Wish I were there!....Have fun Boss!

Grumpymangrumbling2019:

I see use for global illumination but as reflections are concerned traditional methods are good enough. I remember just how difficult it was for nvidia to setup a scenario where you can tell the difference from the car reflecting the fire. It was entertaining seeing them struggle to hide the traditional method working fine.

"Traditional" (aka fast and fake) methods for reflections and shadows will be replaced. It's not a matter of 'if', but 'when'. It might not be viable to run in real time today, but it's very close and it's already the norm in CG for many years. Current solutions are simply limited and have already peaked, so the only way forward is to use more complex techniques, such as raytracing.

I remember back when Hardware T&L became normal and they started to put in lightsources and shadows into games as well as bumpmapping which reacts to light (I forgot what it is really called) and most of it all started to vanish away despite that we have so much more power in the hardware today, as well as more efficient APIs. It was also great when games used EAX type of effects for the sound but that pretty much disappeared too with never games.

Kaleid:

I remember back when Hardware T&L became normal and they started to put in lightsources and shadows into games as well as bumpmapping which reacts to light (I forgot what it is really called) and most of it all started to vanish away despite that we have so much more power in the hardware today, as well as more efficient APIs. It was also great when games used EAX type of effects for the sound but that pretty much disappeared too with never games.

EAX was replaced by EFX.

Astyanax:

EAX was replaced by EFX.

So which games are using it? Arkham City had for instance echo in cave like environments but Knight removed it. Audio is not a high priority today.

EAX sort of died along with Creative Labs' near monopoly on sound cards.

What a shame, as I think audio is hugely important and adds to the game.

mentor07825:

What a shame, as I think audio is hugely important and adds to the game.

Soundblaster X7 ftw 😉

Since this is a leak and might not be true (likely is true and we'll find out soon) i'll post the forum link instead of the pic for the sake of discussion and not spoil: https://forums.guru3d.com/posts/5678856/

Grumpymangrumbling2019:

I see use for global illumination but as reflections are concerned traditional methods are good enough. I remember just how difficult it was for nvidia to setup a scenario where you can tell the difference from the car reflecting the fire. It was entertaining seeing them struggle to hide the traditional method working fine.

AMD is going to trigger a few fan boys with the way they will use Ray Tracing and how they will make it work for consoles and consoles ports. What really is astonishing is that some still think you need "specific" hardware to actually ray trace. Nv's mindshare on some is mind boggling.

Eastcoasthandle:

AMD is going to trigger a few fan boys with the way they will use Ray Tracing and how they will make it work for consoles and consoles ports.

not really.

Eastcoasthandle:

What really is astonishing is that some still think you need "specific" hardware to actually ray trace. Nv's mindshare on some is mind boggling.

True, you dont need it. But specific hardware can speed things up vs without it.

waltc3:

EAX sort of died along with Creative Labs' near monopoly on sound cards.

I'm still using my Creative X-FI Gamer pro

Ricardo:

Current solutions are simply limited and have already peaked, so the only way forward is to use more complex techniques, such as raytracing.

id suggest watching carmacks lecture on lighting/rendering principles from 2013 to gain some perspective. if you want the link, i can dig it up for you. in the opening he states "we are trying to simulate it (the game world) in various ways...& nowadays we know wat we would have to do to make that almost perfect...we just have nowhere near the computing capacity to do really high level simulations. but its useful, even if youre not going to do the right thing, to at least understand wat the right thing is & then understand which tradeoffs youre making. make them with a clear head rather than accidentally backing into tradeoffs that may or may not be the best way to go about things" we still dont have anywhere near the computing power to do anything close to ray tracing six years later. in its current form the technology is sampling a minuscule number of rays at an incredibly low resolution, & the results are crippling to even dedicated AI cores that literally dont do anything else but that one type of math. watever implementation AMD will use to accelerate the process with conventional gpu horsepower im sure will be more flexible algorithmically, by necessity, but i cant imagine any better. anyway my point is that abandoning fundamental principles of rendering in order to attempt to force a technology that is highly fashionable to marketing is NOT how real progress is made

Eastcoasthandle:

AMD is going to trigger a few fan boys with the way they will use Ray Tracing and how they will make it work for consoles and consoles ports. What really is astonishing is that some still think you need "specific" hardware to actually ray trace. Nv's mindshare on some is mind boggling.

That's why I said in the other thread that I hope AMD won't have any separate chip area dedicated for it. That way people could decide if they want higher fps or RT, with very linear benefit. As far as I know, with Turing if RTX is turned off, the GPU doesn't use the RT cores for anything, so they are just dead weight. If I'm wrong, I hope someone will correct me.

You cannot do high speed BVH on a general purpose shader, sorry fanboys.

Kaarme:

That's why I said in the other thread that I hope AMD won't have any separate chip area dedicated for it. That way people could decide if they want higher fps or RT, with very linear benefit. As far as I know, with Turing if RTX is turned off, the GPU doesn't use the RT cores for anything, so they are just dead weight. If I'm wrong, I hope someone will correct me.

Hopefully we will see in a few more hours 🙂.

__hollywood|meo:

we still don't have anywhere near the computing power to do anything close to ray tracing six years later. in its current form the technology is sampling a minuscule number of rays at an incredibly low resolution, & the results are crippling to even dedicated AI cores that literally don't do anything else but that one type of math. whatever implementation AMD will use to accelerate the process with conventional gpu horsepower im sure will be more flexible algorithmically, by necessity, but i cant imagine any better. anyway my point is that abandoning fundamental principles of rendering in order to attempt to force a technology that is highly fashionable to marketing is NOT how real progress is made

Very well said. There are a few aspects of Ray Tracing that we have not seen yet in a AAA Title Game in any meaningful way: Reflections, Shadows, Ambient Occlusion, Caustics and Global Illumination.That still allowed you to play a game beyond 1080p and above 60 fps. One game BFV can have reflections. While another games use something else. While others still haven't set a release date. IMO, once we see these RT elements used in console games we willl see more of it on PC games.

So it starts at midnight. One hour to go.

Eastcoasthandle:

AMD is going to trigger a few fan boys with the way they will use Ray Tracing and how they will make it work for consoles and consoles ports. What really is astonishing is that some still think you need "specific" hardware to actually ray trace. Nv's mindshare on some is mind boggling.

I am so relieved that AMD is going to officially call it: Select lightning Effects for Real Time Gaming, apparently--inside their "Ray Trace Vision" package initiative...;) Thank God AMD is going to actually explain what it is, and "Select lightning Effects for Real Time Gaming" hits the mark--it's lighting (for instance, global illumination) that simulates a ray traced lighting effect in real time, one of many such possible effects--without actually trying to ray trace anything in real time...! Because no GPU made is anywhere near-powerful enough to do that! I had hopes AMD would be bring some clarity and sanity to the buzzword marketing nVidia has created, and I see I'm not going to be disappointed! The problem is that our hardware Internet pundits seem content to allow nVidia to really muddy the water with it's "It just works" ray-tracing buzzword marketing spree. Probably 80% of the people who defend nVidia's marketing on this don't have a clue as to what "ray tracing"actually is! (It's almost a bad as Apple marketing, sad to say.)

Yes,we have raytracing but for nothing more than Minecraft or Quake 2 a 60fps with an 2080ti....LMAO Dont espect to have Bf5 or Any mordern game with raytrace a near complete "GI-Reflexion-Shadow" at 60fps... Raytracing is going to have the same path as VR...Too early,cost too mutch (Quake2 levels graphics with an 2080ti =1300$). When card gone be able to push Bf5 level details full Raytrace and more than 60fps for less than 350$ it's gone be a thing.