GPU Compute Shader Priority Queue for Digital Ink Latency

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current computer graphics systems experience latency issues when rendering digital ink, particularly with high-speed pen inputs, leading to a gap between the pen tip and the rendered ink, which reduces responsiveness and feedback, especially with detailed features like pencil effects.

Innovation Solution

The system employs a priority queue and compute shader on a graphics processing unit (GPU) to quickly render digital pencil ink by fetching updated input before scanning the frame, determining input stamps, and calculating their cumulative effects on pixels, allowing for reduced latency and improved responsiveness.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Loss of time

If digital ink is queued with other screen updates in the traditional graphics pipeline, then rendering can be performed systematically, but latency increases causing a gap between pen tip and rendered ink

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovelatencyVSAvoidgraphics processing complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the ink rendering process from the traditional graphics pipeline by creating a separate ink queue and dedicated render thread. This allows ink updates to be processed independently and in parallel with other graphics operations, eliminating the bottleneck where ink had to wait in the general graphics queue and reducing latency without significantly increasing overall system complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements preliminary action by pre-processing ink data into an optimized format and pre-allocating rendering resources before the actual rendering occurs. The ink queue pre-queues rendering commands and the system pre-positions the render thread to be ready for immediate execution, reducing the time between ink input and display.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Speed

If screen refresh rate is maintained at 30-90 Hz, then power consumption and processing load are controlled, but high-speed pen input at 240 Hz cannot be rendered responsively

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepen input speedVSAvoidrendering throughput
Core Design Contradiction:
SpeedVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies dynamics by implementing a dynamic rendering system that adapts to different input rates. The separate ink queue and render thread can dynamically process ink at its native high rate (240 Hz) while the main graphics pipeline maintains the standard refresh rate (30-90 Hz). This dynamic separation allows the system to handle high-speed pen input without forcing the entire graphics subsystem to run at higher rates, thus maintaining productivity balance.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

3Manufacturing precision

If detailed pencil effects are rendered, then visual quality improves, but feedback responsiveness decreases due to increased processing time

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveink rendering qualityVSAvoidrendering delay
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent uses preliminary action by pre-calculating and pre-processing pencil effect parameters such as texture, pressure, and tilt data into an optimized format before rendering. This pre-processing allows the detailed effects to be applied during rendering without requiring extensive real-time computation, thus maintaining high visual quality while minimizing rendering delay and preserving responsiveness.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

4Loss of time

If customized processing hardware is added to process digital ink, then rendering responsiveness improves, but device cost increases significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprocessing latencyVSAvoiddevice manufacturing cost
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces the need for customized hardware with a software-based solution using a separate render thread and optimized rendering pipeline. This software substitution achieves hardware-like responsiveness through efficient multi-threading and direct GPU access, eliminating the need for expensive specialized processing hardware while maintaining improved latency performance.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Data Source

PatentEP3714358B1Pencil ink render using high priority queues
Publication Date: 2025.01.01 MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING LLC
  • EP3714358B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3714358B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3714358B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

Examples described herein generally relate to rendering digital pencil ink on a display of a computer device. The computer device may render a frame via a graphics queue of a graphics processing unit. The computer device may fetch digital pencil ink input from an input buffer at a designated time before scanning at least a portion of the frame including the digital pencil ink. The computer device may determine a set of input stamps based on the digital pencil ink input, each input stamp being associated with stamp properties. A compute shader thread for each block within a portion of the frame may determine whether each of the input stamps intersects the block. At least one compute shader thread for each pixel of a respective block may determine a cumulative effect of each of the input stamps intersecting the respective block on the pixel based on the stamp properties.