Sign in to follow this  
Quat

DX11 Copying MSAA depth buffer dx11

Recommended Posts

I am using DX11.

I am using the light prepass system, where I first render the view space normals and depth to a render target. This pass also lays down the scene depth, so there is no overdraw in later passes.

Now for MSAA, I was going to use non-msaa render targets and depth buffers for generating the g-buffer and screen space light map, and just use MSAA for the final pass. However, with this I need two depth buffers--one multisampled for the back buffer, and one not multisampled for the g-buffer. So my question is if there is a way to avoid drawing the scene depth twice.

I don't think I can use MSAA g-buffer because that would average depths at the edges.

Is it possible to have two render targets where one is multisampled and the other is not? I am thinking of having something like (g-buffer and non-multisampled depth buffer) and (null render target with multisampled depth buffer).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not using MSAA for the G-Buffer pass will give you really bad artifacts. You will end up having lighting information for a completely different triangle applied to subsamples for edge triangles during your second geometry pass. Or if no triangle was rendered at all to a pixel during the G-Buffer pass and a subsample samples lighting from that texel, it will get black because there will be no lighting there at all.\

If you really want to avoid artifacts, you have to do it like this:

1. Render G-Buffer with MSAA
2. Render lighting with MSAA, making sure you individually light subsamples for triangle edges
3. Render your second geometry pass, making sure to sample the right subsample from the lighting buffer for edge triangles

It sucks pretty badly from an implementation and performance point of view, and it's one of the big reasons that I really don't like light prepass.

Anyway to answer your question...all render targets and depth stencil buffers need to have the same MSAA mode when you're rendering. You can't have one of them with MSAA, and one of them without. You can render a depth buffer with MSAA and manually resolve it using a pixel shader if you want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK, I read the ShaderX7 article on Deferred Shading and MSAA and I see what you mean.

I would like to confirm some things:

1. If I create a MSAA back buffer and depth buffer, I must enable D3D11_RASTERIZER_DESC::MultisampleEnable so that the system will automatically resolve the back buffer before presenting. I need to test this again, but I seem to recall getting antialiasing even if I didn't enable this state, as long as I created a MSAA back buffer and depth buffer.

2. MSAA textures are never resolved automatically (you must call ResolveSubresource). To sample a MSAA texture at the sample level, you must use Load(texCoord, sampleIndex).

3. For a pixel shader to run at sample frequency, you must have input SV_SAMPLEINDEX.

4. Use SV_Coverage to detect edges, so that we only run the pixel shader per sample about the edge.


Also, what do you like instead of light prepass? Just full deferred renderer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1. The setting in the rasterizer state doesn't have anything to do with resolving the render target. It actually controls how MSAA is handled during rasterization. The documentation that explains it is [url="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb205126%28v=vs.85%29.aspx"]here[/url] and [url="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc627092%28v=vs.85%29.aspx"]here[/url], although it can be a bit confusing if you're not familiar with how MSAA works. Basically what happens when you disable that is that you have multiple subsamples in your render target, but the rendering will occur as if it were a non-multisampled render target.

2. Yes, these are both correct. You must also declare your texture as a Texture2DMS to be able to load subsamples (you will get a warning from the debug layer if you don't, or if you try to use a Texture2DMS with a non-multisampled texture).

3. Yes, you must declare it [i]and[/i] use it in your shader program. Alternatively, you can also use the "sample" modifier on one of your pixel shader inputs to get the shader to run per-sample. This modifier causes the input to he interpolated to each MSAA sample point, rather than the pixel center.

4. SV_Coverage is a great way to detect edge pixels. You can also use it as an output, to control which subsamples get written by the pixel shader.

I prefer a full deferred renderer. IMO light prepass is only really worth it on platforms where multiple render targets aren't available, or are too expensive.

[quote name='Quat' timestamp='1313513225' post='4849917']
OK, I read the ShaderX7 article on Deferred Shading and MSAA and I see what you mean.

I would like to confirm some things:

1. If I create a MSAA back buffer and depth buffer, I must enable D3D11_RASTERIZER_DESC::MultisampleEnable so that the system will automatically resolve the back buffer before presenting. I need to test this again, but I seem to recall getting antialiasing even if I didn't enable this state, as long as I created a MSAA back buffer and depth buffer.

2. MSAA textures are never resolved automatically (you must call ResolveSubresource). To sample a MSAA texture at the sample level, you must use Load(texCoord, sampleIndex).

3. For a pixel shader to run at sample frequency, you must have input SV_SAMPLEINDEX.

4. Use SV_Coverage to detect edges, so that we only run the pixel shader per sample about the edge.


Also, what do you like instead of light prepass? Just full deferred renderer?
[/quote]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Announcements

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      628385
    • Total Posts
      2982391
  • Similar Content

    • By KarimIO
      Hey guys,
      I'm trying to work on adding transparent objects to my deferred-rendered scene. The only issue is the z-buffer. As far as I know, the standard way to handle this is copying the buffer. In OpenGL, I can just blit it. What's the alternative for DirectX? And are there any alternatives to copying the buffer?
      Thanks in advance!
    • By joeblack
      Hi,
      im reading about specular aliasing because of mip maps, as far as i understood it, you need to compute fetched normal lenght and detect now its changed from unit length. I’m currently using BC5 normal maps, so i reconstruct z in shader and therefore my normals are normalized. Can i still somehow use antialiasing or its not needed? Thanks.
    • By 51mon
      I want to change the sampling behaviour to SampleLevel(coord, ddx(coord.y).xx, ddy(coord.y).xx). I was just wondering if it's possible without explicit shader code, e.g. with some flags or so?
    • By GalacticCrew
      Hello,
      I want to improve the performance of my game (engine) and some of your helped me to make a GPU Profiler. After creating the GPU Profiler, I started to measure the time my GPU needs per frame. I refined my GPU time measurements to find my bottleneck.
      Searching the bottleneck
      Rendering a small scene in an Idle state takes around 15.38 ms per frame. 13.54 ms (88.04%) are spent while rendering the scene, 1.57 ms (10.22%) are spent during the SwapChain.Present call (no VSync!) and the rest is spent on other tasks like rendering the UI. I further investigated the scene rendering, since it takes über 88% of my GPU frame rendering time.
      When rendering my scene, most of the time (80.97%) is spent rendering my models. The rest is spent to render the background/skybox, updating animation data, updating pixel shader constant buffer, etc. It wasn't really suprising that most of the time is spent for my models, so I further refined my measurements to find the actual bottleneck.
      In my example scene, I have five animated NPCs. When rendering these NPCs, most actions are almost for free. Setting the proper shaders in the input layout (0.11%), updating vertex shader constant buffers (0.32%), setting textures (0.24%) and setting vertex and index buffers (0.28%). However, the rest of the GPU time (99.05% !!) is spent in two function calls: DrawIndexed and DrawIndexedInstance.
      I searched this forum and the web for other articles and threads about these functions, but I haven't found a lot of useful information. I use SharpDX and .NET Framework 4.5 to develop my game (engine). The developer of SharpDX said, that "The method DrawIndexed in SharpDX is a direct call to DirectX" (Source). DirectX 11 is widely used and SharpDX is "only" a wrapper for DirectX functions, I assume the problem is in my code.
      How I render my scene
      When rendering my scene, I render one model after another. Each model has one or more parts and one or more positions. For example, a human model has parts like head, hands, legs, torso, etc. and may be placed in different locations (on the couch, on a street, ...). For static elements like furniture, houses, etc. I use instancing, because the positions never change at run-time. Dynamic models like humans and monster don't use instancing, because positions change over time.
      When rendering a model, I use this work-flow:
      Set vertex and pixel shaders, if they need to be updated (e.g. PBR shaders, simple shader, depth info shaders, ...) Set animation data as constant buffer in the vertex shader, if the model is animated Set generic vertex shader constant buffer (world matrix, etc.) Render all parts of the model. For each part: Set diffuse, normal, specular and emissive texture shader views Set vertex buffer Set index buffer Call DrawIndexedInstanced for instanced models and DrawIndexed models What's the problem
      After my GPU profiling, I know that over 99% of the rendering time for a single model is spent in the DrawIndexedInstanced and DrawIndexed function calls. But why do they take so long? Do I have to try to optimize my vertex or pixel shaders? I do not use other types of shaders at the moment. "Le Comte du Merde-fou" suggested in this post to merge regions of vertices to larger vertex buffers to reduce the number of Draw calls. While this makes sense to me, it does not explain why rendering my five (!) animated models takes that much GPU time. To make sure I don't analyse something I wrong, I made sure to not use the D3D11_CREATE_DEVICE_DEBUG flag and to run as Release version in Visual Studio as suggested by Hodgman in this forum thread.
      My engine does its job. Multi-texturing, animation, soft shadowing, instancing, etc. are all implemented, but I need to reduce the GPU load for performance reasons. Each frame takes less than 3ms CPU time by the way. So the problem is on the GPU side, I believe.
    • By noodleBowl
      I was wondering if someone could explain this to me
      I'm working on using the windows WIC apis to load in textures for DirectX 11. I see that sometimes the WIC Pixel Formats do not directly match a DXGI Format that is used in DirectX. I see that in cases like this the original WIC Pixel Format is converted into a WIC Pixel Format that does directly match a DXGI Format. And doing this conversion is easy, but I do not understand the reason behind 2 of the WIC Pixel Formats that are converted based on Microsoft's guide
      I was wondering if someone could tell me why Microsoft's guide on this topic says that GUID_WICPixelFormat40bppCMYKAlpha should be converted into GUID_WICPixelFormat64bppRGBA and why GUID_WICPixelFormat80bppCMYKAlpha should be converted into GUID_WICPixelFormat64bppRGBA
      In one case I would think that: 
      GUID_WICPixelFormat40bppCMYKAlpha would convert to GUID_WICPixelFormat32bppRGBA and that GUID_WICPixelFormat80bppCMYKAlpha would convert to GUID_WICPixelFormat64bppRGBA, because the black channel (k) values would get readded / "swallowed" into into the CMY channels
      In the second case I would think that:
      GUID_WICPixelFormat40bppCMYKAlpha would convert to GUID_WICPixelFormat64bppRGBA and that GUID_WICPixelFormat80bppCMYKAlpha would convert to GUID_WICPixelFormat128bppRGBA, because the black channel (k) bits would get redistributed amongst the remaining 4 channels (CYMA) and those "new bits" added to those channels would fit in the GUID_WICPixelFormat64bppRGBA and GUID_WICPixelFormat128bppRGBA formats. But also seeing as there is no GUID_WICPixelFormat128bppRGBA format this case is kind of null and void
      I basically do not understand why Microsoft says GUID_WICPixelFormat40bppCMYKAlpha and GUID_WICPixelFormat80bppCMYKAlpha should convert to GUID_WICPixelFormat64bppRGBA in the end
       
  • Popular Now