Jump to content

filz Camino

Resident
  • Posts

    154
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by filz Camino

  1. How about Mini ITX form factor? (Bigger than a mini PC but definitely takes up less space than a normal tower PC)
  2. i think that is a reasonable statement, but i don't see the intention of PBR being to improve how things look right now. i see the intention being to future - proof SL and allow it to look better than ever tomorrow. would it have been possible to do that without degrading how it looks today? that's something i can't answer but it seems reasonable to assume the answer would be no, because everyone involved with the project will have been painfully aware of the harm it would do to degrade the way things currently look. so i assume they've made a bit of a conscious compromise here. but if the choice were between SL staying exactly how it is today but being dead through obsolescence in 10 years time, or SL changing as it has done but still being around in 10 years time, which would you choose? if the choice were between the present and the future, which would you choose?
  3. that's because they didn't. they spent time and money to attempt to future-proof SL. no. so it can attract more content creators who are already familiar with industry standard workflows. also, so it can head off the inevitable future direct competition with SL, that would occur if SL did not keep up to date. my take on it is that PBR is negative for most of us in the short term, but not to move to PBR would be negative in the long term and LL are thinking about the long term. for example: i've spent quite a lot of money on my inventory. i would rather that SL was not put out of business in the future by the launch of a (more up to date) competing product because i'd lose the investment of all the SL content i've bought. so i care about the future of SL, just as much as i care about how it looks today. i see PBR as sacrificing some of the latter to attempt to guarantee the former.
  4. leaving me in a position to cut you some slack because logical consistency and coherency clearly isn't yours. /s
  5. in some cases yes but in many cases no. a decent gaming PC from 2024 is literally as powerful as a supercomputer from 2003, the latter would have been the size of a room and cost millions of $. for me at least, that absolutely huge uplift in performance does actually make the more recent machine genuinely worth having, the performance it has opens up a whole raft of new possibilities and improvements to the user experience. on the flipside, i still have an old toaster with a bimetallic strip timer in it which i would not bother to upgrade. if you are OK using a 2003 PC, that's great and obviously good for the environment to keep it in service, but that choice would not work for me personally, and it has nothing to do with marketing. and I'm guessing a computer from the 80's would also still work today (if it was re-capped). higher densities of integration and higher operating temperatures associated with the huge increases in performance we see today make that sort of lifespan unlikely for modern devices, imho.
  6. if by "same settings" you mean the graphics slider is set to the same position, you don't actually have the same settings, you quite possibly have a bunch of new graphics features turned on that are affecting the frame rate. to turn these off - make sure "screen space reflections" and "mirrors" are un-ticked, set "reflection detail" to "static only" and set "reflection coverage" to "none" and you may hopefully see an improvement. I also had very bad frame rate just after installing the new viewer, but that seemed to be fixed by clearing the cache in Settings/Network & Files / Directories so it might be worth trying that. unfortunately, if you were using the old viewer with Advanced Lighting Model (ALM) turned off, then you are going to see a fps reduction because it is no longer possible to turn off ALM in the new viewer.
  7. except they do die? sure, planned obsolescence can be a thing, but even if it were not a thing, electronic devices would not last for ever because everything wears out, due to the laws of physics and chemistry: https://www.student-circuit.com/learning/year3/vlsi-design/ic-reliability-and-failure-mechanisms/ and wears out pretty quickly. it is not possible to make electronic devices that on the one hand, have the levels of performance people demand in 2024 and on the other hand, will also last for centuries.
  8. correct, which is why i did not use the word "alive" to describe them. i did however use the the word "born" and the dictionary definition of that word is as follows: born: "brought into existence" i also used the word "die", one of the dictionary definitions of that word is: die: "stop operating or functioning" i think the terms "brought into existence" and "stop operating or functioning" can be applied quite reasonably to the life cycle of a computer. Hoping that you find that clarification useful! if you want? i'm quite ambivalent on that (rather odd) idea?
  9. i'm actually fine with it because (dreadful as it is) it is better than the available alternatives. we've tried alternatives to capitalism and free market economics - that didn't work out so well. and the open source guys have tried a desktop takeover, and that didn't work out so well either. so really - i think we have to choose our priorities from the menu of actually available options. and here, we can choose between having full control but limited application support by choosing linux, or choose to share control of our OS with a corporation such as Microsoft or Apple, but have good application support as the beneficial trade-off. but trying to choose an option that isn't on the menu causes a lot of stress with no possible upside, so is not to be recommended!
  10. there's no need to ask for this, you already can use the old viewer, it isn't being taken away just yet. it will stop working eventually but so will every single thing on this planet, including your computer and eventually unfortunately, including you! it is called the cycle of birth and death, everything that is born must die ☯
  11. PBR makes possible graphics that are more realistic, although it is probably going to be a long time before we see these benefits in practice. as i understand it, PBR is pretty much the standard for modern games, so i guess this is a case of SL going through a rather painful transition in an attempt to move with the times and avoid becoming obsolete. apparently, water looks OK with the correct EEP settings, so (hopefully) this is fixable by sim owners.
  12. about as necessary as the below i guess. it's basically the same type of response, just from a different side of the argument.
  13. i think you'll be hard pressed to notice any difference. i hardly noticed any difference when i went from 100Mbps to 550Mbps, the only change being that with the latter connection, things rezz very slightly faster after a TP. Looking at my network bandwidth, I don't often see my traffic to LL's servers spike much over 100Mbps from over here in the UK though, so i'm not sure any bandwidth over that level adds a huge amount of value. in fact, i've been using SL over a bad 4G connection these past weeks, often around 1-2 Mbps. it does take about 5 mins for everything to rezz after a TP but once it has rezzed, it actually works fine!
  14. Except that is not the consensus. A more realistic representation of the consensus here is that yes - it is possible that with your specific hardware, the new viewer just won't run properly. But it is also possible that, despite what you believe, you don't fully understand all the new options in graphics settings, and how each of these impact performance. There is hard evidence in this forum that some people who firmly believe they understand the new viewer settings do not in fact understand them, and are quite unreasonably expecting the same performance as the old viewer with all sorts of (optional) new graphics features turned on.
  15. not necessarily. i think not understanding this correctly is one of the problems. "Ultra" on the new viewer is not the same as "Ultra" on the old viewer because the former includes mirrors and reflections, and the latter does not. mirrors and reflections make a big difference to performance. to get the same experience as Ultra on the old viewer, you need to set the slider several notches back from Ultra on the new viewer, or just manually turn off all the mirrors and reflections. when doing so, you're not turning down your graphics settings so that they are below your settings on the old viewer, you are turning down the (new, more feature rich) graphics settings so that they match the settings on the old viewer.
  16. Well as long as it only "seems" like that!
  17. If you are using V6 with ALM turned on in graphics settings, it should be possible to get the same or similar performance out of the PBR viewer provided you turn off reflections and mirrors (and probably also turn off shadows). its a different manufacturer but with like for like graphics settings, i actually get a slightly higher frame rate out of the PBR viewer on my AMD laptop with integrated graphics than i do from the V6 viewer. and, that frame rate is usually over 30fps even in a busy club, so it is quite useable. make sure you turn down the graphics settings, though. "Ultra" on the PBR viewer is a lot more demanding than "Ultra" on the old viewer, so by setting the graphics slider to the same place on both viewers, you are not necessarily configuring like for like graphics settings in both cases. although unfortunately, if you are using V6 with ALM turned off, the best frame rate you'll get on the PBR viewer will be around half what you are used to on the V6 viewer, since with PBR it is no longer possible to turn ALM off.
  18. Unfortunately, Linden Lab (with their now decades old product) are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Either lose new users through eventually becoming obsolete, or lose old users through increasing the hardware requirements in their efforts to modernise. I'm pretty sure Linden Lab, and the Firestorm team are painfully aware of the need to consider this delicate balance. And I recall someone from the Firestorm team saying that according to their user data, only a very small percentage of users (just 1 or 2% from memory, although i may be wrong) actually have a computer that is genuinely too old to run the new viewer. Without surveying all users to determine their experience, it is impossible to get a sense of how many people are having problems with the new viewer - it could be much more, or much less than 1% IMHO). But if it is as low as 1 or 2 percent, it is unfortunately probably a reasonable decision on their part to push ahead with it. Hopefully some of the problems people are having are bugs that will be fixed rather than the simple fact of their computer having insufficient resources to run the new viewer, though. Either way, I think it is a waste of energy to fight this change because I sense that Linden Lab and the Firestorm team are 100% committed to pushing it through. I actually prefer the old viewer myself (I'm using the new one with as much of the new graphics features turned off as I can) but I've just chosen to accept it for what it is, rather than waste my precious time and energy on fighting the inevitable.
  19. and do you think it would be smart to assume everyone in SL is going to make smart choices? (you obviously don't think the PBR release is itself a smart move, what does that say about the choices people here make?) i'm happy to be an alpha tester given that the "alpha" software is working perfectly for me on both of my computers.
  20. ok, although your original post does not give the exact graphics settings that were behind the frame rates you posted, so i can't really comment on the performance figures you give. assuming mirrors and reflections were turned off, your post does not reflect the performance that i and others are getting, so it is certainly not true to say that the performance of the PBR viewer is bad for everyone. they are coming to a sim near you. if someone uses PBR textures for land, it is not possible to provide Blinn-Phong fallback so the land will appear grey in the old viewer. also if any designer produces items with PBR textures and doesn't bother with a Blinn-Phong fallback texture, that item will appear grey in the old viewer. you're also about to lose the voice facility on the old viewer. the new viewer also has other new enhancements you're missing out on - e.g. cache size has been doubled. there are reasons to use the new viewer.
  21. For myself, I have zero interest in reflections and mirrors, and zero interest in shadows. So I just turn it all off! In order to get good frame rates with minimal fan noise, which is what I actually value. In the same way that I'm not going to slap myself in the face and complain about the pain, I'm not going to turn all the unwanted graphics features on and then complain about the low frame rates.
  22. Because there's more to PBR than mirrors and reflections. For example, you're going to start seeing an awful lot of grey textures if you stick to the older viewer. And the reason you would turn mirrors and reflections off is because you don't want to incur the performance penalty they entail. What is the point of complaining about the performance impact of new features when those features are optional and may be turned off? What is the point of complaining about being given more options?
  23. Except they don't? Like many people, my experience is that my laptop gives exactly the same frame rates on the PBR viewer that it does on the pre-PBR viewer, provided I have like for like graphics settings, e.g. mirrors and reflections turned off in the PBR viewer. My desktop gaming PC does see frame rates 10-20% lower on the PBR viewer, but (whilst unwelcome) I don't think it is reasonable to call that a "huge drop in performance".
  24. The images you have posted demonstrate otherwise. Again: turn mirrors and reflections off in the PBR viewer if you want to compare like with like. It is likely to make a big difference to frame rate.
  25. Another point here - people complaining that their hardware is running hot with the new viewer might want to try reducing their maximum frame rate in settings. If you are just standing around chatting to friends, you don't need more than 30fps, and you are likely to hear a whole lot less fan noise (and save on your electricity bills) if you set that as your maximum.
×
×
  • Create New...