-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Why won't PC do checkerboard 4K? (it does)
- Thread starter Renekton
- Start date
Thanks for the links.
It's even more meaningless since people have already done it. On PC in fact!
kikonawa
Member
If you ask me qb does the opposite lol
Lister
Banned
On my 3440x1440p monitor upscaling form around 90% reoslution looks good, though at the distanc eI sit form my monitor there is a noticeable difference which only gets more noticeable the more I drop from 90%.
Sitting 6 feet from say a 50 inch 4K TV would probably make 90% or even 80% resolution just fine.
I'll probably be doing that on PC vs lower rez reconstruction once I buy a 4K TV.
Sitting 6 feet from say a 50 inch 4K TV would probably make 90% or even 80% resolution just fine.
I'll probably be doing that on PC vs lower rez reconstruction once I buy a 4K TV.
Nostremitus
Member
Wait... Does the PS4 Pro have the reality creation feature that my Sony Bravia already has?
Is that how it does 4k?
Is that how it does 4k?
No.
The scaling of Bravia series works by having series of input images and then scale it to 4k.
Games use many different methods of resolving/rendering into higher resolution. (Usually changing someway how rendering is done, not just working on final images.)
Read presentations in these threads if you are interested in specifics.
There's nothing wrong with having more options though
I imagine you'd probably have a better experience with checkerboarding, considering how most games run at native 4k.
CyberPunked
Member
Most games run fine. it's the settings you chose to use that cause the issues.
potatohead
Member
Depends how large or small the monitor is.
Vulcano's assistant
Banned
That hasn't stopped NVidia before, they can lock the feature to new cards.
dr_rus
Member
This isn't something to be implemented by either IHV. The games must support it in their engines.
Nostremitus
Member
I just read the checkerbox explanation.
How is that different in practice to reality creation on Bravia? It separates each 1080p pixel out in a 1:4 ratio like a checkerboard and then fills in the color gradients corresponding to the change in the surrounding pixels. I'm not talking about it's normal scaler. The Reality Creation feature turns each 1080p pixel into four pixels of different gradients corresponding to the surrounding pixels.
What am I not understanding? Because it looks like another method of doing the exact same thing.
The only difference I'm seeing is that on is happening before the framebuffer and the other is happening slower on a less powerful secondary device.
Hipster_Doofus
Neo Member
Rainbow Six Siege has a temporal filtering mode that is similar to what sony is implementing on PS4 Pro.
Surely there's something, even a similar type of method, that could be used where ever through software? Maybe kinda like how DSR / VSR can work in any game while applying a filter along with it. I dunno.
Would simply upscaling from 1440p-1800p to 4k provide a similar level of clarity?
You answered your own question, NVidia wants you to buy a Titan XP.
It's the new interlacing.
Phrozenflame500
Member
I'm a bit iffy on secret-sauce-styled gimmicks until we see some actual results on it.
That being said, if it does result in an actual increase in IQ then sure why not. Although you really can't beat native.
That being said, if it does result in an actual increase in IQ then sure why not. Although you really can't beat native.
Kinda this.
A point that needs to be brought out is these 4K PS4 games are still mostly running at 30fps with "console" graphics settings.
When people say it's still really tough for PC gaming to do native 4K, what they really mean is native 4K and 60fps at ultra settings for recent games. If you're willing to settle for 30fps and/or slide down some settings, playable native 4K is definitely within reach of modern graphics cards, even Maxwell cards probably. I remember someone in a thread a few months ago saying they could play GTA V at 4K on a 970 or 980 with mostly medium/high settings.
Maintenance
Member
Nah, go native or go home. Don't want to end up with another Quantum Break mess.
I can play every game I've tried at 4K on my 980tI, so yeah maxwell is right up there too.
Monies
i dont think you can do it completely in hardware like a post process filter on the final image because the programmers are needed to set the exact timing reconstruction is applied. some post processing (like depth of field) would be broken if checkerboard reconstruction is applied after them.
CrAzY FiNgErS
Member
Options are always good, no? That is what PC gaming is all about, right? All PC gamers aren't die hard "PC Master Race" type people. I game on a 50 inch 1080p Plasma with my itx PC (newly upgraded to a gtx 1060)and it will stay there. I am not a desktop PC gamer anymore.
I won't go to a 4K TV for maybe a few more years, but I would love this technique or similar techniques (programmed properly) within games to be able to have 4k on lower level graphic cards that may not handle 4k very well at acceptable framerates.
Also, it's up to the programmers to implement/program these techniques properly or it will run poorly/look poorly regardless.
codswallop
Member
This is my opinion too. PC gaming to me has always been about flexibility, not spending hundreds or thousands annually to brute force performance (at least we don't need boot floppies any more!).
If different resolutions and anti-aliasing methods are available to tweak appearance vs performance, why not this? I'd love to be able to buy a 4K screen and have my otherwise-capable GTX670 render at 1080p up-whatevered to 4K.
Jimmy Rustle
Banned
Checkerboarding mixed with some HUMA is going to make 1080p look like 4K+8xMSAA.
You just wait.
Half of the pixels are rendered in every frame, next frame the second half.
Result without motion is pretty close to perfect full frame. (Can have single pixel detail in 4k,)
On TV as you said the input is 1080p, half of the data sent each frame to the checkerbox in that paper.
Also the game can jitter/change sample position in each frame, TV signal stays the same, thus additional sample possibilities are not there.
Those new scalers are amazing though, they do feature search of huge array of images and try to hallucinate correct results. (Most likely getting pretty close guesses.)
I bench Rise of the Tomb Raider around 67 FPS maxed out @ 4K on a single card. But the average consumer will not want to pay that kind of money and it's clearly understandable. The PS4 Pro is pretty damn neat in terms of what it's offering for people and at a more than reasonable price point.
Not if you enable temporal filtering.
"Temporal Filtering renders the game at half-resolution with 2x MSAA. In other words, a 1920x1080 picture is rendered at 960x540, and 2x MSAA is applied to smooth out the now-rougher edges.
As a result, there are the same number of depth samples as the full-resolution 1920x1080 picture, but only a quarter of the shaded samples, improving performance greatly, but also decreasing image quality. This manifests as a reduction in the quality and visibility of Ambient Occlusion shadowing, increased shader aliasing, decreased lighting and shading fidelity, and a loss of fidelity on smaller game elements, such as leaves, grass, visual effects and minute pieces of geometry."
http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/gu...e#tom-clancys-rainbow-six-siege-anti-aliasing
hooijdonk17
Member
Bingo.
This talk of PCs doing it 'properly' is silly. Games are all about smoke and mirrors. You get great results by cutting as many corners as you can. This is another option to increase perceived detail and image quality for less computational cost than doing it properly. Like with things like lower resolution reflections, shadows etc you accept a minor trade off for the overall benefits
And clearly it would be an option - nobody would be forced to use it
And clearly it would be an option - nobody would be forced to use it
Definitely from r/PCMR <_<
potatohead
Member
4K and 144 Hz?
If soon is probably like 4 years away I guess so.... lol.
I hope you meant 4K or 144 Hz actually lol. That would be much sooner and already partly present.
Woo-Fu
Banned
Because it doesn't fit the typical business model. Who wants to keep paying for Azure after you've made the bulk of your game sales? Nobody who wants to make money---unless they're trying to promote Azure.
potatohead
Member
There is really no reason it couldn't.
Besides pushing people towards getting the new console and a new TV that is.
johnnydrama
Banned
Okay, so I don't have anything against this solution, but here's my take on this whole thing. Right now, you can easily play most games at 4K/locked 30 (very high/ultra) on a GTX1070, which costs $380 or something. Hell, you can play a lot of the games (bit older ones) at 4K/60 with some settings turned down. Considering how quickly these things drop in price, I'd imagine we'd be seeing this same GPU horsepower at a sub-$250 price point by next summer/fall. While reconstruction methods can definitely be nifty, I'm just not a fan of them. We're really not that far off from affordable 4K/30 and high-end 4K/60.
This alternates the rendered checker box pattern between frames and uses information from the previous one to construct the current full resolution frame.
So, if nothing is moving on screen, you're gonna get 100% of the data from a full native 4k frame. Even in motion you'll still be reconstructing a lot more of that data than a simple upscaled image wouldn't have.
I'm just amused at the capacity to reconstruct your speech. A few days ago 4K didn't matter, then 4K mattered, but now that 4K is not a thing anymore, its absence is suddenly a feature. PS5 will eventually land and everybody will be happy to leave this checkboard behind.
More features is always good, but this is not a feature, but a workaround for a shortcoming.
dr_rus
Member
No, there's not. Such type of upscaling must have full access to framebuffer contents and know how that content is being built for each pixel. For that it must be a part of the program which is building this frame buffer as such upscaling should be implemented inside the rendering pipeline, not as some finishing step or override. Basically you need a custom reconstruction shader integrated into the engine, and this isn't something which any IHV would be willing to provide for all games out there.
DSR/VSR isn't a good example at all as all it does is downscale the image from a high rendering resolution to that of your display.
blankempathy
Member
Soon? Single gpus cant max out newer games at even 60 fps for 4k. There are also no 4k monitors above 60 right now. 4k is nice but 21:9 is the real game changer.
Chobel
Member
Fucking really? Patenting an algorithm?
And what people who can't or won't upgrade?