HDRP 10 SSGI

Hi,

Will it be possible to use SSGI without RTGI?

I'm asking about that because 'what's new' article for HDRP 10 says that "This version of HDRP introduces screen-space global illumination (SSGI) as a fallback for ray-traced global illumination (RTGI)."

Thanks.

 

Good to know! Thanks for replying.

 

Will it update light probes in the near future (with and without RTX)?

 

Just to clarify this further, how Unity setups these raytracing effects is that you setup the volume components first for screenspace version of the effect, like SSAO, SSGI, SSR etc and then enable raytracing checkbox from the component if you want to use raytracing version of the thing (which on it's own makes it go past screenspace for the source data).

How this then works is that if you run the build/project on computer that doesn't support raytracing, HDRP will automatically fallback to the screenspace variant itself and in such case it would be the same as if user simply didn't check the raytracing part of the component in the first place. This is what they mean by fallback.

 

Any idea on the eta before we can try this out?

 

If you mean SSGI then just try it on recent 2020.2 beta or 2021.1 alpha. Both have now HDRP 10.1 which has this.

 

Honestly though, it is not worth your time atm. The quality is really crappy...

I have a bad feeling that the devs feel it is good enough. Regardless, stay away from it for the time being.

 

I mean the method itself (like SSR) is kinda crappy. (although SSR is once again, an area where Unity is extra craptastic)

Or is it crappy even if you consider it's SSGI? How does it compare to Unreal's Screen Space GI?

 

I know very well the limitations of SSGI, and SS effects in general. But this SSGI implementation is very very primitive and to be honest, garbage. If it were sold on Asset store for $10, people will still be pissed.
Don't get me wrong, I am happy that the devs are working on it and that the first iterations are out. But, as you well know, it is in "Unity Preview" stage. enough said.

The RTX GI is pretty crap but this SSGI is like another level...it just is...XD XD XD

 

@jjejj87 A lot of words here how bad it is, but zero actual examples where it fails or examples how it's notably worse than others SSGI implementations. We already know it can't do miracles because it only uses screen space data and it's not meant to be full GI solution.

I just find this type of bashing frankly harsh and pointless as it provides no actual information. If you have something concrete to point out like how others managed to make SSGI better, that would actually be nice to know, otherwise it's just noise and opinions without any proof.

 

Don't know why you feel this way but I did provide enough information.

• it is not worth your time atm. The quality is really crappy...
• I have a bad feeling that the devs feel it is good enough. Regardless, stay away from it for the time being.
• this SSGI implementation is very very primitive,
• I am happy that the devs are working on it and that the first iterations are out
• it is in "Unity Preview" stage

I pretty much put my opinion out in the open...I don't understand why you find it pointless? and since when did we have to post proof when saying something like this about a feature? Mostly we do it when something needs to be proved and discussed critically...so I am a little confused
Afterall, I just said "Well it kind of sucks at the moment."

Although, now that the topic of SSGI is here, I might as well write up something. But as much as I enjoy sharing my thoughts on the forum, it may be a bit tad early for the implementation itself - hence the "stay away" at the moment.

I mean, clearly you are interested in SSGI and think positive about the implementation, and I, clearly don't.

 

It sounds like rz is really asking: do you not like it because you don't like SSGI in general, or you don't like this implementation of SSGI -- in which case, are there implementations that you have liked, and what is the delta?

Your point is definitely valid -- you feel its unusable in production, and it sounds like you feel like it will continue to be unusable unless something changes. So the question is what that something is, and is there a way to provide feedback to course correct it towards being something you feel is usable.

 

I kinda asked that too, and his reply was it's bad even considering it's Screen Space GI.

@jjejj87 if you still have a project with SSGI in it handy, a screenshot would be nice. (I would try it too, but I currently have no machine that can run HDRP that isn't broken...)

 

Yep, but the further question then is ... why is it so bad? Would love a screenshot too to better understand! I had been hoping this would turn out "okay".

 

I'm guessing it's similar to their SSR, which made absolutely no attempt to hide the artifacts inherent to SSR, and also had very poor and grainy blur.

I used to describe it as "wait?! what are those artifacts? is my GPU dying? Ah, false alarm, I just had HDRP's SSR on". Which came after a long line of SSR effects that Unity wrote, none of which were any good.

So I can picture how SSGI would also be a baseline implementation so they can check the box of having the feature with not attempt to make it look good, at all.

But yeah, a screenshot would be nice.

 

Ok I'll reiterate:
- don't let people on the internet randomly tell you what is good or bad for your particular project
- don't just believe claims that tell some implementation is particularly crappy if the person making such claims is unable to give any proper reason why it is so
- we all have different quality standards and we may be able to counter some of the artifacts differently so unless some feat is just simply broken for all, one can't for example tell the thing that didn't work for them wouldn't work for you

TL;DR: better try yourself if you want to know if it works for your project/use case

 

Agreed, and I would, but as I said I have no access to a not broken HDRP capable computer right now.

In the meantime I'm just making conversation.

 

The SSGI looks like a poor AO. There is no 'illumination' in the non-ray tracing version so I do not get it either...
But then maybe it requires something in the scene I am missing?

 

Come on, I keep coming back to this thread hoping to finally see an screenshot, geez.

 

I did give it a go on new HDRP template on 10.1:


Afaik SSGI isn't meant to be even used alone for example on fully dynamically lit scene. I know at least Unreal SSGI docs state the following:

 

As additional note, I don't see SSGI illuminating areas by bounce lighting in that example scene either but lighting itself does fall nicer and gets rid of the flat look on it.

I DO see some light bouncing happening if I place different color objects next to each other in cornel box fashion but it's a fairly subtle effect.

 

I think it is probably a subtle effect - where as in ray tracing / lightmapping you are used to GI lighting up a scene with bounced light in a great way. SSGI != GI ?

(I wanted a real-time light boost for non-lightmapped/procedural geometry)

 

Would it also help in situation where baked indirect wouldn't help at all, like if you place a bright red dynamic sphere in the middle of the room, would some red bounce on the walls?

 

If SSGI is a fallback of RTX GI, does this mean it would still require the build to run with DX12 even when it's not using any raytracing because it's a fallback? Because DX12 in Unity is still very bad in performance.

If not, can be script something like: "If not supporting raytracing, use DX11 instead."
I would like to implement this as a quality setting in my game's settings menu.

 

I got a decent setup running here and was very excited to use the Dx12 RTGI and it looks great with much less hassle setting up than baked lighting. At the same time even though it's in preview I get using my Nvidia Rtx 3070:
~400fps without RTGI
~170fps with it Enabled meaning it cost 230fps to enable it...yikes!
~70 fps when zooming on the wooden walls in the standard HDRP demo.

Right now because the fps fluctuates wildly by the hundreds when using it I simply can't use it for anything serious unlike the screen space effects which is why I also would like SSGI.
I tried the "performance mode" of the GI and it's not even worth mentioning unless you like huge undenoisable decals everywhere.

If I was Unity I would be pushing to perfect the SSGI before the RTGI because I think most of us users need a more serious performance to quality solution.

Maybe if the fps was more consistent it could be usable too but at the end of the day I have to target a complete game effects and all at 200fps and nothing lower because most dedicated gamers still run the 1080 and 2070 series cards which are on average 2-3 times less capable than my 30 series card meaning on 170fps scenes they'd be lucky to hit 60fps on that HDRP test sample scene except they won't because in a serious game with physics, enemies, particles and a much larger landscape and then there's RTAO and Reflections so it's just not going to happen so I'm going SSGI....I have also heard the PS5 does not use DX12 so that's kind of a HUGE bummer. I think for now I am going back to my Windows 7 machine and to Dx11.

Speaking of does anyone have some benchmarks on the SSGI on and off raw fps count as RZ_Olento didn't post fps I'd love to know.

 

Can someone plz send a screenshot of only SSGI set to ultra with no baked lighting and compare it with baked lighting for this new template?! Plz thanks in advanced

 

DX12 is complicated for many developers, and not just unity, with the arrival of RayTracing at Vulkan, perhaps it is the alternative that unity needs to keep things more stable on the RTX side.

Also, we still don't know anything about the possible real-time GI implementation that is in production since the end of enlighten.

 

There older real time solution is the RTXGI but it's Dx12 Windows 10 only.
The newest one is the Screen Space GI that was released a week ago in HDRP 10.2 and works on all platforms.
I haven't heard of anything else being developed otherwise.

I have heard good things about the path tracer as well as it replaces all the other RTX features but I haven't use it.

 

I tried out SSGI but I think it does not work I had no changes in my scene!!!

 

been trying to get ssgi working but no matter what, it's just not budging

 

I don't see any difference but i can receive light from emissions

 

I’m curious if there’s any plan to allow the influence ssgi has to be an exposed parameter? It would be nice to be able to use it in specific camera scenes and not others but not have the switch on and off noticeable

 

Oh dang I didn’t realise that controls ssgi also? I thought it was just albedo maps from objects