LOD fade instead of pop in

[AusQB]

Is there a way to force objects and textures to fade in rather than pop in when a new uGrid is loaded, or is that just how the engine works?

 

Also, is there a console command to display video adapter information, such as current AA and AF settings (not just a readout of the SkyrimPrefs file?

[gsmanners]

The thing about LOD is that it requires a low detail mesh, and not everything has that. Some objects do, but most don't. That's why you get that pop in (or up or whatever).

 

You really need that information in the game? I would have thought you just set it and forget it.

[Gruftlord]

http://skyrim.nexusmods.com/mods/19446

 

this mod adds just that, though the auther is currently still working on a dawnguard compatible version, and work on similar treatment for Dragonborn/Solstheim has not started yet.

 

still the best mod currently to enhance the LOD and reduce pop in.

other than that there are several mods that set many objects to "full LOD" in the CK. hefty performance hit, but with that tweak they of course don't need to switch to their full model, because it is allready allways loaded.

[AusQB]

The thing about LOD is that it requires a low detail mesh, and not everything has that. Some objects do, but most don't. That's why you get that pop in (or up or whatever).

 

You really need that information in the game? I would have thought you just set it and forget it.

 

The information was more to confirm the settings than to view them. I've been trying to override the settings from the Catalyst Control Center but I haven't been able to prove that it's actually working. This guide says to apply the same settings in the Skyrim launcher/prefs ini that you set in the CCC otherwise it won't work, but setting the AA in both to none didn't change anything.

 

 

http://skyrim.nexusmods.com/mods/19446

 

this mod adds just that, though the auther is currently still working on a dawnguard compatible version, and work on similar treatment for Dragonborn/Solstheim has not started yet.

 

still the best mod currently to enhance the LOD and reduce pop in.

other than that there are several mods that set many objects to "full LOD" in the CK. hefty performance hit, but with that tweak they of course don't need to switch to their full model, because it is allready allways loaded.

 

I've looked at that mod, but got turned away as soon as I read "The performance hit will be around 10%". Obviously results vary and my rig is quite capable, but I still favor performance over a small visual luxury.

 

Maybe I'm just being paranoid and I should just give it a go anyway. However, with that mod would I still need mods like Skyrim Distant Detail and High Quality LODs?

[Gruftlord]

on my nvidia i disable the options in the launcher, then overwrite by setting my driver to what i want to get. not sure if it's the same with AMD. nvidia AA and AF look better than the ingame options, i bet AMDs solutions do as well.

 

with the mod i posted, you wouldn't need Skyrim distant detail any more. SDD sets many objects to "if full LOD", meaning the object will be rendered at full detail no matter your distance to it.

Skyrim Distance Overhaul however adds lowpoly/lowres LOD models to the objects. the full poly model is only shown within your grid radius, afterwards the LOD model is shown.

as you can imagine, SDOs performance hit is lower than SDDs. if you're currently using SDD you may gain performance by switching. for me the performance hit of SDO was around 3%, so the author tried to stay on the save side by saying it was 10%.

SDD gives me a roughly 7-10% performance hit.

 

HQLOD does something different than the other two mods, it enhances the very distant mountain meshes. again it comes at a slight performance hit. if you chose the lower resolution options it should be no higher than 5%.

depending on your ini settings, this mesh will only every actually be seen when you are on top of dragonsreach or any mountain and look down. riverflows look much nicer then. and of course where ever you are the mountain tops look a bit smoother.

 

for me reduced pop in is much more desirable in terms of immersion enhancement, than nicer distant rivers. but i'm using both mods, so no problems here. give it a shot and see how much your performance changes when using SDO and disabling SDD.

[AusQB]

Thanks for the advice Gruftlord, I'll assess both mods individually but I think SDO will probably win.

 

And the CCC settings seem to be working properly now. I reduced AA from 8x to 4x and I can now see some jaggies if I really look in close.

[Gruftlord]

you know that AAs performance hit (even 4x) is higher than all the mods we disscussed about combined?

few things tax an GPU more than getting rid of those jaggies. i prefer SMAA with a rather mild setting (read: quality approximatelly what 2x AA would deliver) but enable lots of graphic enhancing mods :-)

[AusQB]

you know that AAs performance hit (even 4x) is higher than all the mods we disscussed about combined?

few things tax an GPU more than getting rid of those jaggies. i prefer SMAA with a rather mild setting (read: quality approximatelly what 2x AA would deliver) but enable lots of graphic enhancing mods :-)

 

I'm well aware of that. Like you said, the LOD pop for me is more about immersion than performance. The AA issue was really just a separate concern.

 

I had been running with 8x AA with really no troubles, but now the mods are piling up. A few HD texture replacers here and some high quality effects there, and riding in the open takes me down to 40, sometimes 30 FPS where I would normally get 50-60. After reading some guides and testimonials, going from 8x to 4x seems to yield a rather significant performance boost, but obviously with the drop in quality which I really have to concentrate to notice.

 

I don't use FXAA, but I do use DYNAVISION which adds a very nice blur effect.

 

I'm completely hijacking my own thread, but I'm now trying to figure out how 4xEQ AA (AMD only) compares to 4x and 8x.

[Gruftlord]

from what i gather you could try 2f8x EQAA. should be 2xMSAA with 6 additional coverage samples

that may produce similar results to 4xMSAA with maybe better performance.

2f4X EQAA for even better performance and slighly less image quality than 4xMSAA

 

or try 4f8x EQAA for near to 8x MSAA quality at only slightly lower performance than 4x MSAA

 

or get a screen with a higher resoltuion. also reduces visiblility of jaggies :-D

Edited February 25, 2013 by Gruftlord

[AusQB]

I did a quick test of 4x vs 4xEQ (which is all I could handle before recurring CTDs (most likely caused by mods but can't be sure) got the better of me.

 

What I could gather is the EQ level adds a very minor amount of blurring, an almost imperceptible change. It didn't really feel like an equivalent of 8x at all. The performance loss while outside was only about 2 FPS, so for my money it's much better to just use 4x.