[DELETED]

[DELETED]

 

Receipts?

 

You know.

If Unreal was able to run raytracing. In software mode. Meaning using CPU without acceleration. At 1440p and 30 fps.

They would bankrupt NVidia and earn insane amount of money.

Because nobody, currently, can raytrace this fast using software mode.

 

Its not raycasting, they have 3 strategies that are applied for different sized objects

 

I completely agree. Unity is very smart for offering its developers less graphics options like software raytracing. Their also pretty smart about refusing to change their pricing structure to compete with UE5. Most Unity developers won't switch over anyways, so they make more money.

 

Citation needed.

 

[DELETED]

 

Where's your evidence of the claim in the first sentence of your original post?

 

That isn't what I requiring a citation on.

 

GPU compute shaders are a hardware level optimization.

This is kinda the point - hardware exposes interface for running an arbitrary code on it. That arbitrary code can be raytracing. If you want some sort of "raytracing chip", then that would be Fixed Function Pipeline with tardware T&L all over again. There's a reason why Fixed Function arrived, and ther'es a reason why it has been (largely) displaced by shaders.

 

[DELETED]

 

Which doesn't make it a good idea. Remember Ageia PPU. And see where they are now. Another good one is ASIC miners during crypto boom.

Generically programmable device can last longer, and if someone somehow managed to discover algorithmic optimization, it will be able to implement it. Whil special chip will be going into trash can in which scenario.

 

I had the Ageia PPU I think the first advanced warfighter game was the only game that I got to play before it was incorporated into nvidia.

Though it was pretty cool, shooting that scud launcher truck and see all the bits that came of it, I think more wheels than was actually attached too it rolled away

 

[DELETED]

 

Also, nope.

"We are targeting" does not mean "we've achieved it".
"We're using raytracing" does not mean "our entire scene is rendered with raytrace tech used in Quake 2 RTX".
"Ray-tracing is not to far off from doing full dynamic lighting" means "currently we are not using raytracing for full dynamic lighting".

Our hardware optimized rasterization went all the way from very specialized pipeline (DirectX 7..8 times, before shaders), to general purpose highly parallel processing unit, which can operate on arbitrary data and write into arbitrary data. (NV VXGI, for example, voxelized scene by rendering it).

So it makes sense to use that instead of trying to recreate T&L with specialized chip. Because specialized chip can do only one thing, while general purpose one can do any of them, and in time hardware will get faster.
For exampl, this is 12 years old demo demonstrating voxel rendering on GPU.

Spoiler

At least that's how I see it.

 

[DELETED]

 

Lightmaps are static lighting.

Speaking of which. Dynamic realgim raytraced lighting was achievable, on CPU - in 2003, in glorious 640x480, I believe..
http://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=9461

However, this is a non-polygonal CSG model with phong lights, and not triangle soup.

Spoiler

 

[DELETED]

 

That's not fully dynamic lighting.

Full dynamic lights mean you can move any light anywhere, at any moment, alter its color and radius and the world will react accordingly.
Unity's dynamic GI is incapable of that.

 

[DELETED]

 

Almost certainly doesn't. They're likely using it with traditional rasterization tech here and there to create a reflection or two and even that is a maybe.

 

[DELETED]

 

I think it would be best to look for approaches that do not require denoising. Insistence on trying to make a neural network hallucinate plausible result doesn't seem like the right idea to me.

Denoising is a hack, and not the kind of hack where I'd say "wow, that's cool".

 

You're making a lot of claims you have repeatedly failed to back up with actual evidence.

 

[DELETED]

 

[DELETED]

 

It doesn't because that's not graphics programming, an entirely different discipline. You have not provided any information that shows that Epic's solution is functionally inferior to current GPU solutions, nor have you even provided actual evidence that the Xbox Series X/PS5 AMD platform can perform raytracing at 60fps/4k.

 

That's not what I said.

Lumen is not necessarily raytracing. Actually using raytracing for GI is another hack that's not exaclty elegant.

Talking about neural networks, I keep rememebring a phrase I saw somewhere. It was something along the lines of "You can hammer neural networks into giving you a result, but you won't necessarily know how they work".

In the long term the purpose of any nvidia solution that relies on their unique chip is to produce vendor lock-in. The need for specialized hardware is not necessarily there.

Lastly, like Murgilod correctly said, your credentials in AI, does not give your statement weight in graphics. For example, over course of this little chat there was confusion on your side regarding difference between fully realtime lighting, "realtime" global illumination, lightmaps, also questions regarding difference between raytracing and rasterization. Lastly there wasn't any sources regarding number of frames per second produced on each platform.

 

[DELETED]

 

Your attempts to show that you're somehow qualified to speak on these things while also failing to provide any actual evidence to back up your claims made in this thread, claims that are often entirely incorrect as neginfinity pointed out, come across as nothing more than masturbatory. You are trying to flex, but its been ineffectual since you've shied away as soon as anyone has asked you to lift anything.

 

[DELETED]

 

Still waiting for one that shows ray tracing with 4k and 60 fps on a console (or on a PC for that matter).

 

[DELETED]

 

The link you provided was a company saying they were targeting it, but that's all the link says. There was no other information and there was no evidence to support those claims in there either because it was just two tweets. The same applies to the marketing piece that is the Xbox page. On top of that, we've seen multiple games this generation that offer a quality mode and a performance mode, meaning some of them offer 4k and some offer 60fps, but not at the same time.

You're trying to deflect and say I'm baiting you, but you have spent this entire thread using inaccurate information. Why aren't you making a game?

 

[DELETED]

 

Those games aren't made by Microsoft. I did check the link and most of those games are actually being made by small developers. Not only that, but a lot of them are being made in UE4. Check links.

 

[DELETED]

 

We don't even know that they're going to be able to hit those targets when Epic has already shown a working demo at 1440/30fps. On top of that, that's with an early build of the engine.

The fact that you're going out of your way to ignore that, just like you've gone out of your way to ignore the parts where you've been outright wrong in this thread, just like you're ignoring how Epic's solution even works.

Check link: https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/...eal-engine-5-playstation-5-tech-demo-analysis

 

[DELETED]

 

You have yet to provide any actual concrete evidence of this.

 

I'm seeing words like "superior" and "inferior" thrown around concerning different technologies but no mention of the real determining factor when it comes to superiority. NVIDIA has showcased many promising technologies over the years but many of them were "inferior" in my eyes simply because they never saw release.

 

Dude, there are people on the forums which started coding long before that. In assembly. And it is a surface shader and not a photon tracer written from scratch.

Use arguments. Credentials can be subjective and often don't amount to much unless you'r Ken Perlin, Bjarne Stroustrup or John Carmack. Arguments are either sound or not regardless of credentials.

If you have links, you should post them.
If you are posting here, you aren't busy.
"Targeting" means they dont' have it. It is typical hype building, marketing nonsense, or overconfident estimates that do not manifest later. They want you to "imagine the possibilities".

 

They do release them as libraries and sdks. Then they sit on the site without being used. In the long term it is a bunch of cool demos to boost chip sales.

What happened to Nvida VXGI hype, by the way? The idea wasn't unsound.

 

[DELETED]

 

Exactly. Because who wants to have to not only implement the feature in the game engine they're using but provide full support in the event that it breaks?

 

[DELETED]

 

Which begs the question: with all the old sdks in mind, why shouldn't one be skeptical about their RTX tech...

 

[DELETED]

 

What's there to be skeptical about?