Is there any performance loss from super/downsampling at the PS4 level? Forget TV scalers... I just want to know if there's any sort of hit (for example: straight 2160p vs. 2160p-to-1080p downsample). I seem to remember reading that depending on the method used, it can have a noticeable negative impact on performance.
-
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.
TLOU PRO Patch 1.08 - Supersampling removed from all modes [Up: New DF video]
- Thread starter Jacob4815
- Start date
RedAssedApe
Banned
find it amusing that the top ones are regarding super sampling followed by complaints about framerate
Well, we're not actually capturing HDR so it doesn't matter. RGB is the best choice there.
Whether auto is the best depends on your TV/receiver. 4:2:2 doesn't work properly with my receiver (remains in 8-bits per channel) so I have to use 4:2:0 for HDR.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
This is the thread about that, no? Also they didn't remove it from UC4, so it's not some corporate mandated thing I think.
DOWN
Banned
He means the removals of the actual posts on the Naughty Dog feedback site that we're bringing the issue to their attention. They seem to be deleting certain topics asking them to fix it
OdysseusVA
Banned
Sorry, meant the removals for the feedback entries.
Negotiator
Member
Supersampling and higher resolutions in general require more memory bandwidth, especially in alpha effect-heavy scenes. It's not free. It can cause fps drops in certain cases. Some people mind them, some don't.
I suggest to tweet @cgyrling directly. He's the Lead Programmer @ ND and I'm sure he can give you a thorough technical explanation of why they had to make certain choices. @cbalestra is also a programmer and ND's co-president. You can also contact ‏@jqgregory.
Heckler456
Banned
OdysseusVA
Banned
There were two with far more votes that have been removed
Bl@de
Member
Because they deleted various (rational and well-made) topics on the issue with over 600 votes. Now only the caps post remains. Wouldn't be surprised if it gets deleted as well, as soon as the votes reach 500+
I posted a similar question above, but in case it gets lost, are there any good examples of what the cost is for supersampling/downsampling? I understand that it can differ based on techniques used, but I'm curious to know. The majority seem to think that it's free or negligible. Thanks!
Heckler456
Banned
Alright, but don't make insinuations that they're trying to quash the complaint by censoring when it seems like they just culled it down to a single topic. Let's wait until they remove that one, or when those other two don't pass moderator approval or whatever before we strike Naughty Dog off the "not-disgusting" list.
Even this is documented. Please read the full topic, if you are interested.
Today more links and new threads have been created.
They removed the two most voted ones. More than 600 votes. These feedbacks were kindly and good written, not like the spam you quoted.
DOWN
Banned
It's a little weird that they only left the most off putting possible version of it to speak for the subject and they threw out most of the votes by choosing that All caps topic over the more rational ones
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
I'm pretty sure he was only asking about the impact of the scaling afterwards.
Heckler456
Banned
Not really? The other guy said that the two posts up for moderation approval had been made today, and had gotten a load of traffic? Maybe they don't have staff on those forums 100% of the time. Maybe topics that garner an extraordinary amount of traffic need to go through approval when passing a certain point. Maybe feedback that garners a certain amount of traffic gets passed on to Naughty Dog on a fast track, and they at that point consider that feedback dealt with? Who knows. There are other explanation than "Naughty Dog is disgusting!".
So you have to manually switch then when you use HDR?
Any way to test what would be best for my setup? I'm using an American KS8000
Negotiator
Member
The graphics processor has to process more pixels. You need more processing power (flops) and more memory bandwidth (GB/s) to "feed" the GPU.
The problem is that the PS4 Pro only has a 24% memory bandwidth boost, compared to a 2.2x GPU flops boost.
And before anyone mentions the Polaris delta color compression, I know that, but 24% is still kinda low.
The Jaguar CPU has nothing to do with it, since higher resolutions rely more on the GPU than the CPU.
Games like Witcher 3 won't even get a Pro update and we all remember the marsh fps slowdowns (another alpha effect-heavy scene due to fog usage). It's a tricky situation.
The two posts now in "moderation approval", and removed from the public list, were made three days ago.
TheGreyHulk
Member
I don't believe anyone thinks it's free. You're rendering the image at a higher resolution than native and scaling it down to the native monitor resolution for a cleaner image with more detail and less aliasing.
I doubt you're losing anything noticeable from the point a frame is done rendering and then scaled down to the output resolution to the monitor.
Negotiator
Member
Scaling is free, but rendering at a higher-resolution framebuffer is not free. That's the tricky part.
Sony really needs to sort this mess out, since they are the platform holder and they are the ones that approve patches. There are also more egregious examples, such as AC Syndicate when the final output is blocky for no reason at all (worse than OG PS4 900p). QA testing has gone out the window.
Funny thing Sony is one of the few manufacturers that still have 3D TV's (930,940,ZD etc). Samsung makes 0.
3D TV's was let go by 90 percent of the companies.
Negotiator
Member
I meant they stopped shoving 3D into their 1st party games. Uncharted 3 had it, but TLOU and Uncharted 4 have ditched it.
4K seems to be a fad for the time being. HDR is the only worthy feature, I'll give you that, but there's no reason it should be a 4K-exclusive tech, unless they (as an industry) really want to push 4K hard.
Spoken like a true junior.
Melchiah
Member
There was a supersampled 30fps mode, that ran at a stable framerate. I highly doubt it was removed due to performance issues.
This is not the issue here.
The game ran at 4k@30fps and 1800p@60ish(even better with the last patch) REGARDLESS OF TV USED.
Now it runs at those resolutions ONLY IF YOU HAVE A 4K TV.
Which is fucking BULLSHIT. On a 1080p tv you should get the same performance, downscaling from 4k/1800p to 1080p does not incure decreased performance.
Coming from a favourite developer, the silence about this mess is unbelievable.
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
I suggest reading the OP. ND has cleared all of those performance hurdles. This is purely about scaling.
Freshmaker
I am Korean.
Again, the 4K mode already runs fine.
How does 1080P mode SS put more load on the system than that?
Negotiator
Member
Downscaling is free, but rendering at a higher-resolution framebuffer in the first place is not free. DF has made a video that proves this in TLG.
They should just implement an extra in-game option (supersampling on/off toggle) IMHO. Making it a system-wide option would probably require extensive SDK changes.
People do seem to be ignoring the fact that 60fps is now locked at 1080p on the Pro, whilst there are still drops at 1800p.
Do you even read what this thread is about?
Negotiator
Member
So, you just want supersampling from 4k30? What about 60 fps folks? That's why I suggested a supersampling toggle.
Yeah, I'm not sure why they don't understand this.
Maybe 1800p is a tad bit high for locked 60 fps. Perhaps ND could experiment with lower resolutions (1600p, 1440p), but this would require extensive QA testing on their part.
Freshmaker
I am Korean.
Yeah, in 1800p periodic drops to as low as 55fps is shocking. (Even though that still outperforms the Base PS4's 60fps mode.) This is performance a PC gamer probably wouldn't even flinch at.
Also still ignores the super sampled 30fps mode vanishing which was never broken. Instead, there's just blatant nonsense about how the bandwidth can't support the fill rate even though it's demonstrating it can with a 4k set to this very day.
Xaero Gravity
NEXT LEVEL lame™
Get him!
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
Ah yes. Well maybe it should be done. I wonder however if they just remove them because they've attracted enough attention so that they are acknowledged by the dev team and being worked on, so they don't want people wasting their voting points on them anymore.
Always-honest
Banned
Nah
There is certainly value in super-sampling, more than I anticipated personally. That's why so many people are annoyed that ND gave us a taste and then took it away, myself included.
Freshmaker
I am Korean.
You can see the penalty in operation right now if you have a 4k set. It'd be exactly the same as the 1800p 60fps mode.
bonchooski
Member
there is tremendous value first off the universal value of a larger hard drive. secondly supersampling has made a difference for me to the point that it's a feature I look for in buying a game now. the image quality it provides is amazing in my eyes.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
There are other games they published that have Pro patch and feature downsampling. UC4 and I:SS come to mind.
Maybe, or perhaps DF haven't looked for a cost yet.
I suspect ND implemented a quick & dirty fix in response to pressure from Sony, pressure that was ultimately generated by the media attention DF's "slower on Pro" video got (thanks for that DF). Probably understandable too. ND provided what they believed was a good Pro patch that satisfied their balance between image quality and frame-rate. Then thanks to DF's click bait they've been told to "fix" it. The quick & dirty fix was probably to simply remove the code needed for SSAA. The result, higher frame-rates all-round. The cost, no SSAA on 1080p TVs.
This is my guess too. However why not come out and say something. Even something non-commital like 'we wanted to focus on getting the performance right, so for now we have done blah. We are looking at ways to further improve the picture quality while maintaining that performance level. One side effect of this change is the loss of downsampling, which we are looking into and will share more with you soon"
I think Super sampling is going to end up driver level & devs will be free to make a push for higher frame rate in 1080p mode that's basically base mode but using the extra power of the PS4 Pro & make the 4K mode free from the limitations of having to perform better than the standard PS4 1080P mode.
This way you will always have a 1080P performance mode on PS4 Pro but you can also set the PS4 Pro for super sampling.
This way you will always have a 1080P performance mode on PS4 Pro but you can also set the PS4 Pro for super sampling.
That would likely shut people up but if your exact statement was released I'd worry that it was just that, a way to sweep the issue under the rug. If the goal was to shut people up your statement would likely work though, well done.