Sorry, I wasn't clear enough. In nV implementation, the outer loop of the raytracer is in shader, but the "cast ray" operation is a single operation. In the AMD implementation, a single intersection test into the acceleration structure is a single operation (implemented in TMUs). That is, there needs to be a shader program that loops over doing that until it has a value.
Just a rumor, backed up by a patent. But of course most patents describe things that never get put into practice.Ok thanks, understood. On the other hand this means for each ray i cast the shader program needs to explicitly loop over all levels of the acceleration structure? Does not sound like a good idea for several reasons. Is this just a rumour at this point?
Just a rumor, backed up by a patent. But of course most patents describe things that never get put into practice.
The relative cost of having to have every lane on the shader program loop over every level of the structure (or at least until all lanes have a hit) is probably less than you'd imagine, mostly because the cost of the memory access is dominant
What I read was...it is 4x as powerful as before. But will also use...upwards of 300 watts. He may be referring to power consumption.Hmm, that's interesting since I seem to recall that they'd also said its "more than 4x as powerful" before.
Thank you Tuna-Fish for the excellent detailed explanation and information.
I was wondering in what darkswordsman17 and also what you said about the amd implementation.
The nvidia rtx implementation is putting an huge cost to games performance, a game like Battlefield V (ultra settings) at 1440P on a nvidia 2080 super does 111 fps without rtx, and 57 fps with rtx enabled.
If amd RT version gives a much lower overhead (a much lower % of performance lost) they could claim 2080 super performance in the consoles when ray tracing is enabled and do it with a much weaker gpu.
If you are wondering which Nvidia card does 57 fps at 1440P on Battlefield V (high quality) without rtx is something like the GTX 1060 or the GTX 1650 super.
Amd only needs something a little more powerful than those and a much lower performance hit than nvidia. I think it's not impossible...
Isn't it a reasonable assumption that the adding of RT units from NV is a long term plan to increase them until in 3-4 generations there will be enough to actually practically put them to use in more or most games?
Ironically the lack of competition in the high end segment might be the reason they actually gambled on using transistors on RT compared to pure incremental general performance.
I have no idea how this relates to consoles, but I think its a good idea that hardware RT is now in the mix, and I hope it won't fail meaning that it will take 5-10 years for someone to bother to pick it up gain.
No, RT will be used in every next generation game going forward, NVIDIA will increase RT hardware to increase the amount and complexity of RT effects in games.Isn't it a reasonable assumption that the adding of RT units from NV is a long term plan to increase them until in 3-4 generations there will be enough to actually practically put them to use in more or most games?
Really? So Microsoft and Sony and DXR needed something to sell ray tracing too? That's doesn't make any sense. Hardware RT was planned from the start, NVIDIA pioneered it, but others followed as well.NV needed something to sell this to the consumer somehow because the RTX chips make little sense to consumer price/performance wise.
Really? So Microsoft and Sony and DXR needed something to sell ray tracing too? That's doesn't make any sense. Hardware RT was planned from the start, NVIDIA pioneered it, but others followed as well.
This kind of thinking is not only illogical, but anti progress as well, Hardware T&L was also not ready for consumers in regards to price/performance, but look where we are now!
And the next step that will make those vertex shaders a "dead end" is ray tracing...Hardware T&L is a dead end and were replaced with vertex shaders a long time ago ...
FixdReally? So Microsoft and Sony and DXR needed something to sell ray tracing too? That's doesn't make any sense. Hardware RT was planned from the start,NVIDIAIntel and Imagination pioneered it, but others followed as well.
Well I still say that the currently available implementation of RT in games, a.k.a. RTX is a bad joke, and if AMD's solution in the consoles will be as bad, I'm totally down to ridicule them as well.Fixd
I find HW based RT very usefuly, but not for games. Unfortunately, at this point, there are no (engineering) CAD software packages that utilises RT block from RTX cards for real time ray tracing (maybe latest Solidworks, I'm not sure). Most of them still use CPU. But I know Creo and SW (Dassault) are working on this
And the next step that will make those vertex shaders a "dead end" is ray tracing...
Can you elaborate further given the recent news about Xbox RT cores?Even the Xbox has an upgraded pipeline.
You have no concept of hardware development cycles, that's why you're spreading this nonsense here. In terms of raytracing, NVIDIA pioneered one thing only: shameless greed.No, RT will be used in every next generation game going forward, NVIDIA will increase RT hardware to increase the amount and complexity of RT effects in games.
Really? So Microsoft and Sony and DXR needed something to sell ray tracing too? That's doesn't make any sense. Hardware RT was planned from the start, NVIDIA pioneered it, but others followed as well.
This kind of thinking is not only illogical, but anti progress as well, Hardware T&L was also not ready for consumers in regards to price/performance, but look where we are now!
This turned out to be incorrect in the end, both Xbox and PS5 have the same RT system.Nah... The PS5 has a very different RT solution compared to what is implemented in DXR.
This turned out to be incorrect in the end, both Xbox and PS5 have the same RT system.
They both use Navi 2 GPU's, so the hardware RTX is the same. But the XBox runs windows with DX12, the PS does not, and runs Sony's own OS and API's.
Sony will most likely use Vulkan RT, which is similar to DXR.On HW level, yes.. on higher/API level we are not sure - maybe that's what Zlatan meant while he mentioned DXR directly.