss you need to switch off other stuff.
Def terrain aside, I doubt the the graphic engine behind MXB is very different from the one behind GPB.
Has anyone tried LAA with MXB?
Quote from: h106frp on May 11, 2017, 09:18:18 PM
Has anyone tried LAA with MXB?
Works fine for me. I've activated it on all Pib's sims :)
Quote from: HornetMaX on May 11, 2017, 06:52:13 PM
Don't see why you say that. Maybe the def terrain puts extra load on the GPU and to get back your fpss you need to switch off other stuff.
Def terrain aside, I doubt the the graphic engine behind MXB is very different from the one behind GPB.
That thought crossed my mind too, but considering the way it seems to work, I doubt it takes much more overhead than LiveTrack-alikes in any other sims. Also, Piboso would probably need to utilize OpenCL to make it affect the GPU that much (and I suspect the results would look more immediate and realistic).
The MXB's engine doesn't seem to look all that different from the rest of them in the majority of situations. Yet, when I was watching my replay at the Enduro track on max settings, it looked noticeably better than anything I've seen in GPB so far. The fps would drop to as low as 40, though.
To be honest, RX tracks in WRS seemed to introduce some lag as well. Maybe in the end the culprit is the deformations indeed. But then again, the Lighting settings seem to have the biggest hit (trees shadows?). There should be a way to turn the deformations off somehow and check how it behaves without them.
Quote from: h106frp on May 11, 2017, 09:18:18 PM
Has anyone tried LAA with MXB?
Same as Max: have LAA activated in the other sims too beside MXB. I can't say I see a lot of difference performance-wise, but at least it should help with replays.
Just installed the new driver and even though the FPS counter and all the other GeForce Experience stuff shows up in game (full screen), nothing happens when I press record.
Can anybody else test the new ShadowPlay with GP Bikes?
I just activated shadowplay recently and, indeed, I saw an nvidia overlay appearing in most games but not GPBIKES. Also, nvidia hints me to press Alt + z to begin the record (azerty keyboard, may be another combo with qwerty) not Ctrl...
Will test it soon as shows in my GPB but not tried recording
DD
Quote from: vini97 on May 23, 2017, 01:40:16 PM
Just installed the new driver and even though the FPS counter and all the other GeForce Experience stuff shows up in game (full screen), nothing happens when I press record.
Can anybody else test the new ShadowPlay with GP Bikes?
Works fine for me, can record (fullscreen, no borderless window stuff).
Impact seems also to be very low (need to test more but it seems I can record and ride seriously at the same time, even when using DSR x4, i.e. GPU rendering at 4K, then down-sampling at 1080p for the display and then down-sampling again at 720p for the video capture).
File sizes seems big however, even at lower settings (but I need to check this too).
Win 7x64, GTX 970, latest NVidia drivers.
Tested it.
None of the keyboard shortcut works. Have to go back to the desktop and turn it on manually :-\
Quote from: tchemi on May 24, 2017, 09:34:21 PM
Tested it.
None of the keyboard shortcut works. Have to go back to the desktop and turn it on manually :-\
Strange. Do you have overlays ? Do you have other software using overlays running (e.g. MSI Afterburner) ? Do you have other software for screen recording running ? Any post processing (e.g. reshade) ?
Are you "connected" to any account in the "Share" settings, Max?
Quote from: vini97 on May 25, 2017, 11:57:52 AM
Are you "connected" to any account in the "Share" settings, Max?
I only connect with my nvidia account, that's all (it autoconnects any time in fact).
Tried to uninstall everything (with DDU) and reinstall latest drivers ?
Not yet but I'll do that now.
Very strange that the overlay and everything shows up in game, though.
I don't have the overlay displaying on GPB. But it displays on other games