This topic is locked from further discussion.
I'm PC enthusiast and I dont own XboxOne or PS4, but I need to say, project cars or assetto corsa looks really bad compared to these GTSport gameplay videos. I dont know how they done that, but GTSport looks photorealistic.
Buildings with windows? That attention to details is amazing
People say that GTSport looks like GT6, but I can see huge difference on this comparison
trees looks like real in gtsport, you can really see light reflection on leaves
I'm looking at GTSport and this is amazing what console hardware can do
Ah, the GT games, infamous for their fake 2D polygonal backdrops that rotate to face you with your camera position, fake lighting, horrible A.i and physics along with cars apparently 100% made out of octa reinforced carbon titanium tungsten carbide.
Developers for GT already stated that their GTS has the latest rendering techniques. The candidate for "latest rendering techniques" is Forward Plus tiling with PBR.
Deferred rendering is last gen and AMD doesn't recommend it for their GCNs.
Forward plus and its variations were developed to get the benefits of cheap lighting in deferred, but without all of the other problems deferred has. The downside is high overdraw costs or vertex costs, as you might end up doing either a zprepass and doubling your vertex load, or toughing it out with the remaining overdraw costs even after clustered light binning, which can still be more costly if you're running heavy per pixel operations.
Deferred is not really anymore last gen than Forward rendering is as it's been around for a while. You're just taking coin terms and falling for the marketing of how it's been put into context. Granted Forward rendering has it's benefits and arguably better in many regards but you can use tricks with deferred rendering to get many lights for low cost in performance. Deferred and Forward can be used as a hybrid or may depend on the scene.
Because deferred anti aliasing has been improoved a lot, and PBR limits the one material problem, it's still difficult for a developer to choose one over the other. I suspect Sony or polygonal games are mentioning buzzwords in a context as to help hype the game....nothing more cause it doesn't mean a lot to the end user so long as they get solid frames and modern graphics. I believe Forza Horizon 2 uses Forward rendering as well.
But as you can see in this video using UE4 engine, today's deferred look utterly amazing...looks better than GTS to me.
You are actually going against AMD's recommendation for their current GPU architecture i.e. AMD recommends Forward Plus renderer over Deferred renderer.
To minimise overdraw, Forward renderer and Forward Plus renderer must have opaque pass.
AMD's push for Forward Plus renderer is done purposely for their current GPU architecture.
Latest UE4 has forward shading renderer feature.
https://docs.unrealengine.com/latest/INT/Engine/Performance/ForwardRenderer/
Switching from the Deferred Renderer to the Forward Renderer may provide you with an increase in performance for your project.
Ah, the GT games, infamous for their fake 2D polygonal backdrops that rotate to face you with your camera position, fake lighting, horrible A.i and physics along with cars apparently 100% made out of octa reinforced carbon titanium tungsten carbide.
Developers for GT already stated that their GTS has the latest rendering techniques. The candidate for "latest rendering techniques" is Forward Plus tiling with PBR.
Deferred rendering is last gen and AMD doesn't recommend it for their GCNs.
Forward plus and its variations were developed to get the benefits of cheap lighting in deferred, but without all of the other problems deferred has. The downside is high overdraw costs or vertex costs, as you might end up doing either a zprepass and doubling your vertex load, or toughing it out with the remaining overdraw costs even after clustered light binning, which can still be more costly if you're running heavy per pixel operations.
Deferred is not really anymore last gen than Forward rendering is as it's been around for a while. You're just taking coin terms and falling for the marketing of how it's been put into context. Granted Forward rendering has it's benefits and arguably better in many regards but you can use tricks with deferred rendering to get many lights for low cost in performance. Deferred and Forward can be used as a hybrid or may depend on the scene.
Because deferred anti aliasing has been improoved a lot, and PBR limits the one material problem, it's still difficult for a developer to choose one over the other. I suspect Sony or polygonal games are mentioning buzzwords in a context as to help hype the game....nothing more cause it doesn't mean a lot to the end user so long as they get solid frames and modern graphics. I believe Forza Horizon 2 uses Forward rendering as well.
But as you can see in this video using UE4 engine, today's deferred look utterly amazing...looks better than GTS to me.
You are actually going against AMD's recommendation for their current GPU architecture i.e. AMD recommends Forward Plus renderer over Deferred renderer.
To minimise overdraw, Forward renderer and Forward Plus renderer must have opaque pass.
AMD's push for Forward Plus renderer is done purposely for their current GPU architecture.
Latest UE4 has forward shading renderer feature.
https://docs.unrealengine.com/latest/INT/Engine/Performance/ForwardRenderer/
Switching from the Deferred Renderer to the Forward Renderer may provide you with an increase in performance for your project.
Your post contradicts itself, you say that AMD recommend Forward+ rendering on it's current GCN architecture then show a performance graph showing improvements on a 6970.
A 6970 is not a current card and doesn't use GCN.
Developers for GT already stated that their GTS has the latest rendering techniques. The candidate for "latest rendering techniques" is Forward Plus tiling with PBR.
Deferred rendering is last gen and AMD doesn't recommend it for their GCNs.
Forward plus and its variations were developed to get the benefits of cheap lighting in deferred, but without all of the other problems deferred has. The downside is high overdraw costs or vertex costs, as you might end up doing either a zprepass and doubling your vertex load, or toughing it out with the remaining overdraw costs even after clustered light binning, which can still be more costly if you're running heavy per pixel operations.
Deferred is not really anymore last gen than Forward rendering is as it's been around for a while. You're just taking coin terms and falling for the marketing of how it's been put into context. Granted Forward rendering has it's benefits and arguably better in many regards but you can use tricks with deferred rendering to get many lights for low cost in performance. Deferred and Forward can be used as a hybrid or may depend on the scene.
Because deferred anti aliasing has been improoved a lot, and PBR limits the one material problem, it's still difficult for a developer to choose one over the other. I suspect Sony or polygonal games are mentioning buzzwords in a context as to help hype the game....nothing more cause it doesn't mean a lot to the end user so long as they get solid frames and modern graphics. I believe Forza Horizon 2 uses Forward rendering as well.
But as you can see in this video using UE4 engine, today's deferred look utterly amazing...looks better than GTS to me.
You are actually going against AMD's recommendation for their current GPU architecture i.e. AMD recommends Forward Plus renderer over Deferred renderer.
To minimise overdraw, Forward renderer and Forward Plus renderer must have opaque pass.
AMD's push for Forward Plus renderer is done purposely for their current GPU architecture.
Latest UE4 has forward shading renderer feature.
https://docs.unrealengine.com/latest/INT/Engine/Performance/ForwardRenderer/
Switching from the Deferred Renderer to the Forward Renderer may provide you with an increase in performance for your project.
Your post contradicts itself, you say that AMD recommend Forward+ rendering on it's current GCN architecture then show a performance graph showing improvements on a 6970.
A 6970 is not a current card and doesn't use GCN.
Forward Plus reduces memory bandwidth usage, hence reducing GPU's TFLOPS being bound by memory bandwidth. Basic GPU optimization 101.
http://techreport.com/review/31224/the-curtain-comes-up-on-amd-vega-architecture/3
Vega GPUs has tile cache rendering with polygon binning feature which is ideal for deferred renderer.
More efficient shading with the draw-stream binning rasterizer
AMD is significantly overhauling Vega's pixel-shading approach, as well. The next-generation pixel engine on Vega incorporates what AMD calls a "draw-stream binning rasterizer," or DSBR from here on out. The company describes this rasterizer as an essentially tile-based approach to rendering that lets the GPU more efficiently shade pixels, especially those with extremely complex depth buffers. The fundamental idea of this rasterizer is to perform a fetch for overlapping primitives only once, and to shade those primitives only once. This approach is claimed to both improve performance and save power, and the company says it's especially well-suited to performing deferred rendering.
Both 6970 and current GCN GPUs doesn't have tile cache rendering with polygon binning feature.
AMD's main push for forward plus render is reduce memory bandwidth usage.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/11002/the-amd-vega-gpu-architecture-teaser/3
ROPs & Rasterizers: Binning for the Win(ning)
We’ll suitably round-out our overview of AMD’s Vega teaser with a look at the front and back-ends of the GPU architecture. While AMD has clearly put quite a bit of effort into the shader core, shader engines, and memory, they have not ignored the rasterizers at the front-end or the ROPs at the back-end. In fact this could be one of the most important changes to the architecture from an efficiency standpoint.
Back in August, our pal David Kanter discovered one of the important ingredients of the secret sauce that is NVIDIA’s efficiency optimizations. As it turns out, NVIDIA has been doing tile based rasterization and binning since Maxwell, and that this was likely one of the big reasons Maxwell’s efficiency increased by so much. Though NVIDIA still refuses to comment on the matter, from what we can ascertain, breaking up a scene into tiles has allowed NVIDIA to keep a lot more traffic on-chip, which saves memory bandwidth, but also cuts down on very expensive accesses to VRAM.
For Vega, AMD will be doing something similar. The architecture will add support for what AMD calls the Draw Stream Binning Rasterizer, which true to its name, will give Vega the ability to bin polygons by tile. By doing so, AMD will cut down on the amount of memory accesses by working with smaller tiles that can stay-on chip. This will also allow AMD to do a better job of culling hidden pixels, keeping them from making it to the pixel shaders and consuming resources there.
As we have almost no detail on how AMD or NVIDIA are doing tiling and binning, it’s impossible to say with any degree of certainty just how close their implementations are, so I’ll refrain from any speculation on which might be better. But I’m not going to be too surprised if in the future we find out both implementations are quite similar. The important thing to take away from this right now is that AMD is following a very similar path to where we think NVIDIA captured some of their greatest efficiency gains on Maxwell, and that in turn bodes well for Vega.
Meanwhile, on the ROP side of matters, besides baking in the necessary support for the aforementioned binning technology, AMD is also making one other change to cut down on the amount of data that has to go off-chip to VRAM. AMD has significantly reworked how the ROPs (or as they like to call them, the Render Back-Ends) interact with their L2 cache. Starting with Vega, the ROPs are now clients of the L2 cache rather than the memory controller, allowing them to better and more directly use the relatively spacious L2 cache.
This is especially significant for a specific graphics task, which is rendering to a texture (as opposed to a frame buffer to be immediately displayed). Render to texture is an especially common operation for deferred shading, and while deferred shading itself isn’t new, its usage is increasing. With this change to Vega, the ROPs can now send a scene rendered to a texture to the L2 cache, which can in turn be fetched by the texture units for reuse in the next stage of the rendering process. Any potential performance improvements from this change are going to be especially game-specific since not every game uses deferred shading, but it’s one of those corner cases that is important for AMD to address in order to ensure more consistent performance.
PS: NVIDIA Maxwell/Pascal already has tile cache rendering with polygon binning feature. Note why majority of Unreal Engine 4 deferred render based games runs better on Maxwell/Pascal GPUs at the given TFLOPS number.
NVIDIA Maxwell/Pascal tile cache render is smashing AMD on effective memory bandwidth front!!!!!
Again, AMD's main push for forward plus render is reduce memory bandwidth usage.
Both current GCN and 6970 has different CU design i.e. VLIW4 vs SIMD, but memory interaction model are very similar.
Your "post contradicts itself" claim lacks memory model awareness with deferred rendering.
-----------------------------------
http://techreport.com/review/31224/the-curtain-comes-up-on-amd-vega-architecture/3
To help the DSBR do its thing, AMD is fundamentally altering the availability of Vega's L2 cache to the pixel engine in its shader clusters. In past AMD architectures, memory accesses for textures and pixels were non-coherent operations, requiring lots of data movement for operations like rendering to a texture and then writing that texture out to pixels later in the rendering pipeline. AMD also says this incoherency raised major synchronization and driver-programming challenges.
To cure this headache, Vega's render back-ends now enjoy access to the chip's L2 cache in the same way that earlier stages in the pipeline do. This change allows more data to remain in the chip's L2 cache instead of being flushed out and brought back from main memory when it's needed again, and it's another improvement that can help deferred-rendering techniques.
http://wccftech.com/phil-spencer-xbox-scorpio-teraflops/
Phil Spencer correctly identifies AMD GPU issues with it's high TFLOPS i.e. memory bandwidth.
When you talk to me about Scorpio, the term I use about the architecture isn’t the six teraflops which is obviously what we’ve announced, it’s balance. Really what it is, is you want a platform that is balanced between memory bandwidth, GPU power, you know, your ability to move memory and [an] amount of memory around in many ways is more inhibiting to the performance of your game than absolute teraflops on any one of the individual pieces, and when we designed Scorpio we really thought about this balanced rig that could come together at a price-point. Like, I want Scorpio to be at a console price-point, I’m not trying to go and compete with a high-end rig. And because we’re building one spec, we’re able to look at the balance between all the components and make sure that it’s something we really hit that matters to consumers and gamers.
The lesson from Nvidia Maxwell/Pascal designs are increasing memory bandwidth while increasing TFLOPS.
Notice both Vega and Phil Spencer's statement Scorpio's GPU memory handling targets memory movement issues.
Developers for GT already stated that their GTS has the latest rendering techniques. The candidate for "latest rendering techniques" is Forward Plus tiling with PBR.
Deferred rendering is last gen and AMD doesn't recommend it for their GCNs.
Forward plus and its variations were developed to get the benefits of cheap lighting in deferred, but without all of the other problems deferred has. The downside is high overdraw costs or vertex costs, as you might end up doing either a zprepass and doubling your vertex load, or toughing it out with the remaining overdraw costs even after clustered light binning, which can still be more costly if you're running heavy per pixel operations.
Deferred is not really anymore last gen than Forward rendering is as it's been around for a while. You're just taking coin terms and falling for the marketing of how it's been put into context. Granted Forward rendering has it's benefits and arguably better in many regards but you can use tricks with deferred rendering to get many lights for low cost in performance. Deferred and Forward can be used as a hybrid or may depend on the scene.
Because deferred anti aliasing has been improoved a lot, and PBR limits the one material problem, it's still difficult for a developer to choose one over the other. I suspect Sony or polygonal games are mentioning buzzwords in a context as to help hype the game....nothing more cause it doesn't mean a lot to the end user so long as they get solid frames and modern graphics. I believe Forza Horizon 2 uses Forward rendering as well.
But as you can see in this video using UE4 engine, today's deferred look utterly amazing...looks better than GTS to me.
AMD recommends Forward Plus renderer over Deferred renderer.
AMD's push for Forward Plus renderer is done purposely for their current GPU architecture.
Switching from the Deferred Renderer to the Forward Renderer may provide you with an increase in performance for your project.
Lol, the hell you say? I can't imagine why AMD would offer their personal recommendations can you? It's just as I said before.
LOL, Who are you?
There are several AMD Gaming Evolved titles out that use Forward+ rendering techniques like Dirt Showdown. There is a list on AMD's website.
http://gpuopen.com/gaming-product/forwardplus11-directx-11-sdk-sample/
This sample provides an example implementation of the Forward+ algorithm, which extends traditional forward rendering to support high numbers of dynamic lights while maintaining performance. It utilizes a Direct3D 11 compute shader (DirectCompute 5.0) to divide the screen into tiles and quickly cull lights against those tiles, resulting in per-tile light lists for the forward pixel shader.
http://gpuopen.com/gaming-product/radeon-pro-render/
PBR example.
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1016435/Forward-Rendering-Pipeline-for-Modern
| Session Name | Forward Rendering Pipeline for Modern GPUs |
| Speaker(s) | Takahiro Harada, Jay McKee |
| Company Name(s) | AMD |
| Overview | This talk first presents Forward+, a forward rendering pipeline which allows for scenes with the same number of lights expected from a modern deferred renderer (on the order of thousands). Forward+ retains all the benefits of traditional forward rendering while eliminating all the downsides found with deferred rendering. After talking about the rendering pipeline, performance comparisons to deferred lighting will be shown to clarify the performance advantages. We then talk about another advantage of the pipeline: freedom to use arbitrarily complex materials and lighting models by showing a real-world example of how Forward+ is used in an AMD's Leo demo in which many lights and physically-based materials are used. |
---------------------------------
For Unreal Engine 4 and Forward renderer path.
http://radeon.com/en-us/amd-developers-forward-rendering-unreal-engine/
AMD, Developers Embrace Forward Rendering in Unreal Engine 4 to Improve VR
With the forward rendering path in Unreal Engine 4, developed by the amazingly talented engineers at Epic, developers have more choice in how they render for VR, helping to achieve a stunning-looking game while delivering the high frame rates necessary for a good experience.
Discussed on stage at AMD’s “Capsaicin” webcast and press event at the 2017 Game Developers Conference, the forward rendering path provides a strong alternative to the popular deferred rendering method, allowing developers to hit the demanding frame rates necessary for smooth VR experiences with improved image quality. Forward rendering has been showcased in games such as Epic Games’ Robo Recall, and is planned in upcoming VR titles from awesome developers like First Contact Entertainment, Limitless Studios, and Survios
Technically Speaking: Deferred vs Forward Rendering
Let’s dig in and talk about this a bit. Deferred rendering has a performance cost for each frame, in addition to higher GPU memory and bandwidth requirements compared to forward rendering . While deferred rendering does support some nice features like screen-space reflections, those features are generally too costly to use given VR’s ~90FPS requirement.
Current head mounted display (HMD) resolutions being what they are, VR also really benefits from high-quality edge smoothing. Deferred rendering unfortunately doesn’t mix well with multi-sampled anti-aliasing (MSAA) because there are performance and image quality issues. But MSAA is arguably the best AA technique for VR. Post-process AA methods like FXAA don’t work terribly well with stereo views in VR. If you’ve tried a game that uses it, you know it doesn’t look good.
All told, AMD feels that deferred rendering exacts a toll in terms of time, memory, and image quality in VR, and the payoff just isn’t there.
The alternative here is to adopt a form of forward rendering. Interestingly, it’s not a new technique; in fact it’s how GPU rendering started. It’s lighter weight, simpler, and faster. Also, forward rendering works nicely with MSAA, letting us improve edge quality very efficiently. So we think forward rendering is often a better fit for VR applications.
We’ve worked diligently to test and optimize the forward rendering path in Unreal Engine 4.15 for the best performance on AMD hardware. A number of VR development partners are using Unreal Engine, and we showed the performance benefits during our Capsaicin event at GDC.
What is forward rendering & why's it such a big deal? Check out @Radeon's blog on this unique #VR technique: https://t.co/UipghxTxY6pic.twitter.com/LvYhZ2MMBc
— AMD (@AMD) March 7, 2017
Deus Ex Mankind Divided was modified with Forward rendering which yielded performance increase.
https://developer.oculus.com/blog/introducing-the-oculus-unreal-renderer/
Background As the team began production on Farlands, we took a moment to reflect on what we learned with the demo experiences we showed at Oculus Connect, GDC, CES, and other events. We used Unreal Engine 4 exclusively to create this content, which provided us with an incredible editing environment and a wealth of advanced rendering features.
Unfortunately, the reality of rendering to Rift meant we’d only been able to use a subset of these features. We wanted to examine those we used most often, and see if we could design a stripped-down renderer that would deliver higher performance and greater visual fidelity, all while allowing the team to continue using UE4’s world-class editor and engine. While the Oculus Unreal Renderer is focused on the use cases of Oculus applications, it’s been retrofit into pre-existing projects (including Showdown and Oculus Dreamdeck) without needing major content work. In these cases, it delivered clearer visuals, and freed up enough GPU headroom to enable additional features or increase resolution 15-30%.
...
Our implementation is based on Ola Olsson’s 2012 HPG paper, Clustered Deferred and Forward Shading. Readers familiar with traditional forward rendering may be concerned about the CPU and GPU overhead of dynamic lights when using such a renderer. Luckily, modern approaches to forward lighting do not require additional draw calls: All geometry and lights are rendered in a single pass (with an optional z-prepass). This is made possible by using a compute shader to pre-calculate which lights influence 3D “clusters” of the scene (subdivisions of each eye’s viewing frustum, yielding a frustum-voxel grid). Using this data, each pixel can cheaply determine a list of lights that has high screen-space coherence, and perform a lighting loop that leverages the efficient branching capability of modern GPUs. This provides accurate culling and efficiently handles smaller numbers of dynamic lights, without the overhead of additional draw calls and render passes.
AMD is pushing for forward+ rendering!
AMD GPUs doesn't have TFLOPS advantage as NVIDIA "fat" Pascal GPUs also has very high TFLOPS shader power.
Forza motorsport7 on scorpio in 4k will piss all over gran tourismo.period.
GT Sport will also run in 4K on the Pro with HDR and 10-bit color.
And again, the lighting is unmatched. There may be more impressive tech in other games, but what PD is able to pull off with what's put in front of them is nothing short of amazing. Actual effort and attention to detail really pays off.
@BassMan: That comparison is bullshit. It's from an older build of GT Sport back at E3 2016 last year. Newer build looks better and is more stable.
Forza motorsport7 on scorpio in 4k will piss all over gran tourismo.period.
GT Sport will also run in 4K on the Pro with HDR and 10-bit color.
And again, the lighting is unmatched. There may be more impressive tech in other games, but what PD is able to pull off with what's put in front of them is nothing short of amazing. Actual effort and attention to detail really pays off.
Wow, the lighting is unbeatable.
Developers for GT already stated that their GTS has the latest rendering techniques. The candidate for "latest rendering techniques" is Forward Plus tiling with PBR.
Deferred rendering is last gen and AMD doesn't recommend it for their GCNs.
Forward plus and its variations were developed to get the benefits of cheap lighting in deferred, but without all of the other problems deferred has. The downside is high overdraw costs or vertex costs, as you might end up doing either a zprepass and doubling your vertex load, or toughing it out with the remaining overdraw costs even after clustered light binning, which can still be more costly if you're running heavy per pixel operations.
Deferred is not really anymore last gen than Forward rendering is as it's been around for a while. You're just taking coin terms and falling for the marketing of how it's been put into context. Granted Forward rendering has it's benefits and arguably better in many regards but you can use tricks with deferred rendering to get many lights for low cost in performance. Deferred and Forward can be used as a hybrid or may depend on the scene.
Because deferred anti aliasing has been improoved a lot, and PBR limits the one material problem, it's still difficult for a developer to choose one over the other. I suspect Sony or polygonal games are mentioning buzzwords in a context as to help hype the game....nothing more cause it doesn't mean a lot to the end user so long as they get solid frames and modern graphics. I believe Forza Horizon 2 uses Forward rendering as well.
But as you can see in this video using UE4 engine, today's deferred look utterly amazing...looks better than GTS to me.
AMD recommends Forward Plus renderer over Deferred renderer.
AMD's push for Forward Plus renderer is done purposely for their current GPU architecture.
Switching from the Deferred Renderer to the Forward Renderer may provide you with an increase in performance for your project.
Lol, the hell you say? I can't imagine why AMD would offer their personal recommendations can you? It's just as I said before.
LOL, Who are you?
There are several AMD Gaming Evolved titles out that use Forward+ rendering techniques like Dirt Showdown. There is a list on AMD's website.
http://gpuopen.com/gaming-product/forwardplus11-directx-11-sdk-sample/
This sample provides an example implementation of the Forward+ algorithm, which extends traditional forward rendering to support high numbers of dynamic lights while maintaining performance. It utilizes a Direct3D 11 compute shader (DirectCompute 5.0) to divide the screen into tiles and quickly cull lights against those tiles, resulting in per-tile light lists for the forward pixel shader.
http://gpuopen.com/gaming-product/radeon-pro-render/
PBR example.
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1016435/Forward-Rendering-Pipeline-for-Modern
| Session Name | Forward Rendering Pipeline for Modern GPUs |
| Speaker(s) | Takahiro Harada, Jay McKee |
| Company Name(s) | AMD |
| Overview | This talk first presents Forward+, a forward rendering pipeline which allows for scenes with the same number of lights expected from a modern deferred renderer (on the order of thousands). Forward+ retains all the benefits of traditional forward rendering while eliminating all the downsides found with deferred rendering. After talking about the rendering pipeline, performance comparisons to deferred lighting will be shown to clarify the performance advantages. We then talk about another advantage of the pipeline: freedom to use arbitrarily complex materials and lighting models by showing a real-world example of how Forward+ is used in an AMD's Leo demo in which many lights and physically-based materials are used. |
---------------------------------
For Unreal Engine 4 and Forward renderer path.
http://radeon.com/en-us/amd-developers-forward-rendering-unreal-engine/
AMD, Developers Embrace Forward Rendering in Unreal Engine 4 to Improve VR
With the forward rendering path in Unreal Engine 4, developed by the amazingly talented engineers at Epic, developers have more choice in how they render for VR, helping to achieve a stunning-looking game while delivering the high frame rates necessary for a good experience.
Discussed on stage at AMD’s “Capsaicin” webcast and press event at the 2017 Game Developers Conference, the forward rendering path provides a strong alternative to the popular deferred rendering method, allowing developers to hit the demanding frame rates necessary for smooth VR experiences with improved image quality. Forward rendering has been showcased in games such as Epic Games’ Robo Recall, and is planned in upcoming VR titles from awesome developers like First Contact Entertainment, Limitless Studios, and Survios
Technically Speaking: Deferred vs Forward Rendering
Let’s dig in and talk about this a bit. Deferred rendering has a performance cost for each frame, in addition to higher GPU memory and bandwidth requirements compared to forward rendering . While deferred rendering does support some nice features like screen-space reflections, those features are generally too costly to use given VR’s ~90FPS requirement.
Current head mounted display (HMD) resolutions being what they are, VR also really benefits from high-quality edge smoothing. Deferred rendering unfortunately doesn’t mix well with multi-sampled anti-aliasing (MSAA) because there are performance and image quality issues. But MSAA is arguably the best AA technique for VR. Post-process AA methods like FXAA don’t work terribly well with stereo views in VR. If you’ve tried a game that uses it, you know it doesn’t look good.
All told, AMD feels that deferred rendering exacts a toll in terms of time, memory, and image quality in VR, and the payoff just isn’t there.
The alternative here is to adopt a form of forward rendering. Interestingly, it’s not a new technique; in fact it’s how GPU rendering started. It’s lighter weight, simpler, and faster. Also, forward rendering works nicely with MSAA, letting us improve edge quality very efficiently. So we think forward rendering is often a better fit for VR applications.
We’ve worked diligently to test and optimize the forward rendering path in Unreal Engine 4.15 for the best performance on AMD hardware. A number of VR development partners are using Unreal Engine, and we showed the performance benefits during our Capsaicin event at GDC.
Deus Ex Mankind Divided was modified with Forward rendering which yielded performance increase.
https://developer.oculus.com/blog/introducing-the-oculus-unreal-renderer/
Background As the team began production on Farlands, we took a moment to reflect on what we learned with the demo experiences we showed at Oculus Connect, GDC, CES, and other events. We used Unreal Engine 4 exclusively to create this content, which provided us with an incredible editing environment and a wealth of advanced rendering features.
Unfortunately, the reality of rendering to Rift meant we’d only been able to use a subset of these features. We wanted to examine those we used most often, and see if we could design a stripped-down renderer that would deliver higher performance and greater visual fidelity, all while allowing the team to continue using UE4’s world-class editor and engine. While the Oculus Unreal Renderer is focused on the use cases of Oculus applications, it’s been retrofit into pre-existing projects (including Showdown and Oculus Dreamdeck) without needing major content work. In these cases, it delivered clearer visuals, and freed up enough GPU headroom to enable additional features or increase resolution 15-30%.
...
Our implementation is based on Ola Olsson’s 2012 HPG paper, Clustered Deferred and Forward Shading. Readers familiar with traditional forward rendering may be concerned about the CPU and GPU overhead of dynamic lights when using such a renderer. Luckily, modern approaches to forward lighting do not require additional draw calls: All geometry and lights are rendered in a single pass (with an optional z-prepass). This is made possible by using a compute shader to pre-calculate which lights influence 3D “clusters” of the scene (subdivisions of each eye’s viewing frustum, yielding a frustum-voxel grid). Using this data, each pixel can cheaply determine a list of lights that has high screen-space coherence, and perform a lighting loop that leverages the efficient branching capability of modern GPUs. This provides accurate culling and efficiently handles smaller numbers of dynamic lights, without the overhead of additional draw calls and render passes.
AMD is pushing for forward+ rendering!
AMD GPUs doesn't have TFLOPS advantage as NVIDIA "fat" Pascal GPUs also has very high TFLOPS shader power.
No shit sherlock? What did any of that have to do with the facts that I posted?
AMD recommends Forward Plus renderer over Deferred renderer.
AMD's push for Forward Plus renderer is done purposely for their current GPU architecture.
Switching from the Deferred Renderer to the Forward Renderer may provide you with an increase in performance for your project.
Lol, the hell you say? I can't imagine why AMD would offer their personal recommendations can you? It's just as I said before.
LOL, Who are you?
There are several AMD Gaming Evolved titles out that use Forward+ rendering techniques like Dirt Showdown. There is a list on AMD's website.
http://gpuopen.com/gaming-product/forwardplus11-directx-11-sdk-sample/
This sample provides an example implementation of the Forward+ algorithm, which extends traditional forward rendering to support high numbers of dynamic lights while maintaining performance. It utilizes a Direct3D 11 compute shader (DirectCompute 5.0) to divide the screen into tiles and quickly cull lights against those tiles, resulting in per-tile light lists for the forward pixel shader.
http://gpuopen.com/gaming-product/radeon-pro-render/
PBR example.
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1016435/Forward-Rendering-Pipeline-for-Modern
| Session Name | Forward Rendering Pipeline for Modern GPUs |
| Speaker(s) | Takahiro Harada, Jay McKee |
| Company Name(s) | AMD |
| Overview | This talk first presents Forward+, a forward rendering pipeline which allows for scenes with the same number of lights expected from a modern deferred renderer (on the order of thousands). Forward+ retains all the benefits of traditional forward rendering while eliminating all the downsides found with deferred rendering. After talking about the rendering pipeline, performance comparisons to deferred lighting will be shown to clarify the performance advantages. We then talk about another advantage of the pipeline: freedom to use arbitrarily complex materials and lighting models by showing a real-world example of how Forward+ is used in an AMD's Leo demo in which many lights and physically-based materials are used. |
---------------------------------
For Unreal Engine 4 and Forward renderer path.
http://radeon.com/en-us/amd-developers-forward-rendering-unreal-engine/
AMD, Developers Embrace Forward Rendering in Unreal Engine 4 to Improve VR
With the forward rendering path in Unreal Engine 4, developed by the amazingly talented engineers at Epic, developers have more choice in how they render for VR, helping to achieve a stunning-looking game while delivering the high frame rates necessary for a good experience.
Discussed on stage at AMD’s “Capsaicin” webcast and press event at the 2017 Game Developers Conference, the forward rendering path provides a strong alternative to the popular deferred rendering method, allowing developers to hit the demanding frame rates necessary for smooth VR experiences with improved image quality. Forward rendering has been showcased in games such as Epic Games’ Robo Recall, and is planned in upcoming VR titles from awesome developers like First Contact Entertainment, Limitless Studios, and Survios
Technically Speaking: Deferred vs Forward Rendering
Let’s dig in and talk about this a bit. Deferred rendering has a performance cost for each frame, in addition to higher GPU memory and bandwidth requirements compared to forward rendering . While deferred rendering does support some nice features like screen-space reflections, those features are generally too costly to use given VR’s ~90FPS requirement.
Current head mounted display (HMD) resolutions being what they are, VR also really benefits from high-quality edge smoothing. Deferred rendering unfortunately doesn’t mix well with multi-sampled anti-aliasing (MSAA) because there are performance and image quality issues. But MSAA is arguably the best AA technique for VR. Post-process AA methods like FXAA don’t work terribly well with stereo views in VR. If you’ve tried a game that uses it, you know it doesn’t look good.
All told, AMD feels that deferred rendering exacts a toll in terms of time, memory, and image quality in VR, and the payoff just isn’t there.
The alternative here is to adopt a form of forward rendering. Interestingly, it’s not a new technique; in fact it’s how GPU rendering started. It’s lighter weight, simpler, and faster. Also, forward rendering works nicely with MSAA, letting us improve edge quality very efficiently. So we think forward rendering is often a better fit for VR applications.
We’ve worked diligently to test and optimize the forward rendering path in Unreal Engine 4.15 for the best performance on AMD hardware. A number of VR development partners are using Unreal Engine, and we showed the performance benefits during our Capsaicin event at GDC.
Deus Ex Mankind Divided was modified with Forward rendering which yielded performance increase.
https://developer.oculus.com/blog/introducing-the-oculus-unreal-renderer/
Background As the team began production on Farlands, we took a moment to reflect on what we learned with the demo experiences we showed at Oculus Connect, GDC, CES, and other events. We used Unreal Engine 4 exclusively to create this content, which provided us with an incredible editing environment and a wealth of advanced rendering features.
Unfortunately, the reality of rendering to Rift meant we’d only been able to use a subset of these features. We wanted to examine those we used most often, and see if we could design a stripped-down renderer that would deliver higher performance and greater visual fidelity, all while allowing the team to continue using UE4’s world-class editor and engine. While the Oculus Unreal Renderer is focused on the use cases of Oculus applications, it’s been retrofit into pre-existing projects (including Showdown and Oculus Dreamdeck) without needing major content work. In these cases, it delivered clearer visuals, and freed up enough GPU headroom to enable additional features or increase resolution 15-30%.
...
Our implementation is based on Ola Olsson’s 2012 HPG paper, Clustered Deferred and Forward Shading. Readers familiar with traditional forward rendering may be concerned about the CPU and GPU overhead of dynamic lights when using such a renderer. Luckily, modern approaches to forward lighting do not require additional draw calls: All geometry and lights are rendered in a single pass (with an optional z-prepass). This is made possible by using a compute shader to pre-calculate which lights influence 3D “clusters” of the scene (subdivisions of each eye’s viewing frustum, yielding a frustum-voxel grid). Using this data, each pixel can cheaply determine a list of lights that has high screen-space coherence, and perform a lighting loop that leverages the efficient branching capability of modern GPUs. This provides accurate culling and efficiently handles smaller numbers of dynamic lights, without the overhead of additional draw calls and render passes.
AMD is pushing for forward+ rendering!
AMD GPUs doesn't have TFLOPS advantage as NVIDIA "fat" Pascal GPUs also has very high TFLOPS shader power.
No shit sherlock? What did any of that have to do with the facts that I posted?
You stated "I can't imagine why AMD would offer their personal recommendations can you?" and AMD has offered their recommendations.
Both 1st party PS4's The Order 1886 and XBO's Forza Horzion 2 has Forward+ rendering for their lighting with PBR solution.
@pimphand_gamer said:
Your post contradicts itself, you say that AMD recommend Forward+ rendering on it's current GCN architecture then show a performance graph showing improvements on a 6970.
A 6970 is not a current card and doesn't use GCN.
Both current GCN and 6970 doesn't have Vega's tile cache rasterization improvements when it comes to optimal deferred rendering processing.
GTsport looks ridiculously like real life, that lighting is out of this world.
plus sense of speed and framerate.
Lighting is one thing, but tracks are very detailed also and that's why GTsport looks so real. For example just notice how great trees looks in gtsport, I can even see sun reflecion on individual leaves (in forza 6 trees looks really flat compared to that). Also building are very detailed and you can even see windows and lights behind them.
Lighting is one thing, but tracks are very detailed also and that's why GTsport looks so real. For example just notice how great trees looks in gtsport, I can even see sun reflecion on individual leaves (in forza 6 trees looks really flat compared to that). Also building are very detailed and you can even see windows and lights behind them.
Brands Hatch never looked so good.
Now we've gone beyond the point of stupidity. How is seeing the sun reflect (which is bullshit) on individual leaves when you're going down the straight at over 300km per hour or while racing in general of any importance?
C'mon people if you're sitting there admiring the graphics while playing a racing game, then you should be off with the faires on a more tame genre like walking simulators.
Sega's Virtua Racing looked better...
Poor cows. :P
Sega's Virtua Racing looked better...
Poor cows. :P
It seems $ony fans are in desperate mode when the only genre their console was worth a damn is gonna be beaten soon by the Scorpio like in every other genre. FM7 is gonna look stunning and will make GTS look like a glorified Mario Kart. RIP $ony.
Sega's Virtua Racing looked better...
Poor cows. :P
It seems $ony fans are in desperate mode when the only genre their console was worth a damn is gonna be beaten soon by the Scorpio like in every other genre. FM7 is gonna look stunning and will make GTS look like a glorified Mario Kart. RIP $ony.
GTS...
Mighty Scorpio FM7.....
@dakur:
You and your little GF look so cute playing GTS...
lololol :P
Sega's Virtua Racing looked better...
Poor cows. :P
It seems $ony fans are in desperate mode when the only genre their console was worth a damn is gonna be beaten soon by the Scorpio like in every other genre. FM7 is gonna look stunning and will make GTS look like a glorified Mario Kart. RIP $ony.
GTS...
Mighty Scorpio FM7.....
LULZ!!! dude...GTS got REKT before it even got released, lol. GT better check itself before it rekz itself.
Now we've gone beyond the point of stupidity. How is seeing the sun reflect (which is bullshit) on individual leaves when you're going down the straight at over 300km per hour or while racing in general of any importance?
C'mon people if you're sitting there admiring the graphics while playing a racing game, then you should be off with the faires on a more tame genre like walking simulators.
I can easily see that difference even in YT gameplayes, trees are no longer so fake and flat because of that light reflecions on leaves. It's even more noticeable when you compare still screenshot from GT6 and GTSport. Trees in GT6 looks flat, while in GTsports they look like real at first glance
Games can look really good but it's hard to make a game blur reality. Gtsport does it. My mind perceives this image as reality but it's infact a game.
The ultra realistic lighting on the foilage, guardrail and grass along with the shadows, i'd really like see their lighting engine.
Comparison to reality.
I bet if the GTsport watermark wasn't there, 100% of this thread would have thought that image was real.
^lol ah no. Funny thing is, that is replay mode again. Most of us will be in gameplay mode when we play this.
Indeed and did you notice not even cardboard cutouts of Spectators in GTS. So much fail. lol :P
Lol you idiot. The pic with the spectators is a real world image. You just rekt yourself by thinking a real world image in from GTS and thinking those real people are cardboards. Good job lem, epic self-ownage!
^lol ah no. Funny thing is, that is replay mode again. Most of us will be in gameplay mode when we play this.
Indeed and did you notice not even cardboard cutouts of Spectators in GTS. So much fail. lol :P
Lol you idiot. The pic with the spectators is a real world image. You just rekt yourself by thinking a real world image in from GTS and thinking those real people are cardboards. Good job lem, epic self-ownage!
ZOMG, you marooooon, reading comprehension isn't your strong suit is it? Lol
This rekage is one for the SW record books. hahahaha :P
Log in to comment