unexpected downscaling on 712k multi-tile VT

[Ricardo Teixeira]

Hello,

Yes, this is the 88x64 8k tileset mentionned earlier, it takes 428 GB on disk.
The VT is built with a "Amplify Texture/Legacy Shaders/Nature/Terrain/Diffuse" material and Vt properties are set to the following :
- HW level = Ultra
- Virtual Size = 1024k x 1024k
- Tile size = 512 x 512
- Mip Filter = Box
- UV Coord Set = 0

About layers, I used Albedo only, lossless compression (quality 80), and disabled Alpha.

I need to find a bigger hard drive in order to build a VT without hitting disk space limitation. I'll let you know when I can try again on a bigger disk.

Hello,

Thank you for the additional information, we really appreciate it. That's odd, the resulting virtual texture should be considerably smaller than the original assets, we will have to run a few tests on our side. If possible, I recommend dividing your collection into 4 terrains, it might be the best choice in order to avoid the current problem. We will keep you posted on any new developments.

Thanks!

[chris]

That's odd, the resulting virtual texture should be considerably smaller than the original assets

It is. The resulting VT is about 380 GB (I suppose it's the big file in Library\AmplifyCache since I can see no other big file in the project folder) whereas the initial set was 428 GB. It's while AT is building the VT that the memory usage grew up to 2TB++.
I'll split up the whole area and see what happens.

Thanks for your assistance.

[Ricardo Teixeira]

That's odd, the resulting virtual texture should be considerably smaller than the original assets

It is. The resulting VT is about 380 GB (I suppose it's the big file in Library\AmplifyCache since I can see no other big file in the project folder) whereas the initial set was 428 GB. It's while AT is building the VT that the memory usage grew up to 2TB++.
I'll split up the whole area and see what happens.

Thanks for your assistance.

Interesting, thank you for the additional information. You meant storage memory, correct?

Thanks!

[chris]

You meant storage memory, correct?

Yes, hard drive space. I supposed it was the cache data created by AT for building the VT.
AT continued to process quietly even after the Windows was complaining about the disk being full. Maybe AT was then working at a slower rate if more operations were needed due to the lack of free cache space, but I'm not sure enough about its working speed when the disk was filled up.

[Ricardo Teixeira]

You meant storage memory, correct?

Yes, hard drive space. I supposed it was the cache data created by AT for building the VT.
AT continued to process quietly even after the Windows was complaining about the disk being full. Maybe AT was then working at a slower rate if more operations were needed due to the lack of free cache space, but I'm not sure enough about its working speed when the disk was filled up.

Thank you for elaborating. We will contact you as soon as we are able to run a few additional tests on our side.