Monday, August 26th 2019

3DMark Introduces Variable Rate Shading Benchmark

3DMark today announced they've introduced a new benchmarking feature. Specifically developed to test Variable Rate Shading (VRS) performance and image quality differences, the new feature allows users to actually visualize the performance and image quality differences associated with more aggressive (or less aggressive) VRS settings. The algorithm is a smart one - it aims to reduce the number of pixel shader operations on surfaces where detail isn't as important (such as frame edges, fast-moving objects, darkened areas, etc) so as to improve performance and shave some precious milliseconds in the deployment of each frame.

To run this test, you will need Windows 10 version 1903 or later and a DirectX 12 GPU that supports Tier 1 VRS and the "AdditionalShadingRatesSupported" capability, such as an NVIDIA Turing-based GPU or an Intel Ice Lake CPU. The VRS feature test is available now as a free update for 3DMark Advanced Edition, or from now until September 2, 3DMark is 75% off when you buy it from Steam or the UL benchmarks website.
Add your own comment

24 Comments on 3DMark Introduces Variable Rate Shading Benchmark

#1
Fluffmeister
Nice that Ice Lake supports this, and it's obviously no surprise the much-maligned Turing once again is packing a forward looking feature.

Is miss the days Nvidia was always playing catch up.
Posted on Reply
#2
Vya Domus
Turns out VRS doesn't really need dedicated hardware for it and can be implemented purely in software, the new CoD on consoles will have this, of all things. So meh, this isn't all that amazing after all.
Posted on Reply
#3
Fluffmeister
And now we will be able to compare performance figures, I can definitely see the benefits for the likes of VR, but then Nv have excelled there too.
Posted on Reply
#4
ArchStupid
Fluffmeister, post: 4104898, member: 101373"
Is miss the days Nvidia was always playing catch up.
Why?
Posted on Reply
#5
Fluffmeister
ArchStupid, post: 4104922, member: 61174"
Why?
You know, future proof hardware, just you wait until it's untapped potential is unleashed. GCN were compute monsters, Nvidia hardware was "gimped". Blah blah blah.

I'm new to all this, apparently it's all easily done in software anyway.
Posted on Reply
#7
_UV_
So another image quality cheating to get top ranks in gaming benchmarks, good job, now we will see more "AMD is bad because of ..."
Posted on Reply
#8
Apocalypsee
IMO VRS ON and OFF visually looks like it just dropped anisotropic filtering and use bilinear
Posted on Reply
#9
birdie
The tree right in the middle of the screen on the VRS ON screen looks badly blurred. I guess it's not the best example of this technique.

Edit: actually it's not just one tree - there are many trees with this issue.

Edit 2: also there's something wrong with the leaves on the ground. They look pixellated.
Posted on Reply
#10
Chomiq
VRS is great for peripheral vision, throwing it in the middle of the screen can only work with shallow DOF to mask it.
Posted on Reply
#11
Vayra86
Nice to see the side by sides, gives a good impression. Nice little test.

Whether or not this is good... of course it is. Rendering will always be full of trickery and it already is. As long as your perception of the image is still good, no harm done. That being said, I do see where VRS cuts the corners, unfortunately. Needs careful application.
Posted on Reply
#12
ShurikN
Not gonna lie, the VRS ON image looks like shit.
Posted on Reply
#13
Chomiq
Just to have a glimpse at actual implementation of VRS:
Posted on Reply
#14
renz496
_UV_, post: 4104980, member: 174000"
So another image quality cheating to get top ranks in gaming benchmarks, good job, now we will see more "AMD is bad because of ..."
and what did you think AMD Rapid Packed Math did? and back then we saw people said we need more tech like this where it can improve performance.
Posted on Reply
#15
xkm1948
This will remain a bad feature/gimmick until our lord and savior underdog AMD implements support. Then it will be another great addition to the FineWine
Posted on Reply
#16
Mistral
Would it kill them to make the test look good?
Posted on Reply
#17
ZoneDymo
Well it reduces strain on the system...by reducing the quality of the image, very noticeably so, so I dont really see any value in this tbh.
Posted on Reply
#19
Prince Valiant
ZoneDymo, post: 4105425, member: 66089"
Well it reduces strain on the system...by reducing the quality of the image, very noticeably so, so I dont really see any value in this tbh.
Reminds me of FXAA and DLSS.

Fluffmeister, post: 4105432, member: 101373"
Yeah seems interesting, free performance boost that unless you really like to pause and zoom in whilst gaming, you won't notice a thing frankly.


It's impossible to tell anything from a lossy video unless it's so bad that the compression doesn't mask it.
Posted on Reply
#20
Fluffmeister
Funny, that is exactly what people are doing in this thread.

Mind blown.
Posted on Reply
#22
ratirt
Actually, I think with VRS off the image looks better (sharper). Especially in the farther scene.
Posted on Reply
#23
ZoneDymo
ratirt, post: 4105755, member: 165024"
Actually, I think with VRS off the image looks better (sharper). Especially in the farther scene.
yeah, I think you should read the post again :P
VRS is there to increase performance at HOPEFULLY no image quality cost.

But as we can, I think, all see, the image quality loss is very noticeable.
Posted on Reply
#24
ratirt
ZoneDymo, post: 4106042, member: 66089"
yeah, I think you should read the post again :p
VRS is there to increase performance at HOPEFULLY no image quality cost.

But as we can, I think, all see, the image quality loss is very noticeable.
That was the point of my post. even though it shouldn't decrease the quality in fact it does and it is very noticeable.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment