Downscaling your resolution to simulate AA...anyone doing th

Post » Tue May 29, 2012 11:14 am

I've never played with downscaling resolution to 'simulate AA' for a little bit of cheap anti-jaggy. I've read that this has been one tool in the toolbox that works for some people.

(for anyone who hasn't heard of this, it is rendering the game in a higher resolution in your gpu than native but displaying at native on monitor, with the side effect of crisper images to reduce the appearance of edge jaggies).

I'm thinking of playing with it for a bit, but I'm not quite sure how to proceed, and was wondering if anyone here is doing this with successful results using an nVidia gpu. Also, if you've tried this, is your performance cost less than applying the appropriate AA with the same visual result?

Any tips/advice/warnings would be appreciated! - thx :)


My relevant specs:

Samsung SyncMaster BX2235 LED 22" (1920x1080 native)
GTX 590, driver 290.53
Skyrim 1.4.20
nVidia Inspector v 1.9.5.9
User avatar
Meghan Terry
 
Posts: 3414
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 11:53 am

Post » Tue May 29, 2012 9:24 am

You may have seen this already and discounted it, and I'm not sure if it would help if you haven't, but Nvidia have a set of guides for most of their cards as to how to optimise them -
http://

uk(dot)geforce(dot)com/optimise/optimal-game-settings/elder-scrolls-v-skyrim-geforce-gtx-590-ops

This has worked for me with my 560ti, game looks fantastic. Swap (dot) for . obviously :smile:
User avatar
Joanne Crump
 
Posts: 3457
Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2006 9:44 am

Post » Tue May 29, 2012 2:01 am

What you're describing is supersampling, which is much more computationally demanding than multisampling, despite only a very minor difference in quality.
User avatar
Rob
 
Posts: 3448
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:26 am

Post » Tue May 29, 2012 8:00 am

Aye, that's super sampling indeed and you're probably quite aware of how you can set that up with the Nvidia Inspector tool. Do you run that ENB flavour you'd done the video for? if I remember correctly its one of the ones that includes SMAA (post-processed anti-aliasing done through a directx injector). I've tried that method out and I gotta say at 4x it looks great and the overhead both memory and GPU wise is minimal, especially compared to what 4xSSAA would be.

This is the generic 'works on all directx apps' version of the SMAA injector if you're curious any ways:
http://www.geeks3d.com/20111202/injectsmaa-add-smaa-support-in-your-dx9-dx10-and-dx11-games/

I've been throwing this guy into all kinds of older or less capable games (like GTA4 :swear: ) and getting great results. I tried it along with tweaking the LOD bias AF setting to -3 with 'From Dust' yesterday for instance, holy crap does it look awesome.
User avatar
Tasha Clifford
 
Posts: 3295
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 7:08 am

Post » Tue May 29, 2012 12:08 pm

I've used SSAA in Inspector (usually 2x). What I'm talking about is setting gpu or monitor scaling in my "adjust desktop size and position" in my nvidia tray to a higher res. Is that scaling the exact same as SSAA in Inspector? If so, I need not bother with playing with resolution. But I didn't realize they were one in the same...that is surprising and confusing to me...hmmm

I've started applying SMAA as an aside...its a decent low-cost alternative to supersampling AA, IMHO.
User avatar
Multi Multi
 
Posts: 3382
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 4:07 pm

Post » Tue May 29, 2012 12:58 pm

Yah super sampling is the technique of drawing the frame 2x or 4x etc as big and then downscaling back to the real resolution desired.
User avatar
Alyna
 
Posts: 3412
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 4:54 am

Post » Tue May 29, 2012 5:42 am

Yah super sampling is the technique of drawing the frame 2x or 4x etc as big and then downscaling back to the real resolution desired.

ahhh ok well I didn't know I was playing around with the same thing...this helps thx
User avatar
Cameron Wood
 
Posts: 3384
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Post » Tue May 29, 2012 4:08 am

This method is generally referred to as downsampled supersampling AA because you natively render the image at a higher internal resolution and then scale it down to a lower target resolution. The end result is that the higher number of pixel data samples used to create a single pixel are averaged together to create a more accurate pixel color that has less contrast/aliasing with adjacent pixels. For example instead of black or white, you will get a shade of grey, allowing a less aliased transition between the two colors.

The key benefit is that supersampling AA will apply AA to the entire scene (sometimes referred to as full-scene AA), unlike MSAA which only covers geometry and TSAA that only covers transparencies/alpha textures. Supersampling will apply AA to everything in the scene including textures and shaders. Beyond the lack of jaggies, supersampling AA in motion has a calming effect on the scene as it reduces the 'pixel crawling' phenomena you may see when high constrast pixels switch back and forth while moving.

The key downsides are that any supersampling is extremely expensive performance-wise, since you are generally rendering the entire image at a higher resolution or # of samples. The performance impact is not quite linear by number of samples but it is heavy; generally you will see a much bigger requirement in terms of GPU horsepower, VRAM usage, and required bandwidth. Another key downside is that because AA applies to the entire scene including textures and ultimately uses an averaging/blending algorithm to combine multiple pixels into one, you can get a blurring effect on the entire image compared to traditional MSAA+TSAA methods. There are some tricks to reduce the impact of blurring, like reducing texture LOD bias, but this can be problematic for some games.

I have not looked into the downsampling methods out there for some time, only for GTA4 using Boris' ENBseries mod for that game because no other form of AA was available. But that's a good game to look into if you want to see the readily apparent results. The IQ is much improved but the performance impact is extremely steep and the game was virtually unplayable on some cards that didn't have enough VRAM as a result of the tremendous increase in VRAM required. FFXI is another game where players used a registry mod to have the game render at a higher resolution and then scale itself down to native target resolution.

Personally, I don't think this method is worth it for a game like Skyrim that already looks good (with mods) and provides a wide array of AA modes already. The biggest concern to me is the amount of VRAM Skyrim uses with just texture mods, that's going to skyrocket once you enable supersampling. If you do want to experiment with higher than available AA modes, you should look into MSAA+TSAA+FXAA first, then if you want to notch it up from there, you can use the unofficial SGSSAA modes available via Nvidia Inspector.

SGSSAA (Sparse Grid) is another form of supersampling AA that builds on the fundamentals of MSAA and TSAA, but instead of rendering at a higher resolution, it uses sub-pixel samples to sample each pixel numerous times using a sparse grid array and then composites those pixels into a single pixel. Basically, it applies the benefits of transparency supersampled AA to the entire scene instead of just to the alpha textures in the scene. It also carries a heavy performane hit but I do believe its a bit lighter overall then downsampling because it doesn't require each intermediate buffer and the output framebuffers to be rendered at a higher internal resolution.

I'm personally a big fan of FXAA because while it does blur the scene, the performance hit and increase in VRAM are negligible and it does an amazing job of applying FSAA. So in summary, I'd play with em all to see the differences and what you like, then settle on something with MSAA + TSAA + FXAA to get a similar FSAA effect without the huge performance hit.
User avatar
Mr.Broom30
 
Posts: 3433
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 2:05 pm

Post » Tue May 29, 2012 8:05 am

thanks Chizow - that was very very informative! :)
User avatar
Sista Sila
 
Posts: 3381
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 12:25 pm

Post » Tue May 29, 2012 12:41 am

Yes but ultimately, FXAA is worse quality than MSAA so the performance hit is less anyway. You should try matching your driver setting to the Skyrim AA setting and enhancing it as it works like AF x16 giving you better performance and quality. I can run 8xAA and the game is very smooth still with these settings applied. I prefer the fidelity 8XAA gives and reduces texture shimmering a lot and performance is acceptable. Note that Skyrim doesn't seem to like some AA methods being forced on over what it can do, i.e 16xAA or CSAA.

Supersample will get rid of the jagged edges of the transparent textures on tree and such, it will give you the best image quality as well. In the end, if you can afford MSAA or SSAA then use it as it's superior quality to FXAA or SMAA and these are generally best for game that use a lot of post processing or deferred lighting, rendering.
User avatar
clelia vega
 
Posts: 3433
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 6:04 pm

Post » Tue May 29, 2012 4:48 am

Thanks for opinions all!


For the morbidly curious here are some benchmarks and accompanying pics (linked)...note that SMAA is deliberate:

Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg

http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/3119/noaaatall.jpg
2636, 43227, 51, 64, 60.980
http://img38.imageshack.us/img38/2695/smaaonly.jpg
2587, 43259, 49, 65, 59.803
http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/1126/2xaaingame2xmsaa2xsgssa.jpg
2291, 42947, 44, 65, 53.345
http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/3024/8xcsaa8xsgssaa.jpg
1793, 43586, 30, 54, 41.137

Conditions:
- 30 second path/woods run by river
- 85 fov
- AFx16
- STEP suite of mods (extensive)
- SES-ENB shader (full SSAO)
- 1920x1080 res
- skyrim v 1.4.21.04 beta
- vsync ON; fps limiter=64
- pc specs in sig
User avatar
Laura Mclean
 
Posts: 3471
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 12:15 pm


Return to V - Skyrim