Jump to content


Assassins Creed 2 woeful performance


  • Please log in to reply
54 replies to this topic

#41 Eric5h5

Eric5h5

    Minion Tormentor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7160 posts

Posted 07 February 2011 - 09:02 PM

View Postthe Battle Cat, on 07 February 2011 - 02:12 PM, said:

It should have said "Awesome Klingon Blabbermouth Developer Dude Guy"

Good thing I got to it first....

--Eric

#42 Smoke_Tetsu

Smoke_Tetsu

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3318 posts
  • Steam Name:Tetsu Jutsu
  • Steam ID:smoke_tetsu
  • Location:Cyberspace

Posted 08 February 2011 - 04:05 AM

View PostBrad Oliver, on 07 February 2011 - 11:05 AM, said:

Conversely, if they introduced GL 4 and a GL profiler that worked awesome (say, like PIX for Direct3D), I'd drop GL 2 so fast it would disrupt the Hadron collider.

And drop support for anything below a Nvidia GeForce 400 series, Nvidia GeForce 500 series, ATI Radeon HD 5000 series, or AMD Radeon HD 6000 Series and above, in the process unless you\they also supported OpenGL 3.3. which supports GeForce 8, GeForce 9, GeForce 100, GeForce 200 and GeForce 300 series and Radeon HD series. You'd force people with cards below the what's supported in OpenGL 4.0 to either go with wrappers or boot camp.  :cool: That is unless 4.0 compatible code could be run with 3.3 on said hardware if it's present transparently I would hope so since 3.3's mission is to backport as much as possible from 4.x for those cards. Although I can understand only wanting to support (4.x) it since it could be the path of least resistance.  :unsure:
--Tetsuo

Alex Delarg, A Clockwork Orange said:

It's funny how the colors of the real world only seem really real when you viddy them on the screen.

the Battle Cat said:

Slower and faster? I'm sorry to hear such good news?

Late 2012 27 inch iMac, Core i7 Quad 3.4GHz, 16GB RAM, Nvidia GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB, 3TB HDD - Mavericks

Late 2009 27 inch iMac, Core i5 2.6GHz, 12GB RAM, ATI Radeon 4850HD 512MB, 1TB HDD - Mavericks

Mac Mini, PowerPC G4 1.4Ghz, 1GB RAM, Radeon 9200 32MB, 256GB HDD - Leopard

Dell Inspiron 1200 Notebook: 1.2GHz Celeron, 1.2GB RAM, Intel GMA915, 75GB HDD - Ubuntu

Generic Black Tower PC, Dual Core 64-bit 2.4GHz, 4GB RAM, GeForce 9600 GT 512MB - Windows 7


#43 Brad Oliver

Brad Oliver

    Awesome Developer Dude Guy

  • Developer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1692 posts
  • Steam Name:hoserama99
  • Steam ID:hoserama99
  • Location:Glendale, AZ
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 08 February 2011 - 08:14 AM

View PostSmoke_Tetsu, on 08 February 2011 - 04:05 AM, said:

That is unless 4.0 compatible code could be run with 3.3 on said hardware if it's present transparently I would hope so since 3.3's mission is to backport as much as possible from 4.x for those cards.

Yes, that's exactly what 3.3 is around for. The API matches 4 for the intersecting bits, so it's easy.
Brad Oliver
bradman at pobox dot com

#44 ltcommander.data

ltcommander.data

    Positronic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 480 posts

Posted 08 February 2011 - 09:45 AM

View PostBrad Oliver, on 08 February 2011 - 08:14 AM, said:

Yes, that's exactly what 3.3 is around for. The API matches 4 for the intersecting bits, so it's easy.
So the driver compiler is able to take GLSL 4.0 code and compile it to run on OpenGL 3.3 hardware as long as you provide sections that don't call any newer extensions? Or do you also have to write your GLSO 4.0 code so that the backwards compatibility sections conform to GLSL 1.50 so that OpenGL 3.3 generation GPU's driver compiler can accept it?

And kind of related, I'm wondering how limiting lack of updated GLSL support is? If Apple were to continue to cherry pick and add support for all the individual extensions that you want, but stuck to GLSL 1.20 would there still be things that you couldn't do even though the relevant extensions are there? Or is improved GLSL more of a convenience in writing more efficient code and accessing those extensions and not specifically feature limiting?

#45 Brad Oliver

Brad Oliver

    Awesome Developer Dude Guy

  • Developer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1692 posts
  • Steam Name:hoserama99
  • Steam ID:hoserama99
  • Location:Glendale, AZ
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 08 February 2011 - 10:03 AM

View Postltcommander.data, on 08 February 2011 - 09:45 AM, said:

So the driver compiler is able to take GLSL 4.0 code and compile it to run on OpenGL 3.3 hardware as long as you provide sections that don't call any newer extensions? Or do you also have to write your GLSO 4.0 code so that the backwards compatibility sections conform to GLSL 1.50 so that OpenGL 3.3 generation GPU's driver compiler can accept it?

GL 4 is a superset of GL 3.3, so you'd just not call the unsupported portions. It is similar to how we do it now with GL 2.1 on hardware that supports only GL 1.5.

Quote

And kind of related, I'm wondering how limiting lack of updated GLSL support is? If Apple were to continue to cherry pick and add support for all the individual extensions that you want, but stuck to GLSL 1.20 would there still be things that you couldn't do even though the relevant extensions are there? Or is improved GLSL more of a convenience in writing more efficient code and accessing those extensions and not specifically feature limiting?


So far it hasn't been limiting at all, as I've stuck to ARB programs + the shader model 3 extensions. ;) That said, Apple supports EXT_gpu_shader4, so GLSL supports pretty much all of GLSL 1.3 right now with parts of GLSL 1.4 through a few other extensions. I don't follow it too closely since I haven't needed any features from it yet.
Brad Oliver
bradman at pobox dot com

#46 devSin

devSin

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 394 posts

Posted 08 February 2011 - 11:01 AM

I think Blizzard needed some more features to have StarCraft II not suck (or they just need more people to replace Rob and whoever else isn't there anymore). And Valve was complaining about something for some reason (nothing one million dollars wouldn't cure, I bet).

But it turned into nerdrage about the reported version of Apple's OpenGL library and has now morphed into a monster auto-reply bot that spews misinformation any time a performance complaint is made and totally disregards the driver authors and the actual developers of the Mac versions (if you have a handful of people at most maintaining your drivers for all your chips Apple still chooses to support and one or maybe two if you're lucky developers touching the actual Mac game code, no wonder there's always room for more optimization).

#47 jeannot

jeannot

    Notorious

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 221 posts

Posted 09 February 2011 - 03:04 AM

View PostBrad Oliver, on 08 February 2011 - 10:03 AM, said:

So far it hasn't been limiting at all, as I've stuck to ARB programs + the shader model 3 extensions. ;) That said, Apple supports EXT_gpu_shader4, so GLSL supports pretty much all of GLSL 1.3 right now with parts of GLSL 1.4 through a few other extensions. I don't follow it too closely since I haven't needed any features from it yet.
Valve games will benefit from some openGL 3.X features, apparently.

Quote

we are anticipating even more speedups in this area if Apple implements the uniform_buffer_object extension and GLSL 1.3 in a future update.
http://store.steampo....com/news/4211/

#48 Brad Oliver

Brad Oliver

    Awesome Developer Dude Guy

  • Developer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1692 posts
  • Steam Name:hoserama99
  • Steam ID:hoserama99
  • Location:Glendale, AZ
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 09 February 2011 - 10:27 AM

View Postjeannot, on 09 February 2011 - 03:04 AM, said:

Valve games will benefit from some openGL 3.X features, apparently.
http://store.steampo....com/news/4211/

Yeah, GLSL has performance issues uploading shader constants, which is one reason why I've stuck with ARB programs + the shader model 3 extensions instead of GLSL.
Brad Oliver
bradman at pobox dot com

#49 Biarnred

Biarnred

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 10 February 2011 - 07:40 PM

Hi

I bought this yesterday and it is awesome. No bugs, no issues except control is difficult (but not impossible) using keyboard/mouse. I am running on max settings throughout the options including fullscreen. Very smooth at all times.

More like this would be great! I now have RomeTW, COD:MW and Assassins C2. Better than I hoped for as a new iMac convert.

I have a i7 quad 27" iMac with 5750HD, SSD HD and 8GB DD3 1333Mhz ram.

Brgds

Alex
The meek shall inherit the earth - so buy a meek quick

#50 Smoke_Tetsu

Smoke_Tetsu

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3318 posts
  • Steam Name:Tetsu Jutsu
  • Steam ID:smoke_tetsu
  • Location:Cyberspace

Posted 27 February 2011 - 03:37 PM

It's being reported that Lion 10.7 will have OpenGL 3.2 support apparently.

Quote

- Support for OpenGL 3.2 on capable hardware.

I found this out from here.

Also take a look at this quote ;)

Quote

OpenGL 3.2 support is indicated in the documentation.
I don't have Lion, but I know this from a reliable source. Another reliable source, if you consider Feral as reliable, has indirectly corroborated the information (without violating the NDA, so don't sue them Apple ). From what he said, I expect apps like GLView will need to be updated in order to report the correct openGL version.

Also according to iGame Radio Assassin's Creed Brotherhood is go be released on the Mac no later than March. Their press release when you download the PDF corroborates this.
--Tetsuo

Alex Delarg, A Clockwork Orange said:

It's funny how the colors of the real world only seem really real when you viddy them on the screen.

the Battle Cat said:

Slower and faster? I'm sorry to hear such good news?

Late 2012 27 inch iMac, Core i7 Quad 3.4GHz, 16GB RAM, Nvidia GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB, 3TB HDD - Mavericks

Late 2009 27 inch iMac, Core i5 2.6GHz, 12GB RAM, ATI Radeon 4850HD 512MB, 1TB HDD - Mavericks

Mac Mini, PowerPC G4 1.4Ghz, 1GB RAM, Radeon 9200 32MB, 256GB HDD - Leopard

Dell Inspiron 1200 Notebook: 1.2GHz Celeron, 1.2GB RAM, Intel GMA915, 75GB HDD - Ubuntu

Generic Black Tower PC, Dual Core 64-bit 2.4GHz, 4GB RAM, GeForce 9600 GT 512MB - Windows 7


#51 ltcommander.data

ltcommander.data

    Positronic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 480 posts

Posted 27 February 2011 - 04:34 PM

View PostSmoke_Tetsu, on 27 February 2011 - 03:37 PM, said:

It's being reported that Lion 10.7 will have OpenGL 3.2 support apparently.

I found this out from here.

Also take a look at this quote ;)
Sadly most of the reports I've found seem to indicate that either OpenGL 3.2 support is not yet fully implemented in the current developer seed, since multiple reports point to GLSL still being at 1.20, or the GPUs that Apple is targeting for support is very limited since things haven't improved much in terms of extension support beyond Snow Leopard for the GMA X3100, 9400M, 8800GT or 320M among GPUs I've heard about. This supposed report from Feral that the OpenGL Extension Viewer actually needs to be updated to see Apple's improved OpenGL support is very weird. Hopefully that doesn't mean Apple's come up with a new OpenGL implementation that impedes cross-platform compatibility.

#52 Smoke_Tetsu

Smoke_Tetsu

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3318 posts
  • Steam Name:Tetsu Jutsu
  • Steam ID:smoke_tetsu
  • Location:Cyberspace

Posted 27 February 2011 - 05:57 PM

Well it is still beta after all and there's some time left before its summer release. So things are still in flux and are subject to change.
--Tetsuo

Alex Delarg, A Clockwork Orange said:

It's funny how the colors of the real world only seem really real when you viddy them on the screen.

the Battle Cat said:

Slower and faster? I'm sorry to hear such good news?

Late 2012 27 inch iMac, Core i7 Quad 3.4GHz, 16GB RAM, Nvidia GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB, 3TB HDD - Mavericks

Late 2009 27 inch iMac, Core i5 2.6GHz, 12GB RAM, ATI Radeon 4850HD 512MB, 1TB HDD - Mavericks

Mac Mini, PowerPC G4 1.4Ghz, 1GB RAM, Radeon 9200 32MB, 256GB HDD - Leopard

Dell Inspiron 1200 Notebook: 1.2GHz Celeron, 1.2GB RAM, Intel GMA915, 75GB HDD - Ubuntu

Generic Black Tower PC, Dual Core 64-bit 2.4GHz, 4GB RAM, GeForce 9600 GT 512MB - Windows 7


#53 Brad Oliver

Brad Oliver

    Awesome Developer Dude Guy

  • Developer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1692 posts
  • Steam Name:hoserama99
  • Steam ID:hoserama99
  • Location:Glendale, AZ
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 02 March 2011 - 10:39 AM

View Postltcommander.data, on 27 February 2011 - 04:34 PM, said:

Sadly most of the reports I've found seem to indicate that either OpenGL 3.2 support is not yet fully implemented in the current developer seed, since multiple reports point to GLSL still being at 1.20...

You have to explicitly ask for a GL 3.2 context, and AFAIK no tools have yet been updated to do so. The "legacy" OpenGL 2.1 context will report GLSL 1.20. I would assume those reports are from folks who are unaware of what you need to do to query GL 3.x properly.
Brad Oliver
bradman at pobox dot com

#54 ltcommander.data

ltcommander.data

    Positronic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 480 posts

Posted 02 March 2011 - 09:07 PM

View PostBrad Oliver, on 02 March 2011 - 10:39 AM, said:

You have to explicitly ask for a GL 3.2 context, and AFAIK no tools have yet been updated to do so. The "legacy" OpenGL 2.1 context will report GLSL 1.20. I would assume those reports are from folks who are unaware of what you need to do to query GL 3.x properly.
Yes. People seemed to have figured it out, confirming support for both ATI and nVidia GPUs. Although they are currently calling NSOpenGLProfileVersion3_2Core. I don't suppose Apple offers a compatibility profile that marries the legacy and core profiles?

It's great that OpenGL 3.2 is finally here. I believe you Mac porting companies pushed for the inclusion of ARB_draw_elements_base_vertex and ARB_fragment_coord_conventions in OpenGL 3.2 in addition to ARB_vertex_array_bgra and ARB_provoking_vertex which are already in Snow Leopard to ease porting from D3D so hopefully this will make your jobs easier. Presumably going OpenGL 4.0 would be quite a bit more work for Apple, implementing the new shader types to support tessellation, but are there things in the intermediate step, OpenGL 3.3, that are particularly important? Or is OpenGL 3.2 a sufficiently large step forward to satisfy the next year or two to come?

#55 Brad Oliver

Brad Oliver

    Awesome Developer Dude Guy

  • Developer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1692 posts
  • Steam Name:hoserama99
  • Steam ID:hoserama99
  • Location:Glendale, AZ
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 03 March 2011 - 09:58 AM

View Postltcommander.data, on 02 March 2011 - 09:07 PM, said:

Yes. People seemed to have figured it out, confirming support for both ATI and nVidia GPUs. Although they are currently calling NSOpenGLProfileVersion3_2Core. I don't suppose Apple offers a compatibility profile that marries the legacy and core profiles?

No, it's either-or. I'd prefer to have 3.2 with the "compatibility" profile as we'll have to refactor our code to not call the missing APIs when we're using GL 3.2, but we'll cope. :)

Quote

It's great that OpenGL 3.2 is finally here. I believe you Mac porting companies pushed for the inclusion of ARB_draw_elements_base_vertex and ARB_fragment_coord_conventions in OpenGL 3.2 in addition to ARB_vertex_array_bgra and ARB_provoking_vertex which are already in Snow Leopard to ease porting from D3D so hopefully this will make your jobs easier. Presumably going OpenGL 4.0 would be quite a bit more work for Apple, implementing the new shader types to support tessellation, but are there things in the intermediate step, OpenGL 3.3, that are particularly important? Or is OpenGL 3.2 a sufficiently large step forward to satisfy the next year or two to come?


Some of those were driven by Transgaming to specifically ease their burden, as they don't typically have access to the PC source code, but it's all appreciated. "Provoking vertex" might be best called the "Civ4 UI D3D quirk extension", as that's the only game I've seen that would benefit from that oddball extension, and it was one we were easily able to work around in the game code, for example, but ARB_vertex_array_bgra is immensely helpful as is ARB_framebuffer_object.

GL 3.2 should hold us just fine for now. I have yet to actually see a game that uses D3D10 in a way that would require work from us, so we've been able to dodge the bullet. It also helps that D3D10 is pretty much a "Vista and up" requirement, so most game companies have been reluctant to dive in head-first there. With luck, by the time we need to port a D3D10 game, everything from Apple will be in place.
Brad Oliver
bradman at pobox dot com