What is defined as "opaque rendering"? Is full resolution depth buffer and id buffer (of opaque geometry) enough to be "native"? Is the "MSAA trick" rendering described in my Siggraph 2015 rendering "native" "opaque rendering"? (see page 49: http://advances.realtimerendering.c...siggraph2015_combined_final_footer_220dpi.pdf). How about a deferred renderer that outputs g-buffer at "native" resolution, but groups pixels (and subsamples) by similarity to reduce shading and texturing cost (replicating/interpolating result to all samples/pixels of group)? (http://research.nvidia.com/publication/aggregate-g-buffer-anti-aliasing, http://www.students.science.uu.nl/~3220516/advancedgraphics/papers/inferred_lighting.pdf). Native resolution of opaque pass isn't a simple concept anymore. Generating an ordered grid of NxM image samples is going be a outdated practice in the future. Nowadays nobody uses uncompressed video (1:1 bitrate for all pixels) either.
Mixed Information on Consoles or How I learned to loathe PR *spin off*
- Thread starter rockaman
- Start date
-
- Tags
- snowflakes
Well for the sake of it I went back to MS site. Started at Xbox One S and click through to Xbox One X.
To me, it makes sense when they say True 4K, they've been redoing their marketing it would appear. I mean I get people are upset and offended by earlier interviews, but that is not what or how they market True 4K on their site.
To me they use the term as a method of debunking the idea that the console is upscaling from 1080p to 4K.
I dunno everyone is going to have to decide for themselves.
http://www.xbox.com/en-CA/xbox-one-s
If you ignore the shouldering to PlayStation in a few early interviews from last year the goal of true 4K really is to prove it can do it.
In fact as someone following 1X since the get go this was the common post I saw on Reddit and forums. That Scorpio didn't have enough power to do 4K. A great deal of hobbyist analysts everywhere, here as well, claimed there was no way it could do 4K at high or above settings.
So I'll leave it at that. The marketing message needed to address some things, and some poor interviews threw shade on 4Pro, which they should have avoided but decided to do anyway.
After they proved it could do native 4K gaming there was a quick pivot on forums about using CBR and dynamic that wasn't native and therefore not true 4K. No one knew what true 4K meant though. And thus here we are as a thread.
There's nothing wrong with CBR, temporal, and dynamic resolution, these are just different ways to get more out of the system with minor trade offs. And for the same reason we stopped using SSAA and switched out to FXAA and MSAA, these high efficiency techniques should be and will be used going forward.
I'm unsure if it makes sense to slay MS over the term true 4K, except if they imply that true 4K means native. No where did they ever commit to all games being 4K native.
To me, it makes sense when they say True 4K, they've been redoing their marketing it would appear. I mean I get people are upset and offended by earlier interviews, but that is not what or how they market True 4K on their site.
To me they use the term as a method of debunking the idea that the console is upscaling from 1080p to 4K.
I dunno everyone is going to have to decide for themselves.
http://www.xbox.com/en-CA/xbox-one-s
If you ignore the shouldering to PlayStation in a few early interviews from last year the goal of true 4K really is to prove it can do it.
In fact as someone following 1X since the get go this was the common post I saw on Reddit and forums. That Scorpio didn't have enough power to do 4K. A great deal of hobbyist analysts everywhere, here as well, claimed there was no way it could do 4K at high or above settings.
So I'll leave it at that. The marketing message needed to address some things, and some poor interviews threw shade on 4Pro, which they should have avoided but decided to do anyway.
After they proved it could do native 4K gaming there was a quick pivot on forums about using CBR and dynamic that wasn't native and therefore not true 4K. No one knew what true 4K meant though. And thus here we are as a thread.
There's nothing wrong with CBR, temporal, and dynamic resolution, these are just different ways to get more out of the system with minor trade offs. And for the same reason we stopped using SSAA and switched out to FXAA and MSAA, these high efficiency techniques should be and will be used going forward.
I'm unsure if it makes sense to slay MS over the term true 4K, except if they imply that true 4K means native. No where did they ever commit to all games being 4K native.
Forza Motorsport uses 1/2 frame rate effects IIRC. Forza horizon will use less resolution on shadows etc.
Agreed with your points.
To get the most out of your gear, the more everything can be scaled in real time or scaled in general the better. No wasted power.
Exactly. They marketed Xbox One S as HDR + 4K console. It has 4K Blu-ray drive and 4K UI, but upscales games from 1080p -> 4K with hardware scaler. "True 4K" seems to mean that games aren't simply upscaled from 1080p, like Xbox One S does.
I don't think this "True 4K" has anything to do with checkerboarding or other highly technical rendering technique terminology. MS marketing department just needed a way to separate Xbox One S and Xbox One X. Both products capable of 4K output. But only the X model gives "True 4K" gaming instead of upsampled 4K.
Actually your right and wrong.
Your right about:
It is a way to differentiated between the 1S and 1X, as I have been saying a while now, 1S upscales to 4k, so why isn't that 4k also then. Because it's upscaling, regardless of resolution it's scaring up from. (This is what got them in trouble on the nets comparing it to 4pro)
Your wrong about:
It not having anything to do with checkerboarding:
They define true 4k to be 2160 framebuffer, which includes checkerboarding, native, and dynamic.
Defining 4k as only being native was and is a short sighted view of how the industry is moving.
For them it's about the framebuffer resolution and in that regards I never had a problem with their pivot to true 4k, in fact I remember saying they needed to come up with terms.
The biggest problem is how long it took for them to change from using the word native to true 4k, also the fact that true and native was used interchangeably for a long time in the past prior to all this 4k talk. So maybe a better word than true could have been chosen, although I have know idea what.
The only thing you could say they committed to, it can do, which is XO games at native 4k, same settings, same fps.
Based on what we know so far. 900p games need more work, but they never said no games would need effort to achieve it.
People will now complain when a game is not native 4k and is using CBR at 2160p although it will look all the better for it, than just using the XO settings.
4KG would confuse Americans.
Except for those dealing frequently with drugs.
At the end of the day, trying to make a sub-2160p and upscaled framebuffer (even if not all the time) to pass as a "true 4K" is disingenuous for consumers as for a non educated person 'true' would be stronger (better) than 'native'.
And yep they certainly had to invent a new category of 4K machine, a 'super', 'true' 4K machine because they already maliciously tried to sell the XB1s as the only 4K console...So they indeed confused the consumers in the first place with that:
"Xbox One S - The ultimate games and 4K entertainment system" (amazon.com)
"Xbox One S 500GB Minecraft Favorites Console Bundle with 4K Ultra HD Blu-ray™" (bestbuy.com)
So now we could have: "Xbox One X - The ultimate games and (only) true 4K entertainment system"
And yep they certainly had to invent a new category of 4K machine, a 'super', 'true' 4K machine because they already maliciously tried to sell the XB1s as the only 4K console...So they indeed confused the consumers in the first place with that:
"Xbox One S - The ultimate games and 4K entertainment system" (amazon.com)
"Xbox One S 500GB Minecraft Favorites Console Bundle with 4K Ultra HD Blu-ray™" (bestbuy.com)
So now we could have: "Xbox One X - The ultimate games and (only) true 4K entertainment system"
maybe I've not kept track of all the known 1X resolutions, so which ones are sub 2160 framebuffer? As far as I'm aware all(?) have been 2160.
be interesting to know which are upscaling.
This is exactly what I was trying to say. Product descriptions in every online store tells consumers that Xbox One S is a 4K capable console. I recently checked some Finnish stores. It's exactly the same stuff. All talk about 4K and HDR. They had to invent a way to tell the consumers that Xbox One X is even better at 4K than their one year old console which was already capable of 4K and HDR.
Xbox One S has UHD drive and 4K video streaming. There was clear market for UHD (4K + HDR) player. Microsoft had to aggressively market it to 4K TV owners. Now they have a problem that their newest device is also capable of 4K gaming. Previously their marketing told constumers that upscaling from 1080p to 4K was good enough. Now they have to figure new ways to market this new device. "True 4K" is just that. I don't believe it has anything to do with low level technical stuff like checkerboarding. Microsoft needs to clearly separate their two currently selling products. Sony doesn't have this problem, since PS4 Pro is their only 4K capable console.
So if the game is never found to drop bellow 2160p but is still implementing a dynamic res?
What resolution would you call games with dynamic res.
The lowest it is found to go, regardless of the percentage of the time it happens?
Dynamic resolution has always been a tricky one to define and isn't new to the 1X or it's definition of true 4k.
Is that what Sony's dynamic 4k means? 2160p dynamic resolution? That seems a lot more confusing than the MS defined true 4k.
I have no issues with them both coming up with terms to define something. Although more useful when the term is actually defined.
MS is in a tighter corner because the 1S has all the check boxes for 4k, including being able to upscale games with hdr to 2160p.
Just saying 1X is more powerful isn't useful on the box or marketing, it needs check boxes and simple labels to differentiate it.
In the next generation of consoles everything will be native 4k and checkerboarding will be forgotten. It's just a method that was created for Sony to hide the pro's ultra weak hardware, at least for a "4k machine" . Not only that but many people will change their tune about it when Sony releases a true 4k machine. We are already seeing people drooling over the very few native 4k titles on the pro, even though these are remasters of old games, like wipeout omega. I expect native resolutions to become the hot topic again when Sony unveils the ps5, until then "devs shouldn't bother with native 4k and should use checkerboarding"
You do realise Sebbbi is a developer, right?
If you had played Wipeout and any of the 4k CBR games, you'd know that there is really no visible difference between them.
I think you'll be not so pleasantly surprised when a few games will come out with CBR on the 1X - or next gen consoles!
https://timothylottes.github.io/20170516.html
I like this blog entry he only talk about the Flops and not about bandwith but having better pixel quality than PS4(next gen) at 4k is very demanding....
I like this blog entry he only talk about the Flops and not about bandwith but having better pixel quality than PS4(next gen) at 4k is very demanding....
Last edited:
1) Checkerboarding was first implemented by Ubisoft on Tom Clancy's Rainbox Six Siege.
2) It's an evolution of other reconstruction techniques like MLAA and Killzone Shadowfall's upscaling
3) It's one approach to reconstruction - there will be other, better solutions invented (just like MLAA evolving to FXAA etc) which is what Sebbbi is saying. It is applicable to all games on all platforms and compromises a small amount of IQ for a lot of performance, same as other reconstruction techniques.
There was also a paper using HL2 about decoupling shading from fragments/pixels, my memory is fuzzy about it though...
http://people.csail.mit.edu/jrk/decoupledsampling/ was the one I remembered the images from, not necessarily the one with the content I remember ^^
http://people.csail.mit.edu/jrk/decoupledsampling/ was the one I remembered the images from, not necessarily the one with the content I remember ^^
just started watching the video, and what bothers me is that he says what "ms said about true 4k" and says but some things aren't native.
I'm pretty sure they must know by now what ms definition of true 4k is, so they should either say they don't like the term and only care about native, or use both terms as they should be used in relation to 1X. As it only compounds and propagates confusion.
or maybe they really don't know?
I'm pretty sure they must know by now what ms definition of true 4k is, so they should either say they don't like the term and only care about native, or use both terms as they should be used in relation to 1X. As it only compounds and propagates confusion.
or maybe they really don't know?