Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community - Reply to Topic

Thread: [WCCF] World of Tanks enCore RT Demo Benchmarked – Polaris, Vega, Navi, Pascal, And Turing Tested Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in


  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
10-23-2019 01:47 AM
ToTheSun!
Quote: Originally Posted by The Robot View Post
Yeah, looks very tryhard. Otherwise no one will even spot the difference. So, apologists, what's the point of these bad looking and fps tanking shadows again?
Perhaps the real point is that hardware acceleration is more needed than not. For a slightly bigger hit to performance, RTX does 10x more effects than just the shadows (and better at that).
10-23-2019 12:25 AM
Imouto The RT cores accelerate the barebone part of ray tracing. That's why the more effects you add, the less they help.
10-22-2019 07:52 PM
NightAntilli
Quote: Originally Posted by WannaBeOCer View Post
No one said it couldn't be done without RT cores but it sure does run much better with them.
Actually, a LOT of people said and are still saying that RT is impossible without RT cores. I don't know about "much" better either. I guess that's up for discussion. We'll see whatever else comes out in the near future.

Quote: Originally Posted by WannaBeOCer View Post
Embree has been around for quite some time and it's a CPU ray tracer. We have no clue what their approach will be when it comes to their GPUs just like we don't when it comes to AMD's DxR capable cards.
I always suspected that AMD will combine their CPU and GPU power to delivering RT in games. It isn't for nothing that they have CPUs that can do so many threads right now. And they didn't announce their RT to be a 'hybrid' solution for nothing.All those unused threads for games can potentially be used for RT.

Embree might be a CPU ray tracer, but it seems to have translated to GPUs too as of now. It was n't called a hybrid ray tracer for nothing, I assume... But we'll see how true that is down the line I guess.

Quote: Originally Posted by WannaBeOCer View Post
AMD's current approach with Radeon Rays is proprietary except for their Vulkan extension just like nVidia's VKRay. Open source doesn't always mean hardware agnostic. Looks like Radeon Rays 3.0 is no longer open source either.

https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/...der-developers
All true. But Intel's implementation in World of Tanks is as hardware agnostic as it gets at this point. And I don't think they did this just to be nice. It's Intel. They want to put a dent in nVidia's RTX, is my suspicion. It has been around as you say, so, why push it now, right?
10-22-2019 07:24 PM
The Robot
Quote: Originally Posted by mouacyk View Post
No one knows why the devs left the shadows exaggerately sharp, perhaps for performance and showmanship. However, it is a matter of increasing the penumbra radius to soften the edges, which better simulates the sun as a spot light rather than a point light.
Yeah, looks very tryhard. Otherwise no one will even spot the difference. So, apologists, what's the point of these bad looking and fps tanking shadows again?
10-22-2019 04:26 PM
mouacyk
Quote: Originally Posted by Particle View Post
Ray tracing can certainly produce more realistic results than not, but I don't think they managed that here from the screenshots I've seen. The shading looks janky like it was hit by a hard light source in space. It reminds me of Doom 3's lighting.
No one knows why the devs left the shadows exaggerately sharp, perhaps for performance and showmanship. However, it is a matter of increasing the penumbra radius to soften the edges, which better simulates the sun as a spot light rather than a point light.
10-22-2019 04:05 PM
Particle
Quote: Originally Posted by ToTheSun! View Post
Well, I certainly don't know how light looks in your part of town, but ray/path tracing does a much better job of emulating the lighting I know than fake bake ever did.
Ray tracing can certainly produce more realistic results than not, but I don't think they managed that here from the screenshots I've seen. The shading looks janky like it was hit by a hard light source in space. It reminds me of Doom 3's lighting.
10-22-2019 01:34 PM
mouacyk There's no arguing that RT can be done without RTX. Intel had real-time software ray-tracing in Quake 2 way back around 2003, albeit at something like 800x600 resolution. The fact that we're all here continuing this discussion speaks for the developer push (most consumers complain that rt looks more fake!) to unify and simplify lighting in general. While NVidia is on a space-race to win on performance (and delivery), AMD is making promises, and Intel cannot afford to be left behind.

We all know anything that can be accelerated is better when it is.
10-22-2019 09:53 AM
ToTheSun!
Quote: Originally Posted by Particle View Post
Looking at the difference between ray tracing on and off, I see that it just makes the lighting look worse and more fake. That's disappointing and kind of confusing.
Well, I certainly don't know how light looks in your part of town, but ray/path tracing does a much better job of emulating the lighting I know than fake bake ever did.
10-22-2019 08:24 AM
WannaBeOCer
Quote: Originally Posted by NightAntilli View Post
I don't know if that is viable though. More RT cores is larger die size, is more expensive chips, is lower yields. I don't think we can expect much better pricing, especially since this is nVidia we're talking about.

RTX is a proprietary way of doing Ray Tracing btw, just like HairWorks was a proprietary way of rendering hair. Just like HairWorks used Tessellation, RTX uses DXR. But now that even Intel is pushing for an open standard here, I personally don't see RTX gaining the traction that the likes of GameWorks did (even though it all ultimately died anyway). It will almost be 2 vs 1, Intel & AMD vs nVidia. With Intel entering the graphics market soon, it seems that they are not willing to be as idle as AMD when it comes to nVidia's shenanigans.

The most important thing here is that it has been proven that RT can be done without nVidia's RTX. And it's not as if the performance hit is THAT much worse. They are both almost equally bad in terms of performance drop. Granted, the RTX effects do a little more than just shadows, but we also have to take optimization into account. Remember the difference between the first RTX game and Control for example. The difference in quality and performance is significant, and I don't see why this would be any different for this open standard.
No one said it couldn't be done without RT cores but it sure does run much better with them. Embree has been around for quite some time and it's a CPU ray tracer. We have no clue what their approach will be when it comes to their GPUs just like we don't when it comes to AMD's DxR capable cards.

AMD's current approach with Radeon Rays is proprietary except for their Vulkan extension just like nVidia's VKRay. Open source doesn't always mean hardware agnostic. Looks like Radeon Rays 3.0 is no longer open source either.

https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/...der-developers
10-22-2019 08:06 AM
Particle Looking at the difference between ray tracing on and off, I see that it just makes the lighting look worse and more fake. That's disappointing and kind of confusing.
This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off