• We've upgraded our forums. Please post any issues/requests in this thread.

NVIDIA Demonstrates Real-time Interactive Ray-tracing

Joined
Jun 28, 2007
Messages
669 (0.18/day)
Likes
53
Location
Eugene
System Name Foobox3000
Processor Core 2 Duo 36750@3.46ghz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-G33M-DS2R
Memory 2gb (2x1gb) Crucial Ballistix Tracer
Video Card(s) EVGA 9800gtx
Storage 500gb 7200prm IDE
Display(s) Sceptre 19"
Case Apevia X-Qpack 2 Red
Power Supply 500w Apevia generic
#51
Ray tracing? And what? This looks like shit.

Check this:
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...nshots_and_video_of_the_new_Radeon_tech_demo/


I like this one much much better :)
Don't you guys get it? This is one of the first Nvidia demos of raytracing, and what you see is excatly what they wanted you to see. If they wanted to add nice shaders, shadows, HDR lighting they would, they're not stupid. This was a live demo. Their goal was obviously to make a playable example of raytracing, and because of the extreme amount of hardware it took they probably couldn't afford to add nice effects.
 
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
1,675 (0.36/day)
Likes
149
Location
Minneapolis, Mn
System Name Livingston
Processor i7-4960HQ
Motherboard macbook prp retina
Cooling Alphacool NexXxoS Monsta (240mm x 120mm x 80mm)
Memory 16Gb
Video Card(s) Zotac Arctic Storm Nvidia 980ti
Display(s) 1x Acer XB270HU, 1x Catleap, 1x Oculus
Benchmark Scores http://www.3dmark.com/fs/770087
#52
Don't you guys get it? This is one of the first Nvidia demos of raytracing, and what you see is excatly what they wanted you to see. If they wanted to add nice shaders, shadows, HDR lighting they would,
I would give up, if people are to stupid to check above to see where the conversation is before they post they deserve to be ignored.

they're not stupid. This was a live demo. Their goal was obviously to make a playable example of raytracing, and because of the extreme amount of hardware it took they probably couldn't afford to add nice effects.
I would not say that. I would say they did not even try to add nice textures. It was not the goal. I doubt they even tried to implement it. I think they could afford it, I just think they did not, texturing the car may have brought the frames down to 25 or something, that may not have been acceptable for them for a live demo, but to be honest I think they just did not implement it because they wanted it to be clear what ray tracing was on its own without any confusion on which lines were on the textures and which ones were being ray traced (for example the seam of the trunk on the car).

yesss. I used the the phrase I think 3 times above and I dont think anyone cares what I think.
 

Megasty

New Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
1,263 (0.36/day)
Likes
81
Location
The Kingdom of Au
Processor i7 920 @ 3.6 GHz (4.0 when gaming)
Motherboard Asus Rampage II Extreme - Yeah I Bought It...
Cooling Swiftech.
Memory 12 GB Crucial Ballistix Tracer - I Love Red
Video Card(s) ASUS EAH4870X2 - That Fan Is...!?
Storage 4 WD 1.5 TB
Display(s) 24" Sceptre
Case TT Xaser VI - Fugly, Red, & Huge...
Audio Device(s) The ASUS Thingy
Power Supply Ultra X3 1000W
Software Vista Ultimate SP1 64bit
#53
Very well put Energy.



OMG do people read others' posts. Look at the few ones above yours, they have said it all. Ruby one looks better because they made it to look better. This one is an I-N-TE-R-A-C-T-I-V-E T-E-C-H-N-O-L-O-G-Y D-E-M-O. It's meant to show that 1920x1200 @ 30 fps can be done. Especially in ray-tracing textures don't matter as much as in rasterizers performance wise and same happens with many effects. This demo is lacking them because they were out of their scope, but they could add them with any significant performance penalty.

About the hardware, we don't know the one used by Ati, but those Quadros are nothing else than GTX cards. So in reality they just used 4 GTX280. Sure, they are more expensive than RV770 derivatives but not by that much and they are really doing a lot more work than on the Ruby demo.

And again, as many many many others have said it doesn't matter how it looks. What looks better real games or 3Dmark?


Hint: 3Dmark is not interactive.

And about tesselation. Yeah they used tesselation and that is good, as it increases the detail level with minimal performnce penalty (compared to actual polyfons), but tesselation on the other hand very hardly adds details (and also very hardly can be animated), it just makes things smoother. And that's a very different thing. Nvidia demo demostrates that they can use 2 million of actual polygons that can be transformed and animated. The Ruby demo even if it had 10 million polys after the tesselation was applied doesn't mean anything special, as the 2 ones of the Nvidia demo are far more interesting from a real performance point of view.
Spelling it out for them won't help. They just think it looks like shit. They think 10K of cards should put out better. They also don't know anything about ray-tracing :rolleyes: This is definitely the future of gaming as well as movies. In 10 yrs, this shit will be blowing us all away :toast:
 
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
850 (0.22/day)
Likes
23
Location
USA
#54
Spelling it out for them won't help. They just think it looks like shit. They think 10K of cards should put out better. They also don't know anything about ray-tracing :rolleyes: This is definitely the future of gaming as well as movies. In 10 yrs, this shit will be blowing us all away :toast:
LoL, don't say 10 years. Ray-tracing will probably be old hat in 10 years. After all when a video card comes with 10gb RAM Ray-tracing will be childs play.
 
Joined
Oct 5, 2007
Messages
1,714 (0.46/day)
Likes
182
Processor Intel C2Q Q6600 @ Stock (for now)
Motherboard Asus P5Q-E
Cooling Proc: Scythe Mine, Graphics: Zalman VF900 Cu
Memory 4 GB (2x2GB) DDR2 Corsair Dominator 1066Mhz 5-5-5-15
Video Card(s) GigaByte 8800GT Stock Clocks: 700Mhz Core, 1700 Shader, 1940 Memory
Storage 74 GB WD Raptor 10000rpm, 2x250 GB Seagate Raid 0
Display(s) HP p1130, 21" Trinitron
Case Antec p180
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi PLatinum
Power Supply 700W FSP Group 85% Efficiency
Software Windows XP
#55
Spelling it out for them won't help. They just think it looks like shit. They think 10K of cards should put out better. They also don't know anything about ray-tracing :rolleyes: This is definitely the future of gaming as well as movies. In 10 yrs, this shit will be blowing us all away :toast:
LOL You are so right. I should have learnt from what people said about Intel's ray-traced Quake.

Also in the hardware department, I should have learnt from what some people said about UT3 Engine when one of the developers was asked about the graphics card he used to test it on and how it ran. He said a Quadro and decent fps. I can't remember which one, but I do remember the price of it at the time: $2000+, it was a 7900 with more RAM. Guess what people said. ;)
 

Mussels

Moderprator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Messages
46,106 (9.57/day)
Likes
13,536
Location
Australalalalalaia.
System Name Daddy Long Legs
Processor Ryzen R7 1700, 3.9GHz 1.375v
Motherboard MSI X370 Gaming PRO carbon
Cooling Fractal Celsius S24 (Silent fans, meh pump)
Memory 16GB 2133 generic @ 2800
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X (BIOS modded to Gaming Z - faster and solved black screen bugs!)
Storage 1TB Intel SSD Pro 6000p (60TB USB3 storage)
Display(s) Samsung 4K 40" HDTV (UA40KU6000WXXY) / 27" Qnix 2K 110Hz
Case Fractal Design R5. So much room, so quiet...
Audio Device(s) Pioneer VSX-519V + Yamaha YHT-270 / sennheiser HD595/518 + bob marley zion's
Power Supply Corsair HX 750i (Platinum, fan off til 300W)
Mouse Logitech G403 + KKmoon desk-sized mousepad
Keyboard Corsair K65 Rapidfire
Software Windows 10 pro x64 (all systems)
Benchmark Scores Laptops: i7-4510U + 840M 2GB (touchscreen) 275GB SSD + 16GB i7-2630QM + GT 540M + 8GB
#56
overall theres a few things that i feel should be reapeated in this thread.

#1: it took 4 video cards to do this, instead of TONS OF COMPUTERS IN A SERVER FARM. Its a LOT faster now and possible on ONE machine, as opposed to lots.

#2: The reference to HDR. everyone disliked it at first too, and it was a performance killer. now its almost free and its tuned in the way people like it. Shadows in games are the same - now we're getting reflections. Imagine 100% perfect shadows added to your favourite game now.. remember its going to be ADDED into existing things, its not taking anything else away!

#3: it was INTERACTIVE. Thats a huge step from a simple non-interactive movie.

#4: darkmatters post right above this one. the UT3 engine was developed on a $2,000 card... that was a 7900. Give it 2 years and this amount of power will be nothing! look at a GTX280 now compared to a 7900 back then
 
Joined
Oct 5, 2007
Messages
1,714 (0.46/day)
Likes
182
Processor Intel C2Q Q6600 @ Stock (for now)
Motherboard Asus P5Q-E
Cooling Proc: Scythe Mine, Graphics: Zalman VF900 Cu
Memory 4 GB (2x2GB) DDR2 Corsair Dominator 1066Mhz 5-5-5-15
Video Card(s) GigaByte 8800GT Stock Clocks: 700Mhz Core, 1700 Shader, 1940 Memory
Storage 74 GB WD Raptor 10000rpm, 2x250 GB Seagate Raid 0
Display(s) HP p1130, 21" Trinitron
Case Antec p180
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi PLatinum
Power Supply 700W FSP Group 85% Efficiency
Software Windows XP
#57
#5 Why the lack of nitty gritty textures and effects doesn't matter at all.

Although you need a bit of knowledge of what ray-tracing is to understand this point. I found this link "Ray-tracing for the masses" that explains how it works, for those who don't know and want to learn.

http://www.cs.unc.edu/~rademach/xroads-RT/RTarticle.html

After reading it what you have to understand of the demo is this:

1- All the ray-tracing work (which involves reflection/refraction testing) is already done in this Nvidia demo. It's by far the most demanding task a ray-tracer must do.

2- At every surface found by the rays, a COLOR has already been picked through a texture load. Whether that texture is of good quality or not (or if it is modified by a shader) won't matter so much, the performance is almost the same as the task of fetching the textures already happened in the demo.

3- Many of the effects you can add are not as costly as the geometry surfaces. i.e. If you add fog, fog does not have reflection or it is usually small enough that would be a waste of resources to test it. That means that ray splitting has not to be done, it's just applying a transparency (with refraction, of course, this is ray-tracing after all :)).

Or blurring if you prefer, blurring in ray-tracing just means changing the direction of the rays, which is what actually happens in reality.


And that's it. That's why it doesn't matter if the demo looks pretty or not. It's quite an achievement and should be understood as it is. Hope this helps. :toast:
 
Last edited:

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
24,277 (5.51/day)
Likes
10,365
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 4790K@4.6GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z97 Extreme6
Cooling Corsair H100i
Memory 32GB Corsair DDR3-1866 9-10-9-27
Video Card(s) ASUS GTX960 STRIX @ 1500/1900
Storage 480GB Crucial MX200 + 2TB Seagate Solid State Hybrid Drive with 128GB OCZ Synapse SSD Cache
Display(s) QNIX QX2710 1440p@120Hz
Case Corsair 650D Black
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply Corsair HX850
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
#58
All the people bitching about how much hardware this demo required need to learn to read. As I already said, HDR started out the same way. It required huge amounts of hardware to pull of in real time, now a $50 card can do it.
 
Joined
Sep 25, 2007
Messages
5,822 (1.56/day)
Likes
618
Processor Core I7 3770K@4.3Ghz
Motherboard AsRock Z77 Extreme
Cooling Cooler Master Seidon 120M
Memory 12Gb G.Skill Sniper
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1070
Storage Sandisk SSD + 1TB Seagate Barracuda 7200
Display(s) IPS Asus 26inch
Case Antec 300
Audio Device(s) Xonar DG
Power Supply EVGA Supernova 650 G2
Software Windows 10/Windows 7
#59
sounds like your all bitching back and forth to me, lol

and over some pictures, , how do you "actually" know how much workload is actually on these cards:laugh::laugh:

they can say its how many polygons they want but we should all know how these PR games usually play out
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 21, 2008
Messages
5,230 (1.48/day)
Likes
661
Location
IRAQ-Baghdad
System Name MASTER
Processor Core i7 3930k run at 4.4ghz
Motherboard Asus Rampage IV extreme
Cooling Corsair H100i
Memory 4x4G kingston hyperx beast 2400mhz
Video Card(s) 2X EVGA GTX680
Storage 2X Crusial M4 256g raid0, 1TbWD g, 2x500 WD B
Display(s) Samsung 27' 1080P LED 3D monitior 2ms
Case CoolerMaster Chosmos II
Audio Device(s) Creative sound blaster X-FI Titanum champion,Creative speakers 7.1 T7900
Power Supply Corsair 1200i, Logitch G500 Mouse, headset Corsair vengeance 1500
Software Win7 64bit Ultimate
Benchmark Scores 3d mark 2011: testing
#60
maybe if we see some video can explain more than that picture's
 

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
34,332 (9.23/day)
Likes
17,427
Location
Hyderabad, India
System Name Long shelf-life potato
Processor Intel Core i7-4770K
Motherboard ASUS Z97-A
Cooling Xigmatek Aegir CPU Cooler
Memory 16GB Kingston HyperX Beast DDR3-1866
Video Card(s) 2x GeForce GTX 970 SLI
Storage ADATA SU800 512GB
Display(s) Samsung U28D590D 28-inch 4K
Case Cooler Master CM690 Window
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound Blaster Recon3D PCIe
Power Supply Corsair HX850W
Mouse Razer Abyssus 2014
Keyboard Microsoft Sidewinder X4
Software Windows 10 Pro Creators Update
#62
Thats true, but nv used 4 quadro fx 5800 4gb for this ray tracing demo @30fps. How much does it cost?
Now the question is, how many rv770 needed for this ruby demo. 2, 3 or 4? Anyway it will cost much less.
Which one looks better? Definitely Ruby.
Link me to a site which says they used desktop Radeons for AMD's demo and not a farm.
 
Joined
Nov 25, 2007
Messages
162 (0.04/day)
Likes
12
System Name lumi
Processor Intel Core i3 3100, 3.1GHz (2/4)
Motherboard MSI Z68A-G43 (B3)
Cooling Stock :O
Memory 16GB DDR3-12800 1600Mhz (4*4GB)
Video Card(s) AMD 270X
Storage 60GB SSD/256GB SSD, 2*3TB HDD's, 1*4TB HDD's
Display(s) acer 24" (1920*1080) H243H.
Case Fractal Design Core 3000
Audio Device(s) Onboard :/
Power Supply 850 watt pretty green thing
Software LM14(arch when i cba) // Win7.64
#63
Link me to a site which says they used desktop Radeons for AMD's demo and not a farm.
i was pretty sure i read something on the AMD website about it being rendered on two workstation cards in crossfire.



also http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/38145/135/


edit: direct from AMD( http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/AboutAMD/0,,51_52_15438_15106,00.html?redir=cin01 )

Rendered in real-time and interactive, this is a brief video from the first Cinema 2.0 demo, premiered by AMD in San Francisco on June 16, 2008. The interactive demo was rendered by a single PC equipped with two "RV770" codenamed graphics cards powered by an AMD Phenom™ X4 9850 Processor and AMD 790FX Chipset. The full demo shows cinema-quality digital images rendered in real-time with interactivity. Check back later this summer for a video of the full Ruby Cinema 2.0 demo
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
1,675 (0.36/day)
Likes
149
Location
Minneapolis, Mn
System Name Livingston
Processor i7-4960HQ
Motherboard macbook prp retina
Cooling Alphacool NexXxoS Monsta (240mm x 120mm x 80mm)
Memory 16Gb
Video Card(s) Zotac Arctic Storm Nvidia 980ti
Display(s) 1x Acer XB270HU, 1x Catleap, 1x Oculus
Benchmark Scores http://www.3dmark.com/fs/770087
#64
This is a desperate attempt to counter AMD's refined example of ray tracing. Nvidia's example screams of being rushed.

Refined example of ray tracing? you made me laugh out loud in real life. Its a fine example of computer graphics. They put so much eye candy in it people cant tell what the ray tracing is (its a full tech demo for Cinema 2.0 NOT. I repeat NOT for ray tracing alone.) Nvidia released a demo of RAY TRACING you think its a public response to AMDs demo? Thats funny...because it was not public. None of us have seen it, it was not for us. It was a tech demo for people in the industry. And I can see why, half the people not in the industry are to stupid to see the point of the demo and did not deserve to know it exists as this thread demonstrates.



The interactive demo was rendered by a single PC equipped with two "RV770" codenamed graphics cards
2 4870x2's. 4 Cores. The same equivalent as 4 280's, a little less efficient but equivocal in my opinion.
 

rflair

New Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2008
Messages
119 (0.03/day)
Likes
80
System Name Main PC
Processor Intel Q9550@3.83GHz
Motherboard ASUS P5K-E
Cooling Thermalright TRU120
Memory 8 GB OCZ Reaper
Video Card(s) ATI 4890@940/1100
Storage 3.5 TB
Display(s) 24" Dell, 42" Sharp Aquos
Case Antec 900
Audio Device(s) SB Audigy ZS
Power Supply PC P&C 860
Software Windows 7 SP1 x64
#65
Refined example of ray tracing? you made me laugh out loud in real life. Its a fine example of computer graphics. They put so much eye candy in it people cant tell what the ray tracing is (its a full tech demo for Cinema 2.0 NOT. I repeat NOT for ray tracing alone.) Nvidia released a demo of RAY TRACING you think its a public response to AMDs demo? Thats funny...because it was not public. None of us have seen it, it was not for us. It was a tech demo for people in the industry. And I can see why, half the people not in the industry are to stupid to see the point of the demo and did not deserve to know it exists as this thread demonstrates.





2 4870x2's. 4 Cores. The same equivalent as 4 280's, a little less efficient but equivocal in my opinion.
From what I've seen of both the ATI demo is much better, the fact that it doing ray tracing and more just make it a better tech demo.

Are you propping up Nvidia's demo just because your a fanboy or something? Because thats what your coming off as.

The reflections in the Nvidia demo are limited to the few colors used in its environment, there is a reason all the buildings are grey and few color on anything else.

The ATI demo is just more robust, even you can see that.

Still its good to see both companies moving forward with some very nice technology.
 
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
1,675 (0.36/day)
Likes
149
Location
Minneapolis, Mn
System Name Livingston
Processor i7-4960HQ
Motherboard macbook prp retina
Cooling Alphacool NexXxoS Monsta (240mm x 120mm x 80mm)
Memory 16Gb
Video Card(s) Zotac Arctic Storm Nvidia 980ti
Display(s) 1x Acer XB270HU, 1x Catleap, 1x Oculus
Benchmark Scores http://www.3dmark.com/fs/770087
#66
From what I've seen of both the ATI demo is much better, the fact that it doing ray tracing and more just make it a better tech demo.

Are you propping up Nvidia's demo just because your a fanboy or something? Because thats what your coming off as.
Are you an idiot? I have a 4870 in my rig.

The reflections in the Nvidia demo are limited to the few colors used in its environment, there is a reason all the buildings are grey and few color on anything else.
There are no other colors because its pure ray tracing! its taking everything from the environment! I have had to ray trace BY HAND with a calculator in AP physics. There are no other colors unless the ray passes through another medium (Glass, Water, Fog, etc.) which bends it (the ray) towards or away from the normal (90 degrees) (changing the frequency/wavelength of the ray) which in turn changes the color that is seen. Your bitching about them not picking colors you liked for the tech demo that was not intended for customers, but members of the industry to see? you sound very ignorant. Are you under the impression that if they had used more colors it would have been harder for the scene to be processed? If thats the case I will ease your mind. It would render just as fast.


The ATI demo is just more robust, even you can see that.

Still its good to see both companies moving forward with some very nice technology.
YES. Its a full tech demo for Cinema 2.0. And it was a public demo. For us they have the video online, its public. Nvidia is not showcasing a new technology suite, there just f****** showing raytracing in real time. They could do more, but that was not the goal. and you were not supposed to even see this much. Period.

You might want to read some before you jump in to a thread like this.
 
Last edited:

rflair

New Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2008
Messages
119 (0.03/day)
Likes
80
System Name Main PC
Processor Intel Q9550@3.83GHz
Motherboard ASUS P5K-E
Cooling Thermalright TRU120
Memory 8 GB OCZ Reaper
Video Card(s) ATI 4890@940/1100
Storage 3.5 TB
Display(s) 24" Dell, 42" Sharp Aquos
Case Antec 900
Audio Device(s) SB Audigy ZS
Power Supply PC P&C 860
Software Windows 7 SP1 x64
#67

rflair

New Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2008
Messages
119 (0.03/day)
Likes
80
System Name Main PC
Processor Intel Q9550@3.83GHz
Motherboard ASUS P5K-E
Cooling Thermalright TRU120
Memory 8 GB OCZ Reaper
Video Card(s) ATI 4890@940/1100
Storage 3.5 TB
Display(s) 24" Dell, 42" Sharp Aquos
Case Antec 900
Audio Device(s) SB Audigy ZS
Power Supply PC P&C 860
Software Windows 7 SP1 x64
#68
Are you an idiot? I have a 4870 in my rig.



There are no other colors because its pure ray tracing! its taking everything from the environment! I have had to ray trace BY HAND with a calculator in AP physics. There are no other colors unless the ray passes through another medium (Glass, Water, Fog, etc.) which bends it (the ray) towards or away from the normal (90 degrees) (changing the frequency/wavelength of the ray) which in turn changes the color that is seen. Your bitching about them not picking colors you liked for the tech demo that was not intended for customers, but members of the industry to see? you sound very ignorant. Are you under the impression that if they had used more colors it would have been harder for the scene to be processed? If thats the case I will ease your mind. It would render just as fast.



YES. Its a full tech demo for Cinema 2.0. And it was a public demo. For us they have the video online, its public. Nvidia is not showcasing a new technology suite, there just f****** showing raytracing in real time. They could do more, but that was not the goal. and you were not supposed to even see this much. Period.

You might want to read some before you jump in to a thread like this.
The only person sounding ignorant and directly calling other people stupid and an idiot is you. Must be nice from behind your keyboard, believe me it wouldn't be so nice face to face.

People are allowed their opinions and should not have to deal with ass hat responses from a dweeb hiding behind his PC.

Answer things with respect to others, knowledge is a good thing to share but you aren't coming off as knowledgeable just everything you've accused others of being.

And I could debate the entire light and the way it reflects and is handle in true environments and that Nvidia did a very, very simple demo but you have proved that your not up to that.
 
Joined
Sep 2, 2005
Messages
294 (0.07/day)
Likes
25
Location
Szekszárd, Hungary
Processor AMD Phenom II X4 955BE
Motherboard Asus M4A785TD-V Evo
Cooling Xigmatek HDT S1283
Memory 4GB Kingston Hyperx DDR3
Video Card(s) GigaByte Radeon HD3870 512MB GDDR4
Storage WD Caviar Black 640GB, Hitachi Deskstar T7K250 250GB
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster F2380M
Audio Device(s) Creative Audigy ES 5.1
Power Supply Corsair VX550
Software Microsoft Windows 7 Professional x64
#69
2 4870x2's. 4 Cores. The same equivalent as 4 280's, a little less efficient but equivocal in my opinion.
Two rv770 means two 4850 or two 4870 or one 4870x2.
The 4870x2's codename is r700 not rv770.
 

Mussels

Moderprator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Messages
46,106 (9.57/day)
Likes
13,536
Location
Australalalalalaia.
System Name Daddy Long Legs
Processor Ryzen R7 1700, 3.9GHz 1.375v
Motherboard MSI X370 Gaming PRO carbon
Cooling Fractal Celsius S24 (Silent fans, meh pump)
Memory 16GB 2133 generic @ 2800
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X (BIOS modded to Gaming Z - faster and solved black screen bugs!)
Storage 1TB Intel SSD Pro 6000p (60TB USB3 storage)
Display(s) Samsung 4K 40" HDTV (UA40KU6000WXXY) / 27" Qnix 2K 110Hz
Case Fractal Design R5. So much room, so quiet...
Audio Device(s) Pioneer VSX-519V + Yamaha YHT-270 / sennheiser HD595/518 + bob marley zion's
Power Supply Corsair HX 750i (Platinum, fan off til 300W)
Mouse Logitech G403 + KKmoon desk-sized mousepad
Keyboard Corsair K65 Rapidfire
Software Windows 10 pro x64 (all systems)
Benchmark Scores Laptops: i7-4510U + 840M 2GB (touchscreen) 275GB SSD + 16GB i7-2630QM + GT 540M + 8GB
#70
GSG9's point is simple: Nvidias demo was PURE ray tracing, while ATI's is ray tracing with extras added on top.

Of course ATI's will look better - its DESIGNED to. Nvidias was PURELY ray tracing.

Its like saying HDR is crap simply because in the earliest of tests, they didnt include any other shader effects to go along with it - it was plain and boring. Duh, its early stages - they can leave out whatever they want for tech demos as its about the TECH, NOT about 'looking good'
 
Joined
Sep 2, 2005
Messages
294 (0.07/day)
Likes
25
Location
Szekszárd, Hungary
Processor AMD Phenom II X4 955BE
Motherboard Asus M4A785TD-V Evo
Cooling Xigmatek HDT S1283
Memory 4GB Kingston Hyperx DDR3
Video Card(s) GigaByte Radeon HD3870 512MB GDDR4
Storage WD Caviar Black 640GB, Hitachi Deskstar T7K250 250GB
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster F2380M
Audio Device(s) Creative Audigy ES 5.1
Power Supply Corsair VX550
Software Microsoft Windows 7 Professional x64
#71
GSG9's point is simple: Nvidias demo was PURE ray tracing, while ATI's is ray tracing with extras added on top.

Of course ATI's will look better - its DESIGNED to. Nvidias was PURELY ray tracing.
Summary:

Nvidia: 30fps in raytracing without extras with four uberexpensive 4gb cards.
Ati: 25+fps in raytracing + extras with two cheap cards.

Am i correct?
 
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
1,675 (0.36/day)
Likes
149
Location
Minneapolis, Mn
System Name Livingston
Processor i7-4960HQ
Motherboard macbook prp retina
Cooling Alphacool NexXxoS Monsta (240mm x 120mm x 80mm)
Memory 16Gb
Video Card(s) Zotac Arctic Storm Nvidia 980ti
Display(s) 1x Acer XB270HU, 1x Catleap, 1x Oculus
Benchmark Scores http://www.3dmark.com/fs/770087
#72
The only person sounding ignorant and directly calling other people stupid and an idiot is you. Must be nice from behind your keyboard, believe me it wouldn't be so nice face to face.

People are allowed their opinions and should not have to deal with ass hat responses from a dweeb hiding behind his PC.

Answer things with respect to others, knowledge is a good thing to share but you aren't coming of as knowledgeable just everything you've accused others of being.

Don't insult me in the first post directed at me and you might earn my respect, if you had not noticed I did not insult Tk or anyone else just the guy who stepped in, used some loaded words and acted with a god complex. Did you see me make any comments about the ATi demo besides that it was run on 4 cores? No. Thats not what this thread is about its about NVIDIA Demonstrating Real-time Interactive Ray-tracing
Hmm, so possibly, when I speak about the topic at hand...in a thread about the topic, its no more bios than that I am on topic hmm?
I do like ray tracing, it is how our eyes create the environment we see. It IS the future of rendering. That is something people need to understand. I would like them to understand that Nvidia was trying to show Ray Tracing and that was the only thing, hence the scene was not painted with effects. But if people dont get it to bad.


People can have all the opinions they want and they can post them as much as they want. Including saying anything they want about the aesthetics of this demo.

Im sure as hell not getting into a pissing match with you. If you want to delve into what you think of me by all means continue, you will piss off a moderator pretty quick pulling the thread off topic. Which sounds like a good idea before you get to your 20th post. This would be a good time to shut up or interject something useful into the thread.

Two rv770 means two 4850 or two 4870 or one 4870x2.
The 4870x2's codename is r700 not rv770.
That is more impressive I must say, I was under the impression the rv770 was the x2 card. I do wonder if havok has anything to do with ATi's ray tracing...

GSG9's point is simple: Nvidias demo was PURE ray tracing, while ATI's is ray tracing with extras added on top.

Of course ATI's will look better - its DESIGNED to. Nvidias was PURELY ray tracing.

Its like saying HDR is crap simply because in the earliest of tests, they didnt include any other shader effects to go along with it - it was plain and boring. Duh, its early stages - they can leave out whatever they want for tech demos as its about the TECH, NOT about 'looking good'
You just made me feel allot better, I have felt like im talking to a brick wall today and yesterday with different people posting the same things redundantly that have already been covered in various threads and then the same responses follow...I'm glad someone knew what I meant.
 
Last edited:

DrPepper

The Doctor is in the house
Joined
Jan 16, 2008
Messages
7,482 (2.07/day)
Likes
799
Location
Scotland (It rains alot)
System Name Rusky
Processor Intel Core i7 D0 3.8Ghz
Motherboard Asus P6T
Cooling Thermaltake Dark Knight
Memory 12GB Patriot Viper's 1866mhz 9-9-9-24
Video Card(s) GTX470 1280MB
Storage OCZ Summit 60GB + Samsung 1TB + Samsung 2TB
Display(s) Sharp Aquos L32X20E 1920 x 1080
Case Silverstone Raven RV01
Power Supply Corsair 650 Watt
Software Windows 7 x64
Benchmark Scores 3DMark06 - 18064 http://img.techpowerup.org/090720/Capture002.jpg
#73
Summary:

Nvidia: 30fps in raytracing without extras with four uberexpensive 4gb cards.
Ati: 25+fps in raytracing + extras with two cheap cards.

Am i correct?
Who said they were cheap :eek: Could have been RV770 workstation cards. If you look back at the earliest physics models they were rather bare and blocky and now compared to physics models that are being touted.
 
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
1,062 (0.31/day)
Likes
68
System Name REBEL R1
Processor Core i7 920
Motherboard ASUS P6T
Cooling Stock
Memory 6GB OCZ GOLD TC LV Kit 1866MHz@1.65V 9-9-9-24
Video Card(s) Two Sapphire HD 5770 Vapor-X Xfire'd and OC'd (920/1330)
Storage Seagate 7200.11 500GB 32MB
Case Antec Three Hundred
Audio Device(s) ASUS Xonar D1 PCI Sound Card
Power Supply OCZ StealthXStream 500W
Software Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
Benchmark Scores 16585 Performance Score on 3DMark Vantage
#74
Who said they were cheap :eek: Could have been RV770 workstation cards. If you look back at the earliest physics models they were rather bare and blocky and now compared to physics models that are being touted.
My friend's dad who works for AMD told me on the phone last night that the basic components used to play/develop the Cinema 2.0 demo was the V5700 on a 9950 BE Phenom with 4GB of DDR2 RAM, no OC was in the process. I see a more compatible approach compared to enough computer workstation power to diagnose a space station...
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 5, 2007
Messages
1,714 (0.46/day)
Likes
182
Processor Intel C2Q Q6600 @ Stock (for now)
Motherboard Asus P5Q-E
Cooling Proc: Scythe Mine, Graphics: Zalman VF900 Cu
Memory 4 GB (2x2GB) DDR2 Corsair Dominator 1066Mhz 5-5-5-15
Video Card(s) GigaByte 8800GT Stock Clocks: 700Mhz Core, 1700 Shader, 1940 Memory
Storage 74 GB WD Raptor 10000rpm, 2x250 GB Seagate Raid 0
Display(s) HP p1130, 21" Trinitron
Case Antec p180
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi PLatinum
Power Supply 700W FSP Group 85% Efficiency
Software Windows XP
#75
Give up guys. If they can't understand my last post, they will not understand why it doesn't matter that the Ati one looks better.

The reflections in the Nvidia demo are limited to the few colors used in its environment, there is a reason all the buildings are grey and few color on anything else.
Don't want to insult you, but this just shows your limited knowlegde. For the 2 billio0nth time, this is a tech demo. Ray-tracing in a glance does this: find a surface (polygon), calculate the amount of light reflected/refracted, extract* the color of that position in the poly, move on to the next surface.

*It doesn't matter if that texture is a beatiful high detailed one or a completely grey one. In both cases the operation "LOAD_TEX (x,y)" or whatever the name it has, DOES occur. The "performance hit" is the same in both cases. Understand this for once before continuing with the nonsense and the acusations FFS.

Another thing to consider BEFORE talking about the hardware used is that this demo was at 1920x1200 while the other one was on 720p. And forget about resolution scalability of raster renderers, ray-tracing is 100% dependant on resolution. You can't compare both demos because they are very different, and both are as impressive. In a manner, this one is even more impressive, as I remember reading that Ati couldn't achieve such high resolutions no matter how much hardware they used.

And finally, YES, Ati hardware NOW is a lot better suited for ray-tracing becuse it has tons of shaders and a tesselator. Yet it can't do ray-tracing on a level it would be useful for games. This is a ray-tracing demo, not a demo to see which hardware can run it. Whenever the renderer software is prepared, hardware capable of running it will be released. Or do you honestly believe Nvidia is stupid or that they can't put as many shaders as Ati on one chip? When ray-tracing is mature enough Ati, Intel and Nvidia will all have their capable hardware, don't worry.