Nvidia FXAA in Unreal Samaritan Demo (running on Kepler)

[MrK6]

I think disregarding one's own proof within 15 minutes counts as an admission of defeat. I'll let the fanboy keep spinning in his wheel for my own enjoyment though.

 

[tviceman]

Nobody is hating man, come on get real. FXAA/SMAA/MLAA these are not nvidia or AMD dependent features, they run on either vendor's card.

They're s**t. If you want to accept lowered IQ well go ahead and smile while you are fed a crap sandwich. Thought we were supposed to be going forward with visual fidelity, not backwards.

The problem is the nvidia zealots who get pumped when anything related to nv is released and rage if someone does not jump on board. Good grief, I could care less about nv & unreal's tech demo, there is not even a game out there that looks like this. I do care about devs and now nvidia trying to push a feature that reduces IQ.

FXAA = blur city

No FXAA = crisp textures and clarity

Four year old game looking better than its sequel in 2011 = priceless

Or compare


Crysis 1 PC vs 360
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQ_1m...&feature=feedu

Crysis 2 PC vs 360
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtHAP...424&feature=iv

Crysis 2 on PC vs 360 is not much different. Crysis 1 on PC vs 360 is comparing a Ferrari to a Pinto.

I admit that with those screenshots, there is definite and noticeable blur with FXAA present. I did not see such blur in the Samaritan demo screenshot comparison, though. Nvidia also referred to the FXAA used in Samaritan as "FXAA 3." Is this the same FXAA method that is currently available or is it a new and improved FXAA?

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Ignoring facts is the key to winning internet arguments.

I also see the blur.

Edit: It's actually not a blur, it's more like a dulling of lighting.

 

[Olikan]

Lol, source?

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2567961&postcount=31

 

[blackened23]

I still dont' see why you insist FXAA has no value, Groove. We have to face the reality that PC development comes second to consoles, and many console titles do not support native AA. This is where fast AA comes in handy, even if the game does not support native AA, MLAA/SMAA/FXAA will generally work.

The other scenario is a demanding game that would take too large of a performance hit for MSAA (ie, BF3) , in these cases a user could take advantage of FXAA which looks pretty good with little performance penalty. Obviously MSAA will have a large performance penalty in comparison.

 

[Grooveriding]

I still dont' see why you insist FXAA has no value, Groove. We have to face the reality that PC development comes second to consoles, and many console titles do not support native AA. This is where fast AA comes in handy, even if the game does not support native AA, MLAA/SMAA/FXAA will generally work.

The other scenario is a demanding game that would take too large of a performance hit for MSAA (ie, BF3) , in these cases a user could take advantage of FXAA which looks pretty good with little performance penalty. Obviously MSAA will have a large performance penalty in comparison.

I can't argue against those who see value in it. For me, it's crap, I'd be willing to to use more cards to be able to run deferred MSAA - but that's just me. It certainly has value if someone is not concerned with IQ to the point that they'd prefer no aliasing at the expense of IQ. It's a trade-off is all.

I prefer to have it all and would rather not compromise I run BF3 on ultra with 2xmsaa and fxaa off. I can't run 4xmsaa consistently, I get hitching with it unfortunately. Two GK110 had better resolve that for me.

These new AA modes are popular exactly because of console and cross-platform titles. They are perfect for consoles because they come at such a low performance hit. I would prefer PC games are pushing boundaries though and not compromising on IQ. I have large doubts they will ever eliminate the blur introduced by FXAA/MLAA/SMAA. Even today MSAA is not as good as SSAA, so all these post AA modes have a long ways to go.

 

[JAG87]

I can't argue against those who see value in it. For me, it's crap, I'd be willing to to use more cards to be able to run deferred MSAA - but that's just me. It certainly has value if someone is not concerned with IQ to the point that they'd prefer no aliasing at the expense of IQ. It's a trade-off is all.

I prefer to have it all and would rather not compromise I run BF3 on ultra with 2xmsaa and fxaa off. I can't run 4xmsaa consistently, I get hitching with it unfortunately. Two GK110 had better resolve that for me.

These new AA modes are popular exactly because of console and cross-platform titles. They are perfect for consoles because they come at such a low performance hit. I would prefer PC games are pushing boundaries though and not compromising on IQ. I have large doubts they will ever eliminate the blur introduced by FXAA/MLAA/SMAA. Even today MSAA is not as good as SSAA, so all these post AA modes have a long ways to go.

Although I agree with the console part, I disagree with the rest.


Don't have such an obtuse view of post process AA methods just because FXAA and MLAA are poor implementations. Full scene SSAA hasn't been viable for a long time now, and MSAA + TrSSAA is becoming less viable very quickly, the future is most certainly some kind of a post process AA. They just need to get it right. SMAA is on the right track. It's surprisingly very good already. Even in it's baby stage (1x), it's already superior to any other AA method in deferred shader games. And it only gets better with SMAA S2x and 4x. It doesn't blur textures and it gives polygon, transparency and shader anti aliasing, with almost zero performance hit. You can't get that with any other kind of AA method today except full scene SSAA, which is simply not an option.

 

[Grooveriding]

Although I agree with the console part, I disagree with the rest.


Don't have such an obtuse view of post process AA methods just because FXAA and MLAA are poor implementations. Full scene SSAA hasn't been viable for a long time now, and MSAA + TrSSAA is becoming less viable very quickly, the future is most certainly some kind of a post process AA. They just need to get it right. SMAA is on the right track. It's surprisingly very good already. Even in it's baby stage (1x), it's already superior to any other AA method in deferred shader games. And it only gets better with SMAA S2x and 4x. It doesn't blur textures and it gives polygon, transparency and shader anti aliasing, with almost zero performance hit. You can't get that with any other kind of AA method today except full scene SSAA, which is simply not an option.

It does blur textures. It is becoming a necessary evil with deferred shader games and devs not wanting to implement proper msaa.

Even one of the creators of smaa acknowledges it is inferior and is good because other options are not being presented or the performance hit of proper msaa is too intensive.

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1596576&postcount=1105

4xSMAA starts to actually introduce 2xmsaa and 2xtraa which is why it looks improved. But the blur is still there and it starts to introduce a performance cost as well. It is a good solution, but full on msaa or ssaa is preferable. I think ssaa is always going to be too much for the newest games, but older games can make use of it. MSAA nees to be kept on the table.

Personally, it is a good option if you do not care about the reduced IQ, but there are hardware setups capable of pushing msaa in deferrd shading games and it needs to be kept on the table.

 

[railven]

I found the old posts/pics I made in another forum when MLAA first hit the scene. MLAA (FXAA) definitely blurs textures, font, overlays, transparencies, - you name if. But in games with no real AA, it is a benefit. I'd personally take good game AA versus MLAA to be honest. After a while, the blurred textures DO get to you.

Here are my examples:

You'll notice the jaggies in the no-MLAA screen shot, but in that same shot look above the containers I circled. The holo-deck is clear.

Same holo-deck on the MLAA screen shot is blurry, and even the banners hanging with the yellow arrow.

In these scene it is tolerable, but if you've played Dead Space, you know there are a lot of scenes with holo-decks (the video recordings, your HUD) it gets really really bad. I had to turn it off I couldn't put up with the blurry images anymore.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Have you tried version 2?

Also you said you had the same problem with games like WoW, where it would blur text.

I'm using 1.2 of smaa (fxaa does not work) and am not able to reproduce the blurring of text.

 

[Bobisuruncle54]

No he was being serious with his straw man.

Anandtech - Where opinions and subjectivity go to die.

Hilarious statement considering your opinion on tessellation is anything but objective. Why implement it to a level where you won't be able to physically see the polygons beyond a certain pixel to polygon ratio? Oh that's right, for benchmarks that cast Fermi in a good light.

 

[Tempered81]

Updated the op with some smaa vs fxaa comparisons

 

[JAG87]

It does blur textures. It is becoming a necessary evil with deferred shader games and devs not wanting to implement proper msaa.

Even one of the creators of smaa acknowledges it is inferior and is good because other options are not being presented or the performance hit of proper msaa is too intensive.

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1596576&postcount=1105

4xSMAA starts to actually introduce 2xmsaa and 2xtraa which is why it looks improved. But the blur is still there and it starts to introduce a performance cost as well. It is a good solution, but full on msaa or ssaa is preferable. I think ssaa is always going to be too much for the newest games, but older games can make use of it. MSAA nees to be kept on the table.

Personally, it is a good option if you do not care about the reduced IQ, but there are hardware setups capable of pushing msaa in deferrd shading games and it needs to be kept on the table.

But MSAA by itself is not very effective on deferred shading. It's pretty awful on anything besides edges.

And nothing is perfect. Even FS SGSSAA blurs everything unless you force a negative LOD which doesn't really restore the textures as they're meant to be to be seen, it's just a cheat i.e. like bicubic down sampling with sharpening.

Considering the results that SMAA 4x potentially puts out, at a fraction of the cost of MSAA (never mind MSAA+TrSSAA or FS SGSSAA), it's a very good solution.

Think this way

FXAA = 50% IQ for 5% hit
SMAA = 90% IQ for 10% hit
MSAA + TrSSAA = 95% quality for 30+% hit
FS SGSSAA = 99% IQ for 50+% performance hit

Which one would you take? I beg you to think practically, not strictly as an enthusiast. Which is going to benefit the majority of gamers? Which should developers focus on?

 

[Grooveriding]

But MSAA by itself is not very effective on deferred shading. It's pretty awful on anything besides edges.

And nothing is perfect. Even FS SGSSAA blurs everything unless you force a negative LOD which doesn't really restore the textures as they're meant to be to be seen, it's just a cheat i.e. like bicubic down sampling with sharpening.

Considering the results that SMAA 4x potentially puts out, at a fraction of the cost of MSAA (never mind MSAA+TrSSAA or FS SGSSAA), it's a very good solution.

Think this way

FXAA = 50% IQ for 5% hit
SMAA = 90% IQ for 10% hit
MSAA + TrSSAA = 95% quality for 30+% hit
FS SGSSAA = 99% IQ for 50+% performance hit

Which one would you take? I beg you to think practically, not strictly as an enthusiast. Which is going to benefit the majority of gamers? Which should developers focus on?

All of them. I want the choice of them all, not just the best performing but lowest quality option. Fwiw you can force sgssaa in Crysis 2, it is pretty intensive, but I could live with the frame rate. So the option should be there imo, no reason we have to just have one rather than all the possible choices.

 

[bryanW1995]

Lottes has 4.0 on his blog, but in motion SMAA Tr2x looks a lot better than both MLAA and FXAA and loses only slightly to SSAA visually, but has merely a 2ms performance penalty. It's a shame these post AAs are criticized so badly as they're built into Dice's and Cryteks newest engines, and on the consoles. SSAA isn't practical because of the performance hit, and this particular demo running on Kepler is a great example of the practical use of a low cost post-AA. Visually, they can reduce digital artifacts like aliasing and keep the framerate within budget. The blur is cost.

I think the "oh this looks horrible" opinions will be overlooked when devs push visuals like "Samaritin" and Crysis out on platforms that aren't budgeted for traditional AA types. The poor man's AA in the console age. heheh.

I use SSAA on most of my games, and it's freakin' awesome.

 

[JAG87]

All of them. I want the choice of them all, not just the best performing but lowest quality option. Fwiw you can force sgssaa in Crysis 2, it is pretty intensive, but I could live with the frame rate. So the option should be there imo, no reason we have to just have one rather than all the possible choices.

I agree perfectly but you already know you're not going to get that. We never have.

1) FS SSAA has never been an option in games.

2) MSAA is not always present, and at times it has AMD/NV quirks (requiring more work from the developer, i.e. UE3 engine)

FXAA and SMAA can be injected painlessly on both vendors, addresses shader induced aliasing, and has almost no performance hit.

Which do you think is going to have all the focus for further optimization?

Say you could only pick between NO AA and one of the 4 options I gave you before, only one. Which would you pick?

 

[Shamrock]

Geforce 670TI

Blower type fan, she must scream something aweful!

That looks more like it says GTX 570 Ti to me, on the side.

 

[Grooveriding]

I agree perfectly but you already know you're not going to get that. We never have.

1) FS SSAA has never been an option in games.

2) MSAA is not always present, and at times it has AMD/NV quirks (requiring more work from the developer, i.e. UE3 engine)

FXAA and SMAA can be injected painlessly on both vendors, addresses shader induced aliasing, and has almost no performance hit.

Which do you think is going to have all the focus for further optimization?

Say you could only pick between NO AA and one of the 4 options I gave you before, only one. Which would you pick?

No doubt devs, and it seems nvidia, are pushing for post AA and that is the one that will get the attention. It's the obvious choice purely from a performance standpoint and the majority of end-users probably could care less about the difference. If I could only pick one it would have to be MSAA for a reasonable balance of performance and IQ. SSAA is great, but you have to wait to run current games on hardware four years out to enable it.

As far as the in-game FXAA in BF3, it really is quite horrible.

4xMSAA - http://i.imgur.com/TJimJ.jpg
High Post AA - http://i.imgur.com/EqWoT.jpg (look at the trees and the textures in general, awful)

I will give another go with the SMAA injector in BF3 and see how it looks to my eyes. It's unfortunate that the latest 2.7 version of SMAA with S2x and 4x is not compatible with injection, as that it the one I expect to have the best chance of eliminating blur.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Have you tried using the FXAA tool to set custom settings? It has a slider for blur both on Anti Aliasing and Sharpen effects.

Edit: Little more info on the demo..

"That board we ran the Samaritan demo on is the same board we're running the Unreal Engine 4 demos on, we can get so much more out of the card than what you saw in Samaritan."

Editor's note

I was actually at the event and personally asked Mark Rein about the differences in rendering year to year.

The three-way GTX 580 was run with 4x MSAA. The same demo was run yesterday on a single 'Kepler' card, at the same settings, but with MSAA substituted with FXAA. The end result was a comparable image but with far less computational penalty for running the pixel-shader-based AA over conventional MSAA.

For what it's worth, a 'Kepler' card is fundamentally faster than a GTX 580 at exactly the same settings, though I can't say by how much.

As for Unreal 4...

http://hexus.net/tech/news/graphics...itnessed-running-unreal-4-unreal-3-samaritan/

 

[3DVagabond]

Edit: Little more info on the demo..





http://hexus.net/tech/news/graphics...itnessed-running-unreal-4-unreal-3-samaritan/

That does seem pretty impressive. Although his reasoning that they are using Kepler because it runs better than AMD's 7000 series is pure spin. Now, I'm not saying it runs better or worse on nVidia or AMD. It very well might run better on nVidia. It's pretty apparent they are working together, and it's just as likely it's "nVidia's support" that's making them use nVidia hardware as any other reason.

 

[railven]

Have you tried version 2?

Also you said you had the same problem with games like WoW, where it would blur text.

No, I never said I used MLAA in WoW. I said I used WoW as an example (since majority of the game is Overlay) to show to someone a huge con to MLAA was.

I'm using 1.2 of smaa (fxaa does not work) and am not able to reproduce the blurring of text.

And I don't use third party tools too much. Try without SMAA 1.2 injector and see if you get the text issues. This should be fixed at the driver level (not requiring 3rd party fixes, but damn it seems almost all our gaming issues are fixed by a third party any ways haha.)

I look forward to testing MLAA 2.0 on games such as WoW to see if they did fix the overlay issue.

 

[SirPauly]

Edit.

 

[taltamir]

Could have also been motion blur.

Oh I hate motion blur.

Here is when I see motion blur IRL:
1. When looking at the road VERY close to my car while driving at 50+ MPH. (motion blur is only applied to the ground very near the car, as in the first 2-3 feet, the rest is unblurred)

Here is when I don't see motion blur IRL:
1. Turning my head fast.
2. Turning my head very slowly.
3. Walking
4. Running
5. Jumping
6. Falling

And the worse part is their stupid argument of "In real life its not like you have an HD camera floating 6 feet off the ground"

No, in real life I have eyes floating 6 feet of the ground. And they don't do this kind of horrid motion blurring.

 

[railven]

Oh I hate motion blur.

Here is when I see motion blur IRL:
1. When looking at the road VERY close to my car while driving at 50+ MPH. (motion blur is only applied to the ground very near the car, as in the first 2-3 feet, the rest is unblurred)

Here is when I don't see motion blur IRL:
1. Turning my head fast.
2. Turning my head very slowly.
3. Walking
4. Running
5. Jumping
6. Falling

And the worse part is their stupid argument of "In real life its not like you have an HD camera floating 6 feet off the ground"

No, in real life I have eyes floating 6 feet of the ground. And they don't do this kind of horrid motion blurring.

I have a lazy eye and I still don't see blurring IRL. I might see a little ghosting though

I sort of like well used blurr in games, ie in Shift, but over the top blur, as you said when just turning your head, does retract from this holy grail of immersion.