Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
So_ein_Feuerball

VRSS, will we get it?

Recommended Posts

From Nvidia´s newest driver:

Quote

Variable Rate Supersampling (VRSS) is a new technique to improve image quality in VR games. It uses NVIDIA Variable Rate Shading (VRS), a key feature in NVIDIA’s Turing architecture, to dynamically apply up to 8x supersampling to the center of the VR headset display, where the eye is generally focused. It intelligently applies supersampling only when GPU headroom is available in order to maintain the VR headset’s fixed FPS and ensure a smooth VR experience.

 

VRSS is supported by the driver--no game integration required--and can be applied to DX11 VR games or application that have forward renderers and support MSAA, and have been tested by NVIDIA. At the time of writing, over 20 games meet this criteria, including:

 

AFAIK the game meets these requirements.

 

On 10/11/2019 at 5:15 PM, Jason_Williams said:

 

It's simply a technical limitation because of how we draw the clouds and the planes. The only way to try and alleviate this issue is to change how we render all our scenes and employ what is called 'deferred rendering', which in theory will work. Remember I have ONE graphics programmer and he wears many hats and his work touches many aspects of the product so he is always swamped. He is well aware of this issue with clouds and he also hopes he can find the time to eventually work on deferred rendering. 

 

Jason 

 

AFAIK there is only deferred and forward rendering and  the absence of the one implies the other being employed.

 

So if the game uses MSAA as the multisampling in the startup.cfg file suggests, there should be no problems with getting this to work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are switching to deferred so doubtful it will work with what we are planning. Still early days.

 

Jason

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Jason_Williams said:

We are switching to deferred so doubtful it will work with what we are planning. Still early days.

Jason

 

Will that come with PBR? I know they are separate technologies but it certainly looks great on planes and vehicles in general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cant wait simply for VRSS in IL-2 series also :thank_you:!

Edited by YoYo
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, YoYo said:

Cant wait simply for VRSS in IL-2 series also :thank_you:!

 

12 hours ago, Jason_Williams said:

We are switching to deferred so doubtful it will work with what we are planning. Still early days.

 

Jason

 

it won’t work after the switch to deferred rendering, unless Nvidia changes how it works.

@Jason_WilliamsIf you don‘t mind me asking, what are the advantages to switching to DR for IL2?

Also, would it be possible to keep forward rendering as an option for VR?

 

Especially since:

Quote

VRSS is supported by the driver--no game integration required--and can be applied to DX11 VR games or application that have forward renderers and support MSAA, and have been tested by NVIDIA.

 

Best regards

Edited by So_ein_Feuerball
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, So_ein_Feuerball said:

it won’t work after the switch to deferred rendering, unless Nvidia changes how it works.

@Jason_WilliamsIf you don‘t mind me asking, what are the advantages to switching to DR for IL2?

Also, would it be possible to keep forward rendering as an option for VR?

 

Deferred rendering has a significant performance upside when doing lighting calculations, and may allow the developers to improve the "planes in front of clouds" visibility problems. I doubt they would maintain two different rendering pipelines for the game.

 

But, a switch to deferred rendering might give a big enough performance improvement that it would help those of us in VR, obviating the need to use VRSS, which is an NVidia-only Turing-only technology. So from the developers' point of view, they might be able to help all players by a switch to deferred, rather than putting that effort into something that would benefit only a fraction of their player base.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What Alonzo says above is basically correct. We have been planning DS for a while as a way to increase performance and possibly allow for more graphical improvements, but the work is preliminary at this point so we shall see. The VRSS feature was dropped without much warning and we have no idea if it will have much of an effect on IL-2. Maintaining two different render techniques is likely not possible. I have only one guy and he's always swamped and it will likely cause other problems. We hope DS will increase overall performance and also VR performance. But again, we have no big data yet on the preliminary work. The industry moves too fast for our small team to keep up and I don't have nearly enough programmers to stay on top of it all. If we had an off the shelf engine maybe we could, but sims like ours require a custom solution. Never easy. Our competition has 4x as many employees as we do.

 

Jason

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 7
  • Sad 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When DCS switched to deferred it came with quite a performance hit at first, plus bucketload of lighting and shading issues. It got optimized with time, though some issues are still waiting to be resolved. Most of NVidia's AA-modes becoming incompatible with the game was a bummer. When it works as intended, however, the results are great indeed.

 

I fear the conversion is going to be a bumpy ride for Jason's guy as well, but I'm sure he's going to pull it off eventually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On my system, VR in DCS is noticeably smoother with equivalent graphic settings to Il-2, so the DCS team does seem to be on the right path.That is not to say there is anything wrong with Il-2, VR performance has noticeably improved over the past year, but obviously, any improvement is welcome.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's hope that by end 2020 Intel will come back with 7nm CPUs and improve the performance in single core (which is what counts with IL2). This plus the next Ampere Nvidia 3xxx series board added to whatever improvement Jason's team can do should allow to have richer environments more plains, vehicles ships, bombers etc. with less of a performance hit.

It makes me mad when I see that the race is to increase the core count and this game can't make use of it. We are now at 64 cores with AMD. Just crazy. To be fair IL2 uses 3 threads (or logical cores)  when it runs my missions which are very heavy. But that is just three threads out of 16 threads. Or it uses one and half physical core. 

To put things in perspective 8 cores at 2 Ghz are equivalent to one core at 16 GHz or 2 cores at 8Ghz, which basically do not exist. 

The 9900KS can run 8 cores sustained all at 5Ghz . This is equivalent to one core at 40Ghz. Except a fully optical processor no coming CPU with existing technology can reach that. Optical CPUs are a very long way to go. So there is no other solution, but going multicore, programming code for multicore, thinking in parallel and multicore. MULTICORE. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...