DDSOPTing Skyrim Revisited

[haelfix]

I thought i'd start a thread where users try to find bad texture transformations from DDSOPTing the various mods in Sky Revisited.  I've done about 15 or 20 of the big texture overhauls (architecture, armor, landscape etc)  So far, I had a problem with WATER (which as indicated in the guide is a nogo) and I wasn't satisfied with the result from AOF mountains, but so far the rest seems -ok-.  Will update if I find more problems.

 

Incidentally, many of the more modern texture overhauls are already optimized. There was a lot less gains (delta's) than from DDSopting the Bethesda files.. A few mipmaps here and there.

[Kelmych]

  Quote

I thought i'd start a thread where users try to find bad texture transformations from DDSOPTing the various mods in Sky Revisited.  I've done about 15 or 20 of the big texture overhauls (architecture, armor, landscape etc)  So far, I had a problem with WATER (which as indicated in the guide is a nogo) and I wasn't satisfied with the result from AOF mountains, but so far the rest seems -ok-.  Will update if I find more problems.

 

Incidentally, many of the more modern texture overhauls are already optimized. There was a lot less gains (delta's) than from DDSopting the Bethesda files.. A few mipmaps here and there.

I put details on the results of using DDSopt on the STEP mods, almost all of which are in Skyrim Revisited, here and the preceeding section. I made a similar comment that most large texture mods in STEP were already fairly well optimized. These mods, however, are ones that can provide some noticeable performance gain without a corresponding large graphics quality loss by reprocessing the normal maps with DDSopt at half the resolution of the ordinary textures (as discussed in the DDSopt guide).

[justjr]

I mainly constrained all textures 2048x2048 or bigger to maximum of 2048x1024 (only if 2:1, is 1:1 it constrain to 1024x1024). Optimized a lot of them too, but not the architect normal maps, these I let without compress, but constrained to a max of 1024x512. Did not mess with Water, worth it. Only constrained whole SRO and armor/weapon texture mods.

So far so good. But honestly, I do not have a very good eye to spot that kind of problem in textures without have to compare/know them, and I do not.

[haelfix]

I'm definitely struggling with some of these issues right now.  Constraining normals to half size gives acceptable results in some circumstances, but in different lighting (especially with ENB and a lighting module) it really defeats the purpose of the higher resolution, and imo makes it harder for the texture author to find an acceptable trade off (and really the onus should be on him/her and not us).

 

Weirdly enough, I find that armor/cloak look ok with this procedure, whereas things like rocks and ruin clutters really suffer (and it introduces a lot of aliasing, and my current AA solution (SMAA) isn't powerful enough to prevent crawling).  One would think it would be the opposite.

 

Anyway, this probably needs a better eye than mine.  I do think that AV and some of the old not so optimized texture packs are probably much more amenable than just doing it on high quality packs like Bellyaches, Vurts or Cabals.

[EisDrache]

I know alot of people have said not to do it this way but just as a test i desided to DDSopt the entire mods folder from Mod Organizer. And after playing for a few hours and useing console with some item IDS i haven't run across any problems yet not weird textures or weird stretching or anything so for me personally i have no problems DDSopting the entire mods folder.

[haelfix]

DDSOPTing all folders (xcept a few problem ones) is perfectly fine and recommended, and I haven't seen many problems either. The problem is most packs are optimized already and there isn't huge savings.

 

The next step is to forcefully constrain certain textures, like normal maps to a lower resolution.  This is much more violent and there is noticeable visual degredation, with a corresponding.large increase in performance and stability.  Some textures seem unaffected visually (which is good)  whereas others really don't make sense IMO.

 

This is thus harder to deal with and requires more care.

[Neovalen]

The DDSOpting of textures and minimizing VRAM use is proving to be the most difficult part of the entire build due to Skyrims inherent instability as mem usage increases. Damn old engine... heh.

[haelfix]

So I did a full DDSOPT of most of the major texture packs in the game and did some tests (about 25 in all, including most of the armor packs).

 

(note AA is off, I am using ENB v119 Skyrealism + smaa, Nvidia 680 4gb).  In all the above tests the bethesda packs are optimized as well as automatic variants (both 1/2 normals and regular ddsopt compression..  the reason I leave AV out is I see almost no visual difference, despite a major memory gain, so its a no brainer for me)

 

So the test.  I walk from the Riverrun inn to Bleak Falls barrow, and go up the mountain and through the load point to the temple.  There is one cell load point that is very stressful on my system hence my choice of this spot.

 

Anyway..

 

test1)  No optimization other than described above.  Average VRAM use is about 2600, average memory use is about 2800.  VRAM spikes to 2750 during the load.  Meanwhile regular Ram maxes out at about 2856.  Noticeable stutter during the load.

 

Test2) Standard DDSOPT compression on the 25 texture packs (normals are still the same).  Average VRAM use is about 2600, average memory use is about 2800.  The MAX VRAM during the cell load goes to 2720 and RAM use goes to 2860.  Noticeable stutter during the cell load as before.

 

Test3) Standard DDSOPT compression + 1/2 sized normals.  Average VRAM: 2340  Average RAM use 2500.  Spikes to 2480 during the cell load, and the average RAM goes up to 2695.  Absolutely no noticeable stutter.

 

Conclusion.  Standard DDSOPT compression has very limited gains for the immense majority of texture packs other than Bethesda and AV.  However half sizing normals shaves off nearly 300 megabytes in this particular test.  

 

In terms of visual fidelity, I notice the loss of resolution most acutely in landscape, rocks, mountains and faces/beards so I try to focus my attention on reducing the texture sizes of major armor packs, cloaks and the graphic quality of beasts and opponents.  The reason I choose the latter is that typically they will be in motion relative to you, and its hard for the eye to pick out details.  Likewise, you will often find them in dungeons and in poor lighting conditions.  Whereas architecture, landscape and the like are often subject to pausing to look around and admire.

 

So my conclusions of the test above is to definitely DDSOPT + constrain normal map textures to 1024*1024 on armors, weapons, cloaks and monster packs.  This might not be quite enough, but at least it will get you close to where you want to be.

[Neovalen]

I just did a quick test - left everything except took out the 3 big texture packs (foundation)... VRAM steady at 2100 and no crashes or problems with everything else going.

 

Apparently the general rule of thumb is to stay as low as possible in VRAM no matter much actual VRAM your system has.

[haelfix]

Yep, and its actually an interesting trade off.   I just restored full Skyrim Revisited and did what you did and removed SRO, Serious HD and Skyrim HD.  Same thing, VRAM is now about 2k.  So while the full textures of those packs are absolutely better than Bethesda's Hires packs, its unclear if they're so much better that it justifies an additional 600 hundred megs.

 

One of the things that I have noticed is that the art direction is far superior in the Vanilla game.  Colors blend together much better, and it provides a more satisfying experience.  So yes, textures aren't as good or as photorealistic, but then we clearly can't have everything.

 

This is why texture pack combiner is such a great tool, as Cestral has gone through everything with a comb.  

 

I can't tell which I prefer.  Keeping SRO, Serious HD and Skyrim HD with normals half sized as well as most of the armor mods, or going this route instead.

[Neovalen]

For me I definitely prefer to keep the added textures... just need to find the sweet spot.

[Neovalen]

Alright - now riddle me this batman... (this game is confusing as hell to get stable I swear)

 

I restored everything to 2048 textures, then half sized the normals of the 3 major texture packs only. (didn't optimize anything besides Beth textures)

VRAM is hitting 2900 pretty consistently... but NO instability at all! I literally TRIED to get this thing to crash and I couldn't...

[Aiyen]

I would be more interested in your actually RAM usage (not the percentage since that will include what windows is using in the background.) as well as your VRAM.

Perhaps since you have a high quality SSD makes the difference since that allows you RAM/Cache communication to happen much faster which provides that little extra that prevents a CTD while changing complicated cells.

 

We kinda already have concluded that VRAM cannot be the sole reason of the issues. I am using the same texture packages as you are with the same optimizations and I only hit 1700Mb avg. and 1900Mb peak. If install SRO 1k version instead I can drop this to 1200ish but I will still get at least one CTD or gamefrezze before the first dragon. But my RAM usage varies between about 2.7Gb and the max 3.2(5)Gb.. and this is when the game engine gets unstable and after a while CTD happens. If yours is much lower it would explain why you run so stable compared to the rest of us.

[thalastwon]

I've put the normals of the HRDLC, as well as the foundation mods sans SFO to 1024, and it's been extremely stable for me. When I play tomorrow, I'm going to measure how much Vram I'm actually using after a few hours.

[NotARobot]

Gotta ask, what happened to TPC anyways? Why isn't it an option anymore?

[Aiyen]

The author have not been able to follow up with updates and change old mods with new and better ones etc.

I think that is the main reason.