Quoting: ShmerlI think it's still just a race to the bottom. How high do you think monitor resolution should grow in general? Beyond certain point the pixel becomes too small to see any difference. And gradual performance improvement of GPUs will catch up to that eventually. So these tricks with upscaling will become unnecessary, since "good looking" or "not very noticeable" is still not the same as no upscaling.

GPU processing power will still be sparse when we die of age, so it will always make sense to increase render efficiency in one or the other way. TSSAA + deep learning seems to be the path to the holy grail for this. You will easily drop your scepticism once you've seen a proper implementation on your own screen, no worries. ;)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ShmerlI think it's still not a universal benefit. So better for them to come up with smart antialiasing without any upscaling if they want to make things better across the board.

Despite of upsampling, the benefits are still so distinct that it makes native resolution rendering look like a total waste of computing power. I think actually the opposite should take place: Game developers should tweak the graphics in such a way that lower resolution doesn't negatively affect shadow drawing distance etc. so that upsampling can be used with less visual degradation. It would eat upa a few per cent of the performance gains, but chances are you can gain even more by lowering render resolution and still have a similarly good looking image.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ShmerlPerformance yes, but visuals is a moot thing. Visuals should be better without upscaling in general.

DL backed TSSAA can solve many aspects of aliasing and upscaling better in lower resolution than traditional TSSAA in native one.
The TAA in CyberPunk also isn't really good, combined with CAS I really find DLSS "Quality" scaling factor to look better than native (with the "magic" 2.2.6 version of DLSS, of which Nvidia doesn't seem to know why it looks better than previous and later versions). It definitely looks that good in a number of games, e.g. also in Fortnite and Doom Eternal.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Let's hope XeSS won't require such a special treatment. But I suspect it probably will if you want to use Intel's Arc XMX ~tensor cores equivalent.

Wouldn't a unified Vulkan extension make sense to allow usage of XMX/TCs without vendor exclusive APIs?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: YoRHa-2BAlso, this whole thing really just couldn't come at a worse point in time, I'm very busy with vkd3d at the moment, Joshua has been working on that as well, and I'm not sure if there's anyone else ready to pick it up and start working on it.

I think everyone is super happy that you guys are taking care of VKD3D. :)
Regarding HotS performance: Even with D3D11, the 1070 OC is like ~80% faster than my previous RX 570 OC in that particular scene. With DXVK, it's still 20-30%, which is pretty normal in VK apps (can be even worse). I'd blame Blizzard here for not optimizing more for AMD (or the game's crappy performance in general...).

Funny thing is that for whatever reason, DXVK helps to reduce stuttering in HotS vs. D3D11 when combining it with certain ways to cap fps. This makes me prefer DXVK over native D3D11 anyway, despite of the increased GPU demands.

Dunno why Nvidia think they'd have to throw these particular open bits over the fence at this very moment. I'd expect them to do this at least for DLSS if they cared about that share of their customers. Thanks for nothing? ;)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I hope this will allow to reduce the weird performance hit by DXVK in some titles. E.g. the round achievement screen in HotS runs like ~50% faster with native D3D11 on Pascal.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: YoRHa-2B

Quoting: aufkrawallCan anybody tell whether it will be possible to completely avoid any additional shader compile stutter vs. native D3D12?

Yes, if the game isn't completely broken. A Vulkan extension to allow that came out recently, we're still waiting for proper driver support though.

Thanks for letting us know, these are terrific news.
I guess for <= D3D11 this will remain impossible?

I was keen about Gallium Nine due to this, though its CPU bound performance can't cope with DXVK.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Can anybody tell whether it will be possible to completely avoid any additional shader compile stutter vs. native D3D12?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

[quote=YoRHa-2B]

Quoting: somebody1121And it's really bad. We're talking about going from ~23 FPS to ~30 FPS in some scenes, and that is on a Ryzen 2700X (which admittedly isn't very good for gaming, but not all that bad either).

Was this with a Vega or Navi GPU?
This game triggers some weird bug of completely broken CPU performance that is shared between Windows and Linux on these GPUs.
Yeah, it sounds too weird too be true, but CPU performance in critical situations, like tons of grass, is quite twice as high on Polaris in my testings.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Sorry to hear that. I've never had any stability issue with DXVK and RadV, also 1.1 seems totally stable in Hitman 2, HotS etc. so far. :)

View this comment - View article - View full comments