Latest source code of Dynamic Foveated Rendering

Hi @Alex.liu @PimaxQuorra

Can we get access to the latest source code of Dynamic Foveated Rendering used with Eye Tracking?
I assume this is done with the proprietary Nvidia VRWorks API and would like the explore the possibility of implementing this in a way that works for all GPUs with hardware support, or at least for also all AMD GPUs with hardware support.

Thanks

8 Likes

the eytetracking software is done by 7invensun, you won’t be able to get the source code, but its based on Nvidia VRS for which you can download the SDK, but again you won’t get the source code for that either

to get DFR working on AMD you would need AMD to implement their version of VRS (which their current cards do not support at all), I mean thats basically what you are suggesting, that you are going to achieve something AMD can’t, and get VRS working on current AMD cards

Correct, current hardware doesn’t support it. In a few months new cards will be released, which do support VRS.
Software has to be prepared months or sometimes years in advance. When the PS5 will get release, it will be released with working games too.
AMD can probably help with the implementation, if they do support it in a similar way as Nvidia.

I was under the impression that 7invesun reported eye locations, etc. to PiTool (GPU agnostic) and Pitool would then use that information for VRS.

1 Like

If the DFR code is in piservice then you would be asking for the sourcecode for piservice. Pimax said they were going to make the source code for pitool open source which we all assumed would include piservice, but so far they’ve only made the source code for pitool available, which is just a settings front end that doesn’t actually control anything and with very little documentation that would enable you to do anything useful because piservice is still just a black box without even any of the hooks documented. I wouldn’t hold my breath on the publishing it any time soon.

3 Likes

That would be my understanding too. For what you want to do, you would need to have an access to Pimax compositor and implement the particular AMD code for it - basically what someone would expect from Pimax.

On the other hand, I would assume that the eye tracking should be accessible from an application as well and that there is some kind of SDK available for that, so the devs could use it directly in the app.

1 Like

VRS has become a standard DX12 feature for more than a year now. Are we sure the VRS implementation in PiTool directly use Nvidia SDK instead?
It would indeed mean that Pimax team would have to develop an AMD implementation too.
But maybe using the DX12 implementation doesn’t let them hook up at the driver level, I don’t know.

Anyway, I see no reason for Pimax not to make it compatible with VRS-able GPU from nvidia in the future. The more hardware support, the more potential customers.

1 Like

As far as I know, the DX12 implementation requires the game to actually run on DX12 and it to be implemented in the game directly.

From past experience with Pimax and from recent comments of Pimax representatives, I think it’s very unlikely that they are interested in implementing it for anything other than Nvidia GPUs. I only see this happening, if the community does it themselves. For this, Pimax needs to open source their code (which they promised they will, a year ago), but it doesn’t look like it happened yet.

Indeed, I forgot about that.

as I see it, it’s not much that Pimax was relucant to implement AMD features, it’s just that AMD hasn’t care for VR since … ever. I hardly see any feature worth implementing from the red team up till now (as far as I know, no tethered/desktop VR headset use fovated rendering with AMD cards so far either).
If any new and popular hardware comes from other manufacturer, and have hardware/software support for VRS-like tech, I see it as a good opportunity for Pimax to broaden their audience.

It’s true that the open-source support announced during previous Pimax Days has yet to bear fruit. Personnally I was more interested in what the community could do with the distorsion profile, but it’s true that I wouldn’t be against more control over the size/shape/density of each shading area in FFR/DFR.

This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.