Originally Posted by provost
You know guys, I am not a developer nor a person who has any use for complex animations using gpus from
a work perspective, but I have a hard time believing that the only way to get decent computer animation image quality in video games is by using Nvidia's proprietary Gameworks library on Nvidia gpus.... just because this is what Nvidia says it has to be.
Developers don't have to use gameworks. Developers use gameworks (or tressFX) for the same reason they use game engines like unity, unreal engine, source engene, etc. These tools take time, money, and resources to build. For game developers, they would have to update the tools every time they build a new game. Which would add to the cost game development. Developers license tools like gameworks and engines like unity to speed up development time and reduce costs. Why reinvent the wheel?
But at the end of the day someone has spend the time and money to build them. Who is gonig to do it?
Nvidia has take the time to develop these tools. AMD just sits back and whines about sabotage. Where is AMD's lighting api? where's is AMD's physics api? Why hasn't AMD spend the time and money to create competing software packages?
If you want an alternative to gameworks, push AMD to create a competing product.
Heck, if Dreamworks doesn't need gpus for its animation, there has to be a better way to code these darn games that are "oh so demanding" that one needs a min $1000 gpu to play them at high settings. Ray tracing may be?
I don't know exactly what I am talking about when it comes to this stuff, but I do know this; dx12 development would surely shake up the status quo of DX 11 that the gpu companies have been using to earn above average returns.
On the dreamworks comment, They don't have a scheduling requirement. They can render their animations as slowly as they want. If they render at 1 frame per minute that's fine with them. Gamers demand that frames be rended at very high rate of speed. There's a huge difference in requirements.