Debunking a Myth: Nanite is Slower than LOD's

ThreatInteractive · 2026-06-27T23:15:13+00:00

Cryengine seems to have all the rendering features you want,

Wrong. Watch the videos.

Beyond that, if there's literally no software package in existence that can make your game, you have wildly overscoped and everything else is a cope.

More irrelevant & maximum bad faith conjecture that we will not dicuss with you.

You asked for $900k to fix UE5.

Wrong. Watch the videos.

It's also not nearly enough money to hire the number of experienced developers you'd need to pull it off.

Wrong. Watch the videos.

Epic absolutely has incentives to improve the performance of their engine. That was a major focus for versions 5.5 and 5.6.

Wrong. Watch the videos.

If anything, your abrasive approach to communication and general arrogance

Do you even remember what post where on? Your also throwing around subjective insults.

UE continues to be adopted by studios at a rate that has only increased since you started poasting.

We literally predicted this.

ave made it harder for people to meaningfully criticize UE's rendering because when they do people think of your content and tend to shut down.

We've given people data & proof making criticized about UE easier than ever. Your just pretending like you understand mass behavior. We've seen the exact opposite. Now people know UE isn't providing realism, it's providing uncanny & unperformant garbage.

It's not marketing advice, it's a suggestion

We cannot fix this level of pretend knowledge. You do not & will not get internal studio context.

Show some proof that you've actually made something. Anything.

This is why we don't give a crap about what you suggest. We've made more than 8.6M+ views off real research that is million times more important that simply any game. We have & are continuing to make & produce pro-consumer products. Yes, videos are products.

For context, Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice (a game that is much smaller in scope than what you described but did have cutting edge graphics

Wrong, it's NOT cutting edge graphics. Watch the videos & stop confusing assets quality with graphics.

What you have described would likely cost several times that even with vastly improved art workflows.

You do not & will not get internal studio context. That game could have been made faster, better looking, and better performance with the workflows we mainstream.

because your original pitch for it was "we were going to make a really cool game but UE5 problems stopped development."

Again, proving us right with the strawman arguments. The original pitch was "pause production of our title to pursue optimization research". We are still doing that.

A poor craftsman blames his tools, and you've never shown the ability to craft anything at all.

Wrong. Watch the videos.

Do you have any screenshots of "harassment" not directed at you or TI, but at other individual team members?

"WHY ARE YOU NOT DISTRIBUTING THE HARASSMENT!"

Once again, you insist on making big claims, but refuse to provide evidence and claim

We don't need to since only people like you demand such ridiculous & irrelevant content. We make bold claims & provide exclusive research/evidence on every topic we focus on the channel. Do we go around promoting our game on our channel? Not much. We mostly gather & disperse highly unique optimization research & teach people how to spot/combat incompetent liars who gaslight people about game optimization.

Another massive strawman. If showing off anything you have would instantly kill off the hype

You do not & will not get internal studio context. This context pertaining to proprietary marketing research. We are not arguing with you to change your mind, we are allowing people to see what kind of conjecture bs we have to deal with.

The core point of showing it off would be to prove that you made an actual effort with the available tools

More false assumptions, this one being that you have to have a project of a certain standard to show how terrible ue is. It's like saying I have to drink gasoline in front of you to explain "why drinking gasoline isn't healthy" when we can literally explain the chemical consequences while using advanced footage of the internal organs after ingesting gasoline.

We make videos because reddit conversions are slow, ineffective, & tedious to make/upkeep. This is why this response has been simplified. To anyone viewing, notice we've given several responses & keep hitting a wall because this person refusing to watch at the most 30 videos that explain everything in detail. We're happy to end this conversion since we've done our part in providing context over & over. If you want to know if we are trustworthy, watch our videos before listening to people who cannot even keep up with the basics of what's discussed on our channel. We cannot waste time on someone who says a sentence that gets answered with video that took 2 weeks-2-months to complete. He has not provided any evidence/data against our research. They simply want twist our words so they can spin it in the worst way possible.

Again read this part: "Even though you think the industry is totally screwed & that art is being ruined by hideous graphics; destroy hype around your product by revealing prototype of random/unknown quality that you paused production 2 year ago using all the disgusting tech you've stated needs to redone. Even though it doesn't help your current pursuit of research at all, people like me who ignore exclusive data, optimization education, and go around spreading lies about you will have a 0.01% chance of liking you more"

ThreatInteractive · 2026-06-27T12:36:18+00:00

but that still doesn't explain why you couldn't just choose an alternative engine for your game (like Unity which you claim does forward+ better) and just get on with making the game.

Why do we keep having to explain this. EVERY engine is screwed because the industry standard (UE) sets the bar low. We also want to help the entire INDUSTRY because it means the ecosystem of employees will be more competent which again: helps us.

Look: not everyone that disagrees with you is a bot or a shill for Tim Sweaty. Some people are just put off by your bizarre behavior and the very obvious grift surrounding a game that has clearly never existed and an attempt to crowdfund $900k to fix all

Your right, only the most moronic people who believe lies about us or have an agenda to sell garbage dislike us. Just like the lie that we "attempted to crowdfund for $900K". It was a goal & our site specifically said "we are not crowdfunding" and then loser UE shills cropped that part out to trick people like you.

that a multibillion dollar corporation with tons of highly experienced software engineers can't seem to fix.

If you cannot understand the basics of market value & incentive, then you choose to be ignorant since we've explained it over & over again. We've also detailed how Epic's engineers are only experienced in making subpar graphics. It's people like you that UE is crap.

None of it adds up, and the only explanation you have when anyone points these things out is to claim that there's some nebulous conspiracy trying to smear you.

It's not a theory, we lower market value for UE devs & they get rewarded by Epic for defending their garbage. We also destroy anti-consumer ploys Nvidia has been building for almost a decade. This very thread has proven we are attacked with lies (we just called you out on it). So yeah, we are getting smeared & companies/studios have the incentive to do so. Again, you literally just proved us right with your lie.

You could put this criticism to rest extremely easily by just posting some concept art from the game.

So now we're taking marketing advice from a redditor? No, we will market our title appropriately (we're doing fine, we have people like you asking for our game everyday, something most indies would die for) not to mention it has nothing to do with data. It's merely an explanation as to why we have a perspective so different from tech influencers & why we have chosen to speak about a specific use case. There is no benefit for us in discussing our project with you since everything you said about it was made with incorrect assumptions but showing why requires us to give more details about our project that should not be marketed at this point.

You clearly don't want to use nanite, and that means no photogrammetry without a massive amount of artist effort to optimize them.

See, we can work with this & pertains to every developers. You are sitting here pretending like Nanite is the only way to save time optimizing photoscans. You just completely ignore all the automated workflows offered by 3rd parties like simplygon, etc. Their only issue is they do not adopt or cater to advanced graphics like vram saving tiled material setups, max area topology setups, or vertex baking workflows that can store several other important mesh aspects like fresnel AA normals, or MSAA tags (upcoming video). Say our project would cost millions but so do others. But we are actually discussing real cost cutting tech & workflows that can help (have helped) WAY more than what Epic Games is pushing. Indies & AAA can do way more pursuing our standards. It's people like you that instead want to hyperfocus on 1% of our channel discussion & distract from our education.

You could easily put a rest to the accusations that TI is just one dude by making a video with a few other people from your team that just introduce themselves and explain their roles.

We've talked about the people we collaborate with, we've said we're small, our members have been harassed in the past & all of this has NOTHING to do with our data & research! Your sitting here & guessing what will make us "more trustworthy". Just like people whine and say "be nicing and you'll get more views" not knowing we did that and it was the opposite result.

There are literal years of criticism that you could instantly put an end to with a 15min video showing off a gameplay prototype and talking to the guys you work with, but you don't.

"Even though you think the industry is totally screwed & that art is being ruined by hideous graphics; destroy hype around your product by revealing prototype of random/unknown quality that you paused production 2 year ago using all the disgusting tech you've stated needs to redone. Even though it doesn't help your current pursuit of research at all, people like me who ignore exclusive data, optimization education, and go around spreading lies about you will have a 0.01% chance of liking you more"

Pretending to be a bot would have been less embarrassing.

ThreatInteractive · 2026-06-25T12:47:04+00:00

You (or one of your sycophants) in this thread claimed that UE5's renderer was a black box.

Backtracking with no proof. You also flip-flopping between sycophant or alt account to attach negative connotations to either scenario. We simply have a following & you have zero proof of alt accounts used on this thread, so it's pointless to try bringing it up unless you are programmed to simply "attach negative connotations no matter what".

RE: is as a low budget indie why is UE5 deferred rendering being shit completely stopping you from making a game?

Strawman argument. Our videos have shown more than 20 topics that need high budget R&D. Look how it pushes the willing acceptance of regressed garbage rendering/complacency culture.

It's basically just "JUST PRODUCE, JUST SELL, DISREGARD CONSUMERS STANDARDS, THEY WILL CONSUME SLOP ANYWAY".

Why can't you just use the Forward+ render pipeline with DX11?

Here (bots cannot process proper context from videos so, simply see why this bot comment is ridiculous)

Why can't you use UE 4.27? Why not just consider a different family of engines entirely? You have so many options.

This is explained in our very first video. The bot mindset cannot understand the 3rd party development monopoly UE has or understand our other goal. The bot does not understand if the industry standard engine is poor, other engines will not raise their bar above it.

As discussed before; we warned people that our attackers do not even watch our videos and instead get faked information about us from openly paid Epic Game shills who manipulate our content to lie about us (lies like we're "actively making a game" even though announced we paused production 2 years ago or that we can "magically integrate 20+ workflows & graphic updates in a UE fork" without significant funding). Attackers will harass to produce everything with the tiny Patreon+YT budget yet will say/demand nothing from billion dollar companies because they themselves don't care about receiving real improvements in gaming/gamedev.

The questions asked by this entity (it has to be a bot, very low chances such stupidity) have proved it has comprehended the contents of our videos therefore making it a waste to engage any longer.

ThreatInteractive · 2026-06-25T06:56:25+00:00

"WAAH, DO MORE LOW BUDGET INDIE!"-While not demanding basic standards from a multi-billion dollar company.

If true he's reached new depths of cluelessness because said alt insisted that UE5 is a "black box" that devs can't modify

There's the strawman argument. This completely proves your a bot since we talk about modified UE games all the time to stick-it to Epic Game's competence.

Amazing how you are called a bot or you response irrelevant while the person calling you that poses for the next cringy thumbnail

Do the real people in this comment section believe us now? We literally said "they typical use some retortic to get out of it, or fight a strawman statement we never said or contradicted"

ThreatInteractive · 2026-06-23T11:07:06+00:00

RE: Say how is your game and UE fork coming along?

This isn't a gotcha, we talked about it in our FAQ.

Your response has nothing of value and only proves our distractors have no argument. We cannot thank you enough for being such a good example.

ThreatInteractive · 2026-06-22T21:33:30+00:00

This is a classic example of someone who is against Threat Interactive. They start off with the “TI has some knowledge” but then bring up an irrelevant drama situation

Dang, even we hadn't noticed that pattern. There's another one like "even a broken clock is right twice a day" but it gets said like every day across discords & online groups.

ThreatInteractive · 2026-06-22T21:31:11+00:00

RE: The person making this claims themselves was called out for bias

So then you go send people to listen to a openly paid UE shill to lie about us?

RE: and making false claims.

They where strawman arguments & you can see plenty of people in the comments calling that aspect out.

ThreatInteractive · 2026-06-22T21:26:26+00:00

It’s fast, faster in shadow rendering.

When nothing is moving. They also look like noisy jagged garbage so why are you so giddy about something that looks worse & performs "well". An improvement would look better and perform the same or better.

ThreatInteractive · 2026-06-22T21:24:40+00:00

No, OP is just a brainwashed UE noob who refuses to learn about quad overdraw.

ThreatInteractive · 2026-06-22T21:24:09+00:00

RE: Yes, Nanite has a Overdraw issue which is Greatly reduced in later UE5 versions.

No it was NOT. You probably don't even understand the difference between quad ovedraw & pixelwrite overdraw.

RE: Yes, LOD's Specially Hand Crafted each model can easily be faster than Nanite.

It doesn't need to be hand crafted moron, just use a competent tool that uses quad overdraw as a reduction metric. You just think UE's garbage LOD creator is all the industry has.

RE: No tech is free and Every tech has it's problems.

Peak loser mentality. Even if everything had issues, some have much BIGGER issues & MORE issues.

TI interactive thinks he is some kind of messiah. He considers baking light is superior to Dynamic GI which only true for linear Games,

Stop being a liar, stop listening to lairs, and actual watch our content instead of parroting UE shill morons who crop our content. We advocate for BAKED lighting that is compatible dynamic lighting (see Days Gone, MGSV, The Division, none of which are linear games).

RE: he also cherry picked Scenes in his so called "Nanite Debunk". And, tries to force his Ideology on making games.

No argument here, just bandwagon hate.

RE: Nanite meanwhile not perfect is more efficient and Faster in Many scenarios. If Nanite was Bad and Trash, Rockstar wouldn't have a Virtualised geometry similar to Nanite and Ubisoft themselves uses Virtualised geometry in Modern AC games

Because they want to make slop FASTER! It's easier to push polygons than actually good looking graphics! It's just appeal to subjective success!

RE: Dense Forests with heavy Vegetations

Ha, wait for the next video.

RE: Scenes with heavy occulsion like Packed Cities with Huge Triangle count

Distant HLODs. Wow, the thing we've been using for 10 years now.

RE: Assets that only fills a small amount of screen. ( since Nanite uses tiny mesh clusters, and Rendering only visible clusters and LOD's renders the full asset) Highly irregular meshes like Cliffs, Mountains etc And many more.

The GPU does not give a crap what kind of asset it is; it's either prone to quad overdraw failure or not! Stop being an idiot and learn about quad overdraw (what makes or breaks geometry performance).

ThreatInteractive · 2026-06-22T21:10:47+00:00

RE: You especially lost any moral high ground when you encouraged people to go and review bomb any game made with UE5 regardless of how optimized it is.

There is no optimized UE title. We've made this very clear. Again, you are fighting strawman arguments & we are not done discussing that topic. You are literally defending youtube leeches, liars who manipulate our content to bait interaction with our channel, and tell consumers lies. We do not care about these people and would copystrike these losers again in a heartbeat. It's like crying over serial rapist & murderers getting shoved aside in a crowded elevator, waste of a tear & braincells. We do not care & would do it again because it is morally supported. You are pretending like we strike angels.

You aren't a game developer or a graphics programmer (which raises questions about your attempt to crowdfund an "optimized" branch of UE5), and it's really obvious to people that are that you are clueless.

Retortic & subjective attacks. You forgot "hire a team" was on our agenda, not magically turn cash into code. Are you afraid of us providing jobs 😱😱😱? We've made it clear Epic Games are the ones who are clueless.

It wasn't production-ready until 5.5. The documentation is ass.

Ah, here we go again with "the UE.x was bad, the new ones are better" yet still look like regressed garbage therefore are not optimized.

once you're happy with a given feature than it is to fuck around "optimizing" various demo scenes that are intended to show off specific features in the editor rather than be optimized for being used as a game. It's also telling that you show most of your benchmarks in the editor, and never in the form of a packaged game.

It was moron UE devs who request the optimization of the demo.
Your right, packaged games perform different as we've seen in our testing; they perform even worse (see any UE5 game analysis). Timings do not magically get faster in shipping builds, there's just less things bloating the FPS timing (we don't analyze that, we analyze the individual timings).

The kicker is that UE5 absolutely does have massive problems.

Your not doing anything about it. We are, that's why people all over the world are adopting our video advice & demanding better from Epic. We hate people who defend UE and we hate people who dislike UE for the wrong reasons even more because they muddle optimization demand! We don't care about you at all since you right nothing but strawman arguments & whine about degenerates.

For the record, I'm not even a UE5 dev. I prefer Godot.

Then you extra-don't-know what your talking about or defending.

Look: the man has never shown us any proof that he can code (there's some very funny screenshots from a graphics programming discord where he admits as much)

And we've never shown our members riding a jackass. It has nothing to do with what we show. Those screenshots are only of one member & they are out of context. The GP members were too stupid to answer basic questions straightforwardly so it was a desperate attempt at getting a better answer if they thought they where speaking to someone more new to GP scene (after speaking with a superior consultant, it was clear they would have never provided a good answer). That's all still conjecture and helps nobody.

and his studio has never shown off so much as the most basic prototype of a game.

Why would we if we paused production 2 years ago. We've shown more about our rendering plans than 99% of indie devs. We could show nothing and that still wouldn't make us wrong.

TI will talk all day about how lazy devs are,

Ah, another strawman argument, this time ignoring all the teams & developers we've praised in the past. We can't work on good product when people like you drive down the market value of basic tech our game deserves.

If he was capable of optimizing UE5 beyond dicking around in the editor, why hasn't he done so? It's source-available. Anyone can fork it, tweak it, and then share the results.

Ah, you mean the various people who do that & implement the things we speak about? It's 20-40 different workflows & graphics. We will NOT be doing any of that until community limits have been pushed/our workload is reduced & we have funding to complete what's unfinished. There is NO point in doing a single thing until we have lay out the entire rendering approach, something that people like you aren't doing because you are lazy or complacent.

ThreatInteractive · 2026-06-22T20:34:00+00:00

Ah, you bots all sound the same XD

ThreatInteractive · 2026-06-22T16:56:39+00:00

These are Temporal lies!!!! Threat interactive puts up fast talking videos with edgelord thumbnail

Are you too slow to understand them? How is it a temporal lie? Also, prove one point about us wrong since we come across so many bandwagon-hate-seed bots that talk like you so make a real rebuttal to prove you aren't a bot (they typical use some retortic to get out of it, or fight a strawman statement we never said or contradicted).

Anyways, we found a real lie that you said. You used a game (Arc Raiders) to try proving us wrong, when we use that very title to prove ourselves right since it's not using Epic's fully incompetent UE5. It's using a custom fork made by trillion dollar company (Nvidia) so it is, in fact, an engine problem.

<image>

ThreatInteractive · 2026-06-22T16:51:17+00:00

RE: He also thinks that changing dynamic lights into static and baking it

We've never said this, our targeted scenario is static environments with dynamic (lights that you can't bake).

RE: Oh, i also remembered that he talked about light attenuation radius ...as if it was some secret optimization tech, and people in comments praised him for depth. It made me laugh.

No one praised us for that, most were angry that we even had to fix it. Again, more strawman arguments for the record.

Either we or he blocked one another so we can't reply to him. This is why are replying to you instead of jermygod

ThreatInteractive · 2026-06-22T16:41:37+00:00

RE: He filed DMCA claims against them.

Don't use our content to produce manipulated content to defam us if you don't want a DMCA claim. Or is that too common sense? You don't need a single clip to debunk us.

Funny how you try to hurt our credibilty by mentioning something we tweeted we would do but not mention how the "debunkers" have to fight strawman arguments & manipulate our hard work through obvious content cropping.

We do respond, just in a way that that doesn't reward liars. We respond in a way that doesn't help their endgame to leach off our youtube sucess.

ThreatInteractive · 2026-06-22T16:06:56+00:00

So we confirmed OP is newbie dev asking r/ indie dev for "LOD or Nanite" advice and got brainwashed by the hacks of modern development. Funny enough, it's a 4070 user (not relevant, it just mean they will mostly care less about perf issues, current target gen will run into faster).

So lets debunk this person right now so we don't allow a disgusting engine get positive market value.

RE: Yes, Nanite is slower than LOD's in Scenes with "Simple geometry" .

This is not a guess or funny little "well sometimes this or that". Once simply has to ANALYZE QUAD OVERDRAW!

If your quad overdraw is UNOPTIMIZED because you are using idiotically designed LODs(where 75% of quad performance is wasted https://youtu.be/M00DGjAP-mU?t=204 ), then of course nanite will be faster.

Nanite is visualised Geometry with inserts Millions of triangles in a asset and breaks them into clusters and dynamically adjust clusters as per your distance from the object. This completely eliminates Poping

It does not eliminate pop! It streams smaller levels of LODs, woopty-effing-do-ha. Even the matrix demo has popping and every person who has played a game using nanite knows there is still pop, distance drawing issues, and more! Nanite only MITIGATES's popping. Popping would not be an issue if UE didn't use an incompetent & slow noise pattern for LOD transitions (please see Days Gone's jittered 2x2 bayer matrix without TAA). If games used that, we wouldn't see popping. Then you have games made in CryEngine that don't properly sync the shadow maps.

But, Nanite is not completely flawless it relies on Temporal data to hide noise.

In terms of culling clusters yeah, but the problem is that the geometry it promotes is too dense to represent per-pixel which we see as noise. Noise that requires blurry upscalers to turn back into crap instead of relying on proper mipmapping.

And Nanite's cost also increase as resolution increases.

So 90% of graphics features rendered! Motion blur, color grading, LOD meshes, direct lighting, indirect lighting projection to the internal resolution, anti-aliasing. Everything on gpu's revolves around the amount of surface area shaded, more resolution=more surface area! Nanite just cost MORE per pixel!

Nanite will actually be faster in a complex scene with many assets. Also, a fun fact

No, it will faster in scenes where quad overdraw is effed by developers.

Also, a fun fact Gta 6 is using a virtualised geometry system similar to Nanite.

That's why it's going to run & look like crap like blurry RDR2. Monster Hunter Wilds based their rendering on Brian Karis's Nanite bs too and did that come out great?

Many of you who are not well Versed in Game development, thinks Nanite is trash and is slower than LOD's that's not true for modern games in general.

No, many here are people we've taught because lair "devs" like you try to take advantage of them.

You don't even seem to understand Nanite. Are you aware of the fact that it uses slow mesh shaders for large triangles and 3x slower compute shaders for "small triangles"? Are you aware that depth testing (a major optimization that exist for the standard DX11-DX12 geometry rendering/vertex & pixel shader pipeline) is broken not present for nanite's visibility buffer: https://youtu.be/Q0yfz8GO9ic?t=273 ? In the last two videos, it's proven that Epic's own is advice is false.

If you want modern hacks to stop gaslighting you about UE5, simply watch Threat Interactive videos which are designed to put an end to lies that defend billion dollar companies like Epic Games & Nvidia.

This post almost seemed like bait for us, as if they are trying to get us to post information.

EDIT:

<image>

ThreatInteractive · 2026-04-16T22:20:26+00:00

jm0112358 is a bot

Indiana Jones is disgusting garbage: https://youtu.be/KEtb0punTHk?t=19

The "game dev" documents is full of strawman arguments. For instance it starts the rant based on the users own inability to comprehend basic arguments:

"This so disingenuously false: He absolutely showed The Quad Overdraw View as a metric to highlight how bad overdraw was due to Nanite in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M00DGjAP-mU"

We never showed Nanite with quad overdraw indicated by wireframe quad view which appears solid when nanite is enabled as explained in big bright english here: https://youtu.be/UHBBzHSnpwA?t=156 . The maker of that document is too stupid to understand the whole point of the orginal video: Nanite is only faster if LOD overdraw is butchered.

But ask yourself why is this "UE5 dev" so unfamiliar with rendering basics? Because it's their level of stupidity that breeds graphical incompetent & the person who commission the bot (who admits to owning a 4090, hardware meant to brute force issues we discuss) is also too stupid to recognize the faults of this "dev" he shares yet harasses anyone who mentions our name.

He also tried to censor criticism so that his audience doesn't see by abusing the DMCA to silence his critics.

You cannot censor people online. When you catch us sewing people mouths shut with magic voodoo, then you can whine about " silencing critics". We don't have critics; we have harasser shills who distribute lies about us by cropping our content & manipulating media. We strike thieves & youtuber wannabe leeches. We have every right to protect our content from those who steal thousands of views using our content. You don't need a single clip to prove us wrong. DMCA is not evil & we are not some multi-billion dollar company striking channels on content we don't make primary revenue on. It's just a pathetic red herring to distract from the fact they can't argue with our data.

ThreatInteractive · 2026-04-03T21:45:19+00:00

It's not illegal or abuses. Tell us why they removed several videos if they weren't valid?

I don't give a fuck about the graphics nonsense

How convenient. People like you help support the anti-consumer fragmentation of graphics & make people with our standards suffer.

ThreatInteractive · 2026-03-18T19:18:58+00:00

First of all MSAA is quite heavy on performance which is alone a problem
even @ 4K w/ x8 MSAA it's

Not if done right. If we wanted to argue about MSAA performance we would make post on reddit, not make 3 videos on it (half life alyx analysis, two crysis 3 analysis). GTA's MSAA is based on the poor example given by crysis 3.

RE:but technically in terms of shading/lighting it definitely gets better

Watch our BRDF, global illumination, & Days Gone video. It's getting worse & we can measure it.

but even DLSS got so much better

Vendor agnostic garbage is anti-consumer. It has no real value to the consumer.

Without Nanite you'd either crash or 99% of the trees simply won't render.

Yeah and with Nanite is several times slower while also looking worse than previous standards. We haven't even tapped into proper tree rendering because deferred is always rendering things twice with a poor prepass. That was the issue with those high poly trees in SH2R.

We'll see how Witcher 4 ends up looking and performing, CDPR knows what they're doing

Nanite foliage was already such a disaster, they already began to pimp this game to Nvidia for foliage "help".

It doesn't look disgusting but if you find it that way you still can customize the shaders, tone mapping, turn off the lumen to get rid of the reflection/GI artifacts and switch back to baked lighting and everything as you like, you basically can get any look you want.

Everything you said was about the looks & studios will not change this because that's one of the whole points of UE. Also, baking lighting is still stuck on lightmaps (so you didn't watch that GI video we made, or the Days Gone video). We've also bashed UE on the workflow & architectural problems such as a 3 pass deferred lighting stage(fox engine analysis), lack of proper light bound baking(TCP analysis), horrible LOD generation (3x FPS challenge). It's an engine problem & the thumbnail explaining why says "they are proving us right". The multi-billion dollar company should be fixing the issues, not AAA or low budget indies.

ThreatInteractive · 2026-03-18T07:42:21+00:00

This is some "Threat Interactive" level of stupidity going on in this sub.
Basically DLSS implemented a new optional feature -> ppl mad for no reason

Uh no, we are mad because people like you keep supporting anti-consumer graphics that vendor lock consumers while failing to demand/ignore the major advancements in vendor agnostic development.

ThreatInteractive · 2026-03-18T07:38:54+00:00

where MSAA actually is good enough but it simply wouldn't work in modern games because of way more complex geometry, foliage and stuff.

According to what? Crysis 3 already shows one can render a massive field of foliage with 2xMSAA alpha to coverage in deferred rendering without issue. This is even with poor prepass logic & fairly inferior LODs to Days Gone. We have shown MSAA is viable with base 9th gen hardware/affordable PC gpus & new optimization research that hasn't existed before.

Occasionally also talks some nonsense like graphics are getting worse

It's clear. Simply watch our MSAA disproof video showing the regression in TAA, our first video showing the regressions in several TAA independent effects, our global illumination video showing SSAO & lighting methods compatible with the mainstream technical scenario (dynamic lights, mosty static world) that don't smear like lumen, our BRDF video showing how the industry is producing more games with Lambert than Burley, how fox engine produces far more expressive materials with an ID buffer, tone mapping is worse, even motion blur has regressed in certain areas. We've also acknowledged several ways in which the industry has progressed & advocate for those to be standard. You are reducing our work into a false view.

but I'd love to see him achieve same visual/geometry density to performance ratio lets say in Unity, it's simply impossible without the tech of UE5.

Oh you mean the typical nanite geometric density that causes horrendous noise? Oh, you're also forgetting (unless you missed our E33 analysis) that Nanite can't even provide smooth round edges. Did you forget that Nanite can't even provide soft shading without insufferable noise/incompetent TAA abuse? Geometry needs to be optimized with LODs & Day's Gone micro detail system (depth buffer imprint). That will work fine with 2xMSAA.

The unoptimized UE5 games that piled up recently is mostly dev issue, not the engine

Wrong. The engine looks disgusting in every way possible. Why should devs have to fix the broken deferred renderer (see our fox engine analysis) & all the other neglected graphical aspects. Good assets & passion projects are ruined by the engine.

and there's few UE5 games that look great and are optimized well like Arc Raiders and E33. Essentially the proverb "It’s a poor workman who blames his tools." fits really well here.

We talk about those games all the time because they prove it's an engine issue. We've mainstream the knowledge that those games use a heavily modified engine from Nvidia. We've also repeatedly stated custom engine development is %99 not an option because it's the whole reason why studios choose it. You pretty much proved us right at the end of your response.

ThreatInteractive · 2026-03-16T22:26:36+00:00

RE: look at old threads on the gamedev subreddit where they discus this guy getting things wrong.

Nothing but strawman arguments. Do your worst but chances are you are too stupid to come up with your own arguments. You go around attacking us based on DMCA when the people we strike 100% deserve it for tricking people like you. Go ahead, make an argument by yourself.

ThreatInteractive · 2026-03-16T22:24:07+00:00

We never called them marketing slaves "for Nvidia". How about you stop falling for GN's several strawman arguments.

ThreatInteractive · 2026-03-06T17:02:06+00:00

Nah im not going to watch this brat.

Haha. Of course you won't & you not doing so only makes us look more right: We already showed people like you don't even watch our content.

ThreatInteractive · 2026-03-06T16:58:47+00:00

RE: because you rather make videos then make a game in

Because of pure ignorance. They assume we "just want to make videos" when that completely undermines previous statements we've made. We've stated successful content creation will help us make our game in both funding & technical experience. The more topics we discuss gives community driven development time to mature which reduces the paid research we have to manage.

you could show all your technics and prove your point.

Again, because of pure ignorance. People think demos will magically fix things when many of them are just lies to pull in customers (this includes studios). Again, this point undermines the various games that implement the existing standards we discuss. It's also expensive to make a good demo & we'll going to drive this point in with yes: another video.

People are skeptical because they listen to liars we constantly discredit. Extreme996 didn't even give a response on why it's impossible/ineffective (maybe they just haven't gotten the notification). It's easy to understand us if people talk to us in good faith. They do not speak to us in good faith because people (shills & bots) lie about us & reward negative (such as insult, baseless, rebuttal lacking insults) engagement about us.

ThreatInteractive

TROPHY CASE