Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Gsdx future discussion
#11
oh I thought he ment going fowards only using SSE2
Reply

Sponsored links

#12
(03-08-2016, 02:05 AM)tsunami2311 Wrote: oh I thought he ment going fowards only using SSE2

That would be silly Tongue
[Image: ref_sig_anim.gif]
Like our Facebook Page and visit our Facebook Group!
Reply
#13
(03-08-2016, 02:09 AM)refraction Wrote: That would be silly Tongue

hey silly thinks happen! just look at "silly" zoombug nvidia  caused Closedeyes
Reply
#14
(03-07-2016, 07:50 PM)K.F Wrote: Is this as bad as it sounds? Anisotropic filtering is not a minor loss, even if it was replaced with another type of filtering.

Anisotropic filtering won't be replaced with another type of filtering. Currently Aniso is done by the hardware unit. In theory it can be done in SW too, but it is very complex and it will likely be too slow anyway. Accurate emulation isn't compatible with aniso. IMHO, aniso effect is really light vs the emulation fix that could be implemented with SW filtering.

(03-07-2016, 08:31 PM)prafull Wrote: I am in for most of the proposed changes. I think the current status of Gsdx is already decent enough and a legacy plugin based on current status should be good enough for everyone concerned.

 I am already looking ahead to gregory fixing top left corner bug and top half of the screen bug no matter how bad a performance hit it creates because IMHO these are the two major issues remaining with Gsdx. I have already stopped using Anisotropic filtering and custom resolutions long time ago so those are non issues for me.

I bet you're in Smile A screenshot for you     

I completely forgot the top half bug. Not sure I could fix it, however it will be potentially easier to fix when the top-left corner is done.

(03-08-2016, 12:17 AM)refraction Wrote: well looking at this thread http://forums.pcsx2.net/Thread-Removal-o...-from-GSdx

Removal of custom resolution was pretty much accepted as long as we could fix the screenshot resolutions which come out wrong.

Anisotropic filtering, not a huge loss, i think BRZ is more desired than that to be honest. If it means better compatibility and easier to implement other features and better compatibility when upscaling, I think it's a good idea.

Isn't BRZ a post-processing 2D shader?

I hope to improve the edge on depth effect. You know the rainbow stuff due to interpolation. If it work well, it will be less interpolation (for post-processing) so a cripser image.

(03-08-2016, 01:48 AM)Blyss Sarania Wrote: Yes he meant for the legacy plugin in order to manage how many things we have to build.

Though really the legacy plugin only needs built one time, so I don't think it's a bad idea to include all of the extensions.

I dunno. Potentially I would like to keep it in the buildbot and default build. Honestly it would be strange to use an AVX CPU/APU with a DX9/DX10 GPU (and we're going to drop XP support too anyway Tongue2 ).

Based on Steam stat, DX10 GPU are ~15% of the market and DX9 ~1%. It means that 1% of the user would rely only on the legacy plugin. And ~10% (minus intel) will need to switch to the legacy plugin if they want to use the openGL renderer.

For me the equation is DX12 + Vulkan + 16nm + low quality of laptop (+ HBM in 2017 maybe) == upgrade GPU.
Reply
#15
(03-08-2016, 11:05 AM)gregory Wrote: Isn't BRZ a post-processing 2D shader?

Sort of, but the postprocessing of the textures rather than the final image, so it can be used successfully on 3d. Potentially will be less intensive due to textures being cached.

For example on PPSSPP using Monster Hunter (bad example as it looks crap, but shows it can be done)

Without BRZ: http://forums.ppsspp.org/attachment.php?aid=4415

With BRZ: http://forums.ppsspp.org/attachment.php?aid=4416
[Image: ref_sig_anim.gif]
Like our Facebook Page and visit our Facebook Group!
Reply
#16
(03-08-2016, 11:05 AM)gregory Wrote: Based on Steam stat, DX10 GPU are ~15% of the market and DX9 ~1%. It means that 1% of the user would rely only on the legacy plugin. And ~10% (minus intel) will need to switch to the legacy plugin if they want to use the openGL renderer.
But 1% of the steam market can be 10+% of the PCSX2 users, as there's quite the userbase size gap. PCSX2 users might just like playing their oldschool games on their current hardware, and could have less interest all the DX12/Vulkan magic and hardware upgrades than the average gamer.
Reply
#17
How about we put up hardware survey on the main site
[Image: gmYzFII.png]
[Image: dvedn3-5.png]
Reply
#18
(03-08-2016, 06:25 PM)FlatOut Wrote: But 1% of the steam market can be 10+% of the PCSX2 users, as there's quite the userbase size gap. PCSX2 users might just like playing their oldschool games on their current hardware, and could have less interest all the DX12/Vulkan magic and hardware upgrades than the average gamer.
I know that steam stats are not perfect. But let's be honest, there are likely close enough of the reality. Anyway I want to emphasize that legacy GSdx is still available for old hardware. OpenGL is better than DX10 because it uses more recent feature. If you remove them, OpenGL is useless.

(03-08-2016, 06:31 PM)Nobbs66 Wrote: How about we put up hardware survey on the main site
More details please.

Quote: Sort of, but the postprocessing of the textures rather than the final image, so it can be used successfully on 3d. Potentially will be less intensive due to textures being cached.
Unfortunately, you can bet on a tons of upscaling glitches, if it is uses more pixel for the interpolation.
Reply
#19
Well other emulators manage it so we should be able to Tongue2
[Image: ref_sig_anim.gif]
Like our Facebook Page and visit our Facebook Group!
Reply
#20
BRZ would be soooo epic. And yeah other 3d emus can do it e.g. ePSXe, PPSSPP, some N64 emus etc. When I brought it up before, gregory had said the fact that PS2 textures are slightly too small prevented it. I'm not sure it would prevent it though, since I know roughly how the filter works. It would likely have to be slightly modified in order to not take invalid pixels for source. But other than that, we should be able to use most of the xBRZ source code found on Github https://sourceforge.net/projects/xbrz/

However anyway this thread is not about that. The main question I have about the legacy plugin situation is: how does it affect iGPU user? Modern iGPU I mean. Is driver support good enough that they could continue using the mainline plugin, or would they be relegated to the legacy one?
[Image: vwah44]
Gaming: Intel i7 3770k @ 4.2Ghz | R9 290 | 16GB RAM | 480GB(240GB+240GB RAID0) SSD | 3 TB HDD | 1 TB HDD | 500GB HDD
Server: AMD FX 6300 @ 4.4Ghz | GTX 670 | 16GB RAM | 240GB SSD | 320GB HDD
PCSX2 General Troubleshooting FAQ
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)