I'm not sure if it's the quality of the photos, but it does not look impressive. Not impressive at all.

In the end with Larrabee it will come down to performance-per-dollar, the bang-for-buck ratio. If it can give more 3DMarks and give people more fps in Crysis (or it's sequels by then) for less cash than competition, then it will be a winner. And let's not forget compatibility, something AMD/ATI and nVidia have an advantage in. Otherwise it will go the route of XGI Volari, SiS Xabre, and S3 Chrome GPUs.

In fact for all three (XGI Volari, SiS Xabre, and S3 Chrome) performance issues were not the key in their downfall. While not great at the time compared to what ATi and nVidia were offering, all three could somewhat "keep-up", at least with low-mid-end offerings from ATI/nVidia. In reality all three were sunk by poor drivers and compatibility with existing gaming titles at the time.

AddSubI'm not sure if it's the quality of the photos, but it does not look impressive. Not impressive at all.

In the end with Larrabee it will come down to performance-per-dollar, the bang-for-buck ratio. If it can give more 3DMarks and give people more fps in Crysis (or it's sequels by then) for less cash than competition, then it will be a winner. And let's not forget compatibility, something AMD/ATI and nVidia have an advantage in. Otherwise it will go the route of XGI Volari, SiS Xabre, and S3 Chrome GPUs.

I have not followed Larrabee as of late, but I remember months ago it was rumored to not be impressive with traditional rendering.

Also keep in mind in my shots the only part that is ray traced in the reflections, if it was on a modern engine, and higher resolution textures and higher poly models I think this would look quite impressive overall. (I dont think its the techs fault ti looks bad, it was the choice of screenshot, I mean the picture that started this thread had like 6 faces total, when the point of ray tracing is accurate lighting you kinda need a complex scene to render to show off what it can do.

Well there's always the 'cinema2.0' presentation from AMD, that's raytrace/voxel and has nice textures.

just wondering why the hell shadows are so important i would be much happier to see things like the ground and enviroment more realistic like not flat looking like it looks in every single ray tracing SS i'm sorry but shadows are nice and everything but i'm looking around me not at my damn shadow

everything casts a shadow, thats why its so important :) Shadows makes depth and you need that to make everything around you look more realistic

Lillebroreverything casts a shadow, thats why its so important :) Shadows makes depth and you need that to make everything around you look more realistic

thing is look at things like crysis they don't look terrible? or anybetter than that does or maybe its just me....

AddSubI'm not sure if it's the quality of the photos, but it does not look impressive. Not impressive at all.

In the end with Larrabee it will come down to performance-per-dollar, the bang-for-buck ratio. If it can give more 3DMarks and give people more fps in Crysis (or it's sequels by then) for less cash than competition, then it will be a winner. And let's not forget compatibility, something AMD/ATI and nVidia have an advantage in. Otherwise it will go the route of XGI Volari, SiS Xabre, and S3 Chrome GPUs.

In fact for all three (XGI Volari, SiS Xabre, and S3 Chrome) performance issues were not the key in their downfall. While not great at the time compared to what ATi and nVidia were offering, all three could somewhat "keep-up", at least with low-mid-end offerings from ATI/nVidia. In reality all three were sunk by poor drivers and compatibility with existing gaming titles at the time.

I don't think 3d marks and Crysis killing is what they care about AT ALL. Larrabee is SO much more than that; especially on a development level, and an integrated level.

If something like Larabee performs well and succeeds in pleasing developer teams, then products from ATi and Nvidia will have to change drastically, or end up ceasing to serve a purpose in the 3d industry.

Lillebroreverything casts a shadow, thats why its so important :) Shadows makes depth and you need that to make everything around you look more realistic

Don't confuse shadows with shading. A lot of shadows in real life are either subtle, or unnoticed; so all these applications going over the deep end, insisting on a bazillion shadows - with multiple layers - are getting a bit overkill.
However, proper levels of shading are what enable boring photo imaged textures, to actually seem to come to life; which ultimatley is just an illusion more or less; unfortunate, but that's the state of the architecture still. Until full on vertex shading, that won't change.

cdawallthing is look at things like crysis they don't look terrible? or anybetter than that does or maybe its just me....

This was done in the Quake 4 engine not on the cryengine, your looking at the models and other content of the game, things developers create (per game details i guess i would call them). Imagine if the whole alien ship in crysis had been ray traced so the entire surface of the ship reflected the rest of it.

Shadows make things more detailed than high resolution textures alone, we already have high resolution textures (Crysis? Id's new engine etc) if we implement current technology (Occlusion mapping/bump/uv maps etc) with ray tracing surfaces will appear much more realistic.

newconroerI don't think 3d marks and Crysis killing is what they care about AT ALL. Larrabee is SO much more than that; especially on a development level, and an integrated level.

If something like Larabee performs well and succeeds in pleasing developer teams, then products from ATi and Nvidia will have to change drastically, or end up ceasing to serve a purpose in the 3d industry.

Well said :)

newconroerDon't confuse shadows with shading. A lot of shadows in real life are either subtle, or unnoticed; so all these applications going over the deep end, insisting on a bazillion shadows - with multiple layers - are getting a bit overkill.
However, proper levels of shading are what enable boring photo imaged textures, to actually seem to come to life; which ultimatley is just an illusion more or less; unfortunate, but that's the state of the architecture still. Until full on vertex shading, that won't change.

Shadows (in real life) round door frames exist, in a game this is simply shaded in in most cases, such things rendered as shadows would add crucial levels of realism to 3d games especially in dynamic environments with a flashlight or muzzle flash etc. I would not underestimate them.

Shadows are what makes stuff look realistic :) Just look around you! everything casts a shadow.. If the shadow wasent there, the object would just look weird :) even the smallest shadow is something our eye and brain catches, so it means something.

Just look at this nvidia picture and imagine it without the shadows:
pics.computerbase.de/2/2/5/3/3/4.jpg

Then you'll see how shadows help I'm guessing.

DanTheBanjomanI know he did, but it's open source. You can upgrade the engine yourself.

+1 right there is many company's give open source , for easy example about most game have too much moods it is battle filed 2 , and you can take the engine from them site for free

There's quite a difference between being allowed to make mods and an open source engine, quite a difference indeed.

WshlistThere's quite a difference between being allowed to make mods and an open source engine, quite a difference indeed.

Millions of dollars worth of difference. :rolleyes: