Wolfenstein II Gets Turing Support

[matrix07012]

Wolfenstein II Gets Turing Support

 

Quote

To let shader power go where it's needed most, VRS allows developers to subdivide a 3D application's screen space into a grid of 16x16 pixel regions (among other possible division techniques, ranging from as fine as a per-triangle division or, more logically, per-object). According to Nvidia's SIGGRAPH presentation on the topic, each of those 16x16-pixel regions can, in turn, have one of several shading rates applied to it, from the naive 1x1 grid that would typically be used to shade every pixel in a scene today, to 2x2 groups of pixels for 1/4-rate shading, all the way out to a quite-coarse set of 4x4 grids for 1/16-rate shading. According to that presentation, then, the parts of a scene that need the most detail can get it via 1x1 shading, while those that are the most uniform or the most likely to be in motion can be shaded at the lowest rates to save shader horsepower for the parts of the scene that need it.

Quote

Wolfenstein II: The New Colossus is the first game to implement CAS, and it is in fact the poster child for how the technique's analysis step works in the aforementioned white paper. Nvidia provides a visualized example of the result of its post-processing analysis on a frame taken from the game's good guys' submarine, Evas Hammer.

Quote

Performance:

Oh look, another proprietary tech. That's what everyone wants

The performance gains seem pretty nice, but obviously it depends how well the devs implement it, since techniques like this can generate some pretty bad artifacts.

 

Sauce: https://techreport.com/review/34269/testing-turing-content-adaptive-shading-with-wolfenstein-ii-the-new-colossus / https://archive.fo/jxyu8

[Bananasplit_00]

6fps isn't really a massive gain

Edited November 24, 2018 by Bananasplit_00
Because too tired to maths right

[illegalwater]

4 minutes ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

6fps isn't really a massive gain

It is at 4K.

[Xilefian]

29 minutes ago, huilun02 said:

Don't know if Nvidia even realizes that all their proprietary jank only amounts to boastful marketing. None of it will become mainstream because they were made exclusive to Nvidia's expensive stuff anyway. Majority of game sales is on consoles that use Radeon graphics so getting developers to do stuff that more than half of all customers can't see, is kind of a waste of resources.

 

Yeah I know you're going to say "but its technological progress"

Making stuff proprietary and black boxing to the point where it impedes its proliferation is not technological progress

This isn't how the graphics industry works, as much as consumers like to believe as such.

 

NVIDIA implements these kinds of effects as Vulkan and OpenGL extensions, which are a public API specification that any IHV is free to implement.

NV_shading_rate_image

VK_NV_shading_rate_image

 

What usually happens when AMD, Intel or NVIDIA creates extensions like this is that they publish the spec to Khronos for everyone to look at and read, then the other IHVs will go ahead and create their own version either based on the specification or with their own platform improvements in mind. If the specification is popular then vendors tend to work together to have it revised into an "EXT" extension, which is basically a version of the spec that is more vendor agnostic (even if it's just a cosmetic name change).

 

If the extension is really popular and is something lots of GPUs support, then it can be revised into an "ARB" extension, which is the Khronos architecture review board. If it's a feature that becomes pedestrian in graphics rendering, then it stops being an extension and gets promoted into the full OpenGL/Vulkan specification and IHVs are required to implement it to be certified for the latest Vulkan/GL version.

 

During all this, AMD, Intel, NVIDIA (ARM, Apple, Google, Samsung, etc, etc) are all free to implement each other's vendor specific extensions. As an example, NVIDIA GPUs and AMD GPUs both support a handful of vendor extensions from each other.

 

Take a look at these non-NVIDIA extensions that NVIDIA has implemented on a GTX 980:

 

Siggraph is an event that's all about the graphics industry moving forward, so yes this is all about technological progress and that's especially obvious when it's published as a public Vulkan/OpenGL extension specification that anyone is welcome to implement or copy. Proprietary stuff does not get published (goes against the "Open" of "OpenGL").

[grayperview]

2 hours ago, System32.exe said:

It is at 4K.

Not when the frame rate is over 100 its not!

[Curufinwe_wins]

2 hours ago, huilun02 said:

Don't know if Nvidia even realizes that all their proprietary jank only amounts to boastful marketing. None of it will become mainstream because they were made exclusive to Nvidia's expensive stuff anyway. Majority of game sales is on consoles that use Radeon graphics so getting developers to do stuff that more than half of all customers can't use, is kind of a waste of resources.

 

Yeah I know you're going to say "but its technological progress"

Making stuff proprietary and black boxing to the point where it impedes its proliferation is not technological progress

This is a very poor way of looking at it.

 

By making their own they put pressure on others to make feature equivalents, even if it is proprietary (which is rarely is actually... CPU Phys-X is in almost every single game these days). Which generally are less locked down. Do you honestly believe that FreeSync would have come out sooner or wider if G-sync didnt come out first?

 

[Tech Enthusiast]

52 minutes ago, grayperview said:

Not when the frame rate is over 100 its not!

Uhm, no idea what is up for debate here,... just look at the picture. It is right there. 4k resolution and over 100fps.

[grayperview]

4 minutes ago, Tech Enthusiast said:

Uhm, no idea what is up for debate here,... just look at the picture. It is right there. 4k resolution and over 100fps.

As it was when CAS was off too, CAS is worth a massive 6fps improvement, over the 106 it was already running at, hardly game changing!

[RejZoR]

1 hour ago, grayperview said:

Not when the frame rate is over 100 its not!

And neither when framerate is at 30fps because it's still too low whether you add 6fps or not...

[illegalwater]

1 hour ago, grayperview said:

Not when the frame rate is over 100 its not!

At 4K you take every frame you can get.

 

Plus only the 2080 Ti is over 100 FPS. The framerate increase is nice on the 2080 as it brings it closer to 100 FPS. And it's impactful on the 2070 as it was closer to 60 FPS than 100.

[Sahl]

2 hours ago, huilun02 said:

Don't know if Nvidia even realizes that all their proprietary jank only amounts to boastful marketing. None of it will become mainstream because they were made exclusive to Nvidia's expensive stuff anyway. Majority of game sales is on consoles that use Radeon graphics so getting developers to do stuff that more than half of all customers can't use, is kind of a waste of resources.

 

Yeah I know you're going to say "but its technological progress"

Making stuff proprietary and black boxing to the point where it impedes its proliferation is not technological progress

By your logic it is a waste to invest in PC gaming, since the vast majority plays on console and that is where the big bang in terms of sales is or what about top tier GPU or hardware in general.. should we not just stop making those and only have midrange? How many use a 2080(ti) for gaming on steam? well less than 5% of all people.. We could apply this on almost any real life analogy and could fit it to support your arguement or mine. The thing here is that the "tech progress" arguement you try to hurt is actually a pretty valid one. If we had just disregarded most of the new techs, because it was not very supported, then we would have alot less of what we actually see now a days.

 

DLSS will become mainstream pretty fast. I even dare say that the combo of Ray Tracing with normal rastorazation will become mainsteam for the top tier gamers faster than you think. Does this mean next month? no... ofc not.

 

A funny fact is also that now that we talk about resolutions in this thread.. Under 2% of gamers on steam use a 4k monitor, under 7% use a 1440p, almost all use 1080p and will do so for many years.. This is because quality and new tech is expensive, not all will be able to afford it, but some always will.

 

 

[pas008]

5% gains is 5%

with that logic no one should fucking overclock anything 

 

wow more and more negative nancy shit here

[Bcat00]

3 hours ago, huilun02 said:

 

I wouldn't go outright and make that claim just yet. 

All new tech is expensive at the beginning and i'm sure they wouldn't just abandon raytracing just because the gaming market doesn't care for it.

 

The big money lies in the business end, if they want it then we shall have it. Don't forget, being able to raytrace in real time is a huge boom for animation movies that would've required days to render or even months with cheap hardware.

 

I can already see the company behind "Avatar" laughing their heads off in the time they will save in production.

[grayperview]

45 minutes ago, System32.exe said:

At 4K you take every frame you can get.

 

Plus only the 2080 Ti is over 100 FPS. The framerate increase is nice on the 2080 as it brings it closer to 100 FPS. And it's impactful on the 2070 as it was closer to 60 FPS than 100.

it scales, its about 3.5% nothing worth getting excited about.

[illegalwater]

9 minutes ago, grayperview said:

it scales, its about 3.5% nothing worth getting excited about.

Like I said, you take everything you can get at 4K. It's not exciting but it's nothing to be disappointed over.

[Tech Enthusiast]

55 minutes ago, grayperview said:

it scales, its about 3.5% nothing worth getting excited about.

By that logic, when is the threashhold to start caring? And who defines it?

Free performance is always nice to have. You may not need more fps, but your GPU will run less hot... or you may actually hit 60fps, depending on gpu.

No matter how you put it, it is a clear and obvious win for everyone. And a big fat slap in the face of lazy devs. Wolfenstein II has amazing performance optimizations. Kinda sad i don't care about the game, but i like what their programmers do.

[Dabombinable]

Who even plays Wolfenstein II anymore?

[Guest]

2 hours ago, System32.exe said:

At 4K you take every frame you can get.

 

Plus only the 2080 Ti is over 100 FPS. The framerate increase is nice on the 2080 as it brings it closer to 100 FPS. And it's impactful on the 2070 as it was closer to 60 FPS than 100.

4k isn't really that big of a deal as it was 5 years ago. 

[illegalwater]

27 minutes ago, RorzNZ said:

4k isn't really that big of a deal as it was 5 years ago. 

On what accounts? Because 4K is only getting more popular, not less. And hardware wise it still takes some of the fastest GPUs on the market to reliably get 60 FPS in every game.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, System32.exe said:

On what accounts? Because 4K is only getting more popular, not less. And hardware wise it still takes some of the fastest GPUs on the market to reliably get 60 FPS in every game.

Certainly on my steam account, most new graphic cards can get above 60fps in 4k just fine and games are much more optimised. 

[illegalwater]

5 minutes ago, RorzNZ said:

Certainly on my steam account, most new graphic cards can get above 60fps in 4k just fine and games are much more optimised. 

You mean the RTX lineup? The 2070 can't even get to 60 FPS in a lot of games at 4K, let alone above it. And it's a high end card so it's not in the overwhelming majority of people's budgets.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, System32.exe said:

You mean the RTX lineup? The 2070 can't even get to 60 FPS in a lot of games at 4K, let alone above it. And it's a high end card so it's not in the overwhelming majority of people's budgets.

Literally 1060 and up can get nice frame rates at 4k

[illegalwater]

1 minute ago, RorzNZ said:

Literally 1060 and up can get nice frame rates at 4k

If by nice frame rates you mean 20 FPS, sure.

[Guest]

Just now, System32.exe said:

If by nice frame rates you mean 20 FPS, sure.

Not everyone plays AAA titles dude, or even cares. The majority of people like e-sports titles, which are fine in 4k on most graphics cards. 

[illegalwater]

12 minutes ago, RorzNZ said:

Not everyone plays AAA titles dude, or even cares. The majority of people like e-sports titles, which are fine in 4k on most graphics cards. 

That's totally wrong. AAA games sell millions of copies on PC, they dominate the top selling list on Steam.

 

Yeah sure the 1060 will run League at 4K just fine. But to get a playable experience in fast paced games like Overwatch, Fortnite, or PUBG at 4K on a 1060 you need to play on the lowest settings which most people aren't willing to do. And that's just a playable experience mind you, forget 144 FPS as the only affordable 4K monitors are all 60Hz, and the 1060 isn't going to get 144 FPS in any of those three games at 4K.