most people don't understand that that water is not a texture with a cubemap or any of that kind of stuff - the water is only visible because the light that goes through it is being refracted and reflected all over the place and into the eye of the camera like real life.
The Larrabee lives on in Intel's "Knights Corner" project. It's has 50 cores of x86 power and is scheduled to be out in 2012. Real-time ray tracing should indeed be possible in the next gen consoles.
Intel has no reputation in the high-end graphics arena right now, so they're going to have to fight tooth-and-nail to make one. And I'm sure we all know ATi and NVIDIA are going to do everything they can to keep that from happening. But Intel does have a good idea here.
Intel is like 15 times larger than either company, so there's really nothing they can do to stop Intel should it want to enter the GPU market. Intel could literally just buy NVIDIA.
amd fusion is gonna destroy sandy bridge. Thats why Apple is moving all their computers to AMD. Sandy Bridge GPU is pants and will struggle to handle HD 1080p.
News! "Real time"(!?) ray tracing on (NVIDIA) GPU..
"Nvidia's ray tracing demonstration ran even more slowly than Larrabee, taking around 15 seconds to fully render a high-resolution image of a sports car using reflective and translucent textures with global illumination."
15 seconds! The PS3 ray trace demo (you can find here on Youtube) beats that by light years ahead!
Again, as I've said before.. current GPU architecture really suck at ray tracing.
lol, your really not a smart cookie for thinking the GPU, the best computational number cruncher can't beat the CPU, the worst computational number cruncher at calculate mass amounts of basic vector maths used in RAY-TRACING. What planet do you live on? This quake demo uses occlusion mapping to simulate high polys....not very high quality if you ask me. Same models and textures from original game, so simply put - rubbish ray-tracing demo.
If it ever gets released, you are looking at 2nd quarter 2010 at the EARLIEST. Intel already made it clear that if the Larrabee does not compete in the highest end of Nvidia products, it will be cancelled.
ORLY!?!? Anyway I am sure you will say that because the water is a moving mesh it is more difficult to raytrace. You would be correct if you said that, however the quality here is ass. Everyone knows that the Larrabee is later to market than the Fermi, and will have a difficult time competing with the 5870, let alone the Fermi. Pretty much sir, you should have clarified why I am so stupid before tossing around insults like a dick.
Lexwalker2, nVidia's ray tracing demonstration was focused on producing photo realistic, movie quality images with the use of indirect lighting. It is much more complex, and requires many more calculations than the simple ray tracing method used in this Larrabee demo.
You are comparing apples to oranges. They're two different things entirely.
NVIDIA's demo is nothing and its not even real time.. Like I iterated before, there are just stuff that GPU can't do well at all.. Ray Tracing is one of them.
Check this out
watch?v=15kJjwD7xE0
Nehalem EX 24-core real time ray tracing.. better than NVIDIA's demo, especially the speed!
Lexwalker2, you are embarrassing yourself. You are comparing a 24 thread, next generation system running software no one has ever heard of before to a single GPU from nVidia's current (or previous, depending on how you look at it) architecture running Mental Ray, the most popular renderer.
You should learn to compare apples to apples. Say, 1 current generation CPU to 1 current generation GPU both running Mental Ray.
@unclespinnydervish: Suffice it to say that consumer GPUs make a lot of image quality sacrifices to provide realtime rendering, and that a CGI render farm also tends to have far more resources to raytrace. In addition, the render farms don't seem to make any attempts to do things in real time.
It also helps that cards like the Nvidia Quadro has firmware that allows for some GPU acceleration in stuff like Maya and Renderware.
The Cell processor's SPEs are more complete (RISC-based) processor cores (also with SIMD) than those (simplistic) ones found in GPUs. SPEs can be independantly running while GPU cores usually still needs some CPU control (i.e. GPU programs are small and straight forward, and no stack means recursive nesting calls are not possible). On the other hand GPUs are suited where lots of FP ops are required (in parallel) simultaneously. Thus those enourmous GFLOPs and TFLOPs.
Branching is CPU specialty, not the GPUs. Most GPUs do simple branching based on data, but not very good with loops (recursion) and multiple branching (multiple conditions). If you look at their (simple) GPU execution units, you can see that.
AFAIK current GPU parallelism is not fully suitable for ray tracing, as I've mentioned before (in my last post, and another previous post on stream limitations). Ray tracing requires access across all resources since it needs to constantly change the rendered pixels according to each light rays intersection (where lots of branching/recursion is required). The CPU is faster and more flexible in this manner. That's why Intel's touted ray tracing.. They try to "change the game".
You should check out the PS3 ray tracing here (they used 3 units hooked togehter), they are using (rather weak and simplistic) Cell "processors" to render in real time. Its goes to show the flexibility required for ray tracing.
GPUs are very poor at such stuff (recursion and branching, also doesn't even implement a stack), but more suited towards DSP-style coding. Much of the horsepower to control how the GPU behaves will also have to come from the CPU. Thus that's why we see a faster CPU, faster rendering, higher frame rates.
And in ray tracing, since every material and set of lighting, occlusion, etc conditions has its own instruction stream associated with it (to compute refraction, reflection, absorption, etc) and becomes difficult to run the same instruction stream on even a significant fraction of the threads in a shader. This problem reduces your GPU utilization by a huge factor which may make performance unacceptable, even in real time.
Looks like NV is taking a leaf from Intel's idea.. Competition is good.. at least they keep each other on their toes.. Could be a 3 way fight in the future... LOL!
Not sure about that.. AFAIK Ray Tracing requires lots of recursive and branching code, which usually GPU hardware lack (which is why CPU is more suited for this task).
Anyway waiting for the Ruby 2.0 demo... not the video, but the EXE file!
GFLOPs doesn't matter much as GPUs can't perform true ray tracing, even from ATI. This is due to its rendering architecture. That's why render farms still exists in SFX studios. Ray tracing allows true cinematic effects (like in the movies). Usually only CPU can do it and the amount of computational power for this task is enormous (not kidding)! Ray tracing could make GPU rasterization obselete, if can be done in real time (and good frame rates).
Furthermore, I seen some comparing water reflections in games.. well those are done by using light and environment / reflection mapping, not true ray tracing.
Ray tracers usually rely Dual Precision, while those GPU advertised TFLOPs are usually single precision (rasterization relies more on Single Precision).
Will Larrabee spell the end of Render Farms (as well as conventional GPUs)? Time will tell..
Anyway, some time ago NVIDIA did show ray trace demo using CUDA but it was grainy, shoddy and slow, hardly much rays traced at all due to GPU programmability limitations.
Indirect visibility creates another problem for a stream processor when a surface shader uses secondary rays to compute the incident lighting. If two adjacent pixels being shaded in together lock-step emit secondary rays that encounter different materials, those shaders can no longer run together. Additionally, assets needed by the one shader will compete for cache space with assets needed by the the other shader.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Your an idot, NVIDIA is doing real time ray tracing using CUDA, and it would eat this demo for lunch! 3x GTX280 couldn't do this at 1fps, I don't think so!.. you could not be so far off the mark!
Unlike rasterization, ray tracing allows objects to interact with each other. Inter-object visibility is the key reason that ray tracing enables the stunning visual effects viewers have come to expect from production quality 3D content. But the technical upshot of rays bouncing all over the scene is that a ray tracer needs random access to everything. This means the entire scene (all geometry, shaders, and assets) must be accessible in RAM.
Rasterization is limited in the long run though. There likely will be a time when we're using voxels & raytracing instead of rasterization, and it has nothing to with with object printing but real time graphics (especially in games).
It's true that on PC only Intel would develop for this tech in the short run, UNLESS they can get into the next generation of console hardware. That's all the matters anyways, as PC game development is almost dead anyways.
You guys are commenting on texture -resolutions? Wow, talk about missing the point... Hint: It is ray traced! The same technique used when we do 3D movies etc, unlike rasterization that is done in modern 3D games. Ray Tracing is far superior but very costly [in cpu cycles], hence its limited use for games in general. But that might be changed soon.
Heh, this video does not really give raytracing any justice as quake 3 graphics were originally rasterised. In a years time when people actually get to play with this new technology, we will probably get to see a lot of interesting demos, whit some real next-gen graphics.
Those who do not understand why it's an amazingly cool feat should just shut up. It's raytracing in realtime! 3x GTX280's would not give 1 fps on this scene if they were to raytrace it.
This is pre-production hardware and drivers running a demo probably being filmed on someone's mobile, then scrunched to play on YouTube. I don't think that's the basis to be judging what the textures look like.
ps4 could that look that up
260kevinsutton 4 months ago
most people don't understand that that water is not a texture with a cubemap or any of that kind of stuff - the water is only visible because the light that goes through it is being refracted and reflected all over the place and into the eye of the camera like real life.
super6plx 7 months ago
The Larrabee lives on in Intel's "Knights Corner" project. It's has 50 cores of x86 power and is scheduled to be out in 2012. Real-time ray tracing should indeed be possible in the next gen consoles.
Athlor1 11 months ago
Larrabee's already been mostly abandoned as a new Intel consumer GPU architecture, which is why Intel recently 'made nice' w/ nVidia.
xnonsuchx 1 year ago
it was said to having 320 p55c core and 80 texture mapping unit and 64 rops 512bit bus with gddr5 memory. larrabee will crush both gtx 580 and 6970
hanrinch 1 year ago
Intel has no reputation in the high-end graphics arena right now, so they're going to have to fight tooth-and-nail to make one. And I'm sure we all know ATi and NVIDIA are going to do everything they can to keep that from happening. But Intel does have a good idea here.
Good luck, Intel!
macfanofgi 1 year ago
@macfanofgi
Intel is like 15 times larger than either company, so there's really nothing they can do to stop Intel should it want to enter the GPU market. Intel could literally just buy NVIDIA.
TheAdarkon 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
amd fusion is gonna destroy sandy bridge. Thats why Apple is moving all their computers to AMD. Sandy Bridge GPU is pants and will struggle to handle HD 1080p.
jprincehouston 1 year ago
i think i know what water should look like... and this just looks like wavy tin foil... lame... i'de rather stick with my NVIDIA or ATI...
ahsonk 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SEGA's Model 4 ray tracing capable hardware is currently in development
Further information is to be found at the following address -
fgnonlinedotwebsdotcom
pornostar100 2 years ago
Larrabee technology will be incorporated into the Intel X5000 HD
AliasEgo901 2 years ago
LOL cancelled!
Leadwerks 2 years ago
Larrabee inside intel ass ! ah ah ah !
SiouplaitMerci 2 years ago
Graphics is shit!
XanderCallahan 2 years ago
EPIC FAIL. Larrabee has officially been cancelled.
junkyintel 2 years ago
according to john carmack real time ray tracing on a significant scale in games would require a GPU core speed of at least 3ghz
drshields1988 2 years ago
Carmack also thinks that PC gamers want to see games ditching dedicated servers.
Yeah, crackpot.
ericunderscores 2 years ago
Impressive. Can't wait to see realtime photo realisitic rendering.
muffdriver69 2 years ago
1.7%
odst121 2 years ago
if you even knew shit about the subject...
SergioNehama 2 years ago
Nice to see so many kids making ullshit coments on these threads as usual.
rabbit167 2 years ago 10
News! "Real time"(!?) ray tracing on (NVIDIA) GPU..
"Nvidia's ray tracing demonstration ran even more slowly than Larrabee, taking around 15 seconds to fully render a high-resolution image of a sports car using reflective and translucent textures with global illumination."
15 seconds! The PS3 ray trace demo (you can find here on Youtube) beats that by light years ahead!
Again, as I've said before.. current GPU architecture really suck at ray tracing.
lexwalker2 2 years ago
lol, your really not a smart cookie for thinking the GPU, the best computational number cruncher can't beat the CPU, the worst computational number cruncher at calculate mass amounts of basic vector maths used in RAY-TRACING. What planet do you live on? This quake demo uses occlusion mapping to simulate high polys....not very high quality if you ask me. Same models and textures from original game, so simply put - rubbish ray-tracing demo.
DrR1pper 2 years ago
FYI, i am not an Nvidia fanboy....but ATI fanboy
DrR1pper 2 years ago
Well I may be switching to an Intel fanboy after this beast is released
lizardmannnn 2 years ago
If it ever gets released, you are looking at 2nd quarter 2010 at the EARLIEST. Intel already made it clear that if the Larrabee does not compete in the highest end of Nvidia products, it will be cancelled.
l0lum4d 2 years ago
nvidia can do real time ray tracing, find the Bugatti raytracing demo.
l0lum4d 2 years ago
hahahahahahah omg you are so stupid :P
djorkid 2 years ago
ORLY!?!? Anyway I am sure you will say that because the water is a moving mesh it is more difficult to raytrace. You would be correct if you said that, however the quality here is ass. Everyone knows that the Larrabee is later to market than the Fermi, and will have a difficult time competing with the 5870, let alone the Fermi. Pretty much sir, you should have clarified why I am so stupid before tossing around insults like a dick.
l0lum4d 2 years ago
Lexwalker2, nVidia's ray tracing demonstration was focused on producing photo realistic, movie quality images with the use of indirect lighting. It is much more complex, and requires many more calculations than the simple ray tracing method used in this Larrabee demo.
You are comparing apples to oranges. They're two different things entirely.
HelixTheThinker 2 years ago
NVIDIA's demo is nothing and its not even real time.. Like I iterated before, there are just stuff that GPU can't do well at all.. Ray Tracing is one of them.
Check this out
watch?v=15kJjwD7xE0
Nehalem EX 24-core real time ray tracing.. better than NVIDIA's demo, especially the speed!
lexwalker2 2 years ago
Lexwalker2, you are embarrassing yourself. You are comparing a 24 thread, next generation system running software no one has ever heard of before to a single GPU from nVidia's current (or previous, depending on how you look at it) architecture running Mental Ray, the most popular renderer.
You should learn to compare apples to apples. Say, 1 current generation CPU to 1 current generation GPU both running Mental Ray.
HelixTheThinker 2 years ago
Your kidding me right, GPUs arnt good at highly parrallel data processing (like Ray Tracing).
If GPUs cant Ray Trace very well, why do CGI companies have banks of GPUs setup to with the role purpose of rendering frames through Ray Tracing?
Just because Intels former GPU is crap doesnt mean they all are.
unclespinnydervish 2 years ago
@unclespinnydervish: Suffice it to say that consumer GPUs make a lot of image quality sacrifices to provide realtime rendering, and that a CGI render farm also tends to have far more resources to raytrace. In addition, the render farms don't seem to make any attempts to do things in real time.
It also helps that cards like the Nvidia Quadro has firmware that allows for some GPU acceleration in stuff like Maya and Renderware.
InvisibleSandwichTM 1 year ago
wow dude such good graphic.....omg bullshit i want it!
agrom8 2 years ago
The Cell processor's SPEs are more complete (RISC-based) processor cores (also with SIMD) than those (simplistic) ones found in GPUs. SPEs can be independantly running while GPU cores usually still needs some CPU control (i.e. GPU programs are small and straight forward, and no stack means recursive nesting calls are not possible). On the other hand GPUs are suited where lots of FP ops are required (in parallel) simultaneously. Thus those enourmous GFLOPs and TFLOPs.
lexwalker2 2 years ago
Branching is CPU specialty, not the GPUs. Most GPUs do simple branching based on data, but not very good with loops (recursion) and multiple branching (multiple conditions). If you look at their (simple) GPU execution units, you can see that.
About GPU access? Read my old comments here.
lexwalker2 2 years ago
AFAIK current GPU parallelism is not fully suitable for ray tracing, as I've mentioned before (in my last post, and another previous post on stream limitations). Ray tracing requires access across all resources since it needs to constantly change the rendered pixels according to each light rays intersection (where lots of branching/recursion is required). The CPU is faster and more flexible in this manner. That's why Intel's touted ray tracing.. They try to "change the game".
lexwalker2 2 years ago
You should check out the PS3 ray tracing here (they used 3 units hooked togehter), they are using (rather weak and simplistic) Cell "processors" to render in real time. Its goes to show the flexibility required for ray tracing.
lexwalker2 2 years ago
GPUs are very poor at such stuff (recursion and branching, also doesn't even implement a stack), but more suited towards DSP-style coding. Much of the horsepower to control how the GPU behaves will also have to come from the CPU. Thus that's why we see a faster CPU, faster rendering, higher frame rates.
lexwalker2 2 years ago
And in ray tracing, since every material and set of lighting, occlusion, etc conditions has its own instruction stream associated with it (to compute refraction, reflection, absorption, etc) and becomes difficult to run the same instruction stream on even a significant fraction of the threads in a shader. This problem reduces your GPU utilization by a huge factor which may make performance unacceptable, even in real time.
lexwalker2 2 years ago
Looks like NV is taking a leaf from Intel's idea.. Competition is good.. at least they keep each other on their toes.. Could be a 3 way fight in the future... LOL!
lexwalker2 2 years ago
Not sure about that.. AFAIK Ray Tracing requires lots of recursive and branching code, which usually GPU hardware lack (which is why CPU is more suited for this task).
Anyway waiting for the Ruby 2.0 demo... not the video, but the EXE file!
lexwalker2 2 years ago
GFLOPs doesn't matter much as GPUs can't perform true ray tracing, even from ATI. This is due to its rendering architecture. That's why render farms still exists in SFX studios. Ray tracing allows true cinematic effects (like in the movies). Usually only CPU can do it and the amount of computational power for this task is enormous (not kidding)! Ray tracing could make GPU rasterization obselete, if can be done in real time (and good frame rates).
lexwalker2 2 years ago
Furthermore, I seen some comparing water reflections in games.. well those are done by using light and environment / reflection mapping, not true ray tracing.
lexwalker2 2 years ago
Ray tracers usually rely Dual Precision, while those GPU advertised TFLOPs are usually single precision (rasterization relies more on Single Precision).
Will Larrabee spell the end of Render Farms (as well as conventional GPUs)? Time will tell..
Cheers!
lexwalker2 2 years ago
Comment removed
clikes2004 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
lol, the unedited version is at voypics com
vinniyo 2 years ago
wow, for a sec it actually looked like a real ship to me ^^
Hoobes1 2 years ago
Anyway, some time ago NVIDIA did show ray trace demo using CUDA but it was grainy, shoddy and slow, hardly much rays traced at all due to GPU programmability limitations.
lexwalker2 2 years ago 4
Indirect visibility creates another problem for a stream processor when a surface shader uses secondary rays to compute the incident lighting. If two adjacent pixels being shaded in together lock-step emit secondary rays that encounter different materials, those shaders can no longer run together. Additionally, assets needed by the one shader will compete for cache space with assets needed by the the other shader.
lexwalker2 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Your an idot, NVIDIA is doing real time ray tracing using CUDA, and it would eat this demo for lunch! 3x GTX280 couldn't do this at 1fps, I don't think so!.. you could not be so far off the mark!
brloiler 2 years ago
Quote from PC Perspective article..
Why haven't we seen a complete ray tracing renderer running on a GPU?
To answer that question, we need to take a closer look at the differences between the ray tracing and rasterization algorithms.
lexwalker2 2 years ago
Unlike rasterization, ray tracing allows objects to interact with each other. Inter-object visibility is the key reason that ray tracing enables the stunning visual effects viewers have come to expect from production quality 3D content. But the technical upshot of rays bouncing all over the scene is that a ray tracer needs random access to everything. This means the entire scene (all geometry, shaders, and assets) must be accessible in RAM.
lexwalker2 2 years ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
That's not new. That rippling water reflection java applet has been available on the net since the 90s.
deanlowe 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
well, looks bad, but the foundation should be good, ready for improvement...
erikalst 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It sucks
eugenealive 2 years ago
Apparently Sean Maloney owes me lunch.
symbolset 2 years ago
Any game designed for this technology will have to be directly funded by Intel, as it won't be cross-platform.
Oh, and a well crafted / implemented 3D pollygon renderer will always have a performance edge over raytracing.
However, this may have uses in the comming voxel revolution as related to solid object printing ( formerly rapid prototyping )
Sanescience 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Rasterization is limited in the long run though. There likely will be a time when we're using voxels & raytracing instead of rasterization, and it has nothing to with with object printing but real time graphics (especially in games).
It's true that on PC only Intel would develop for this tech in the short run, UNLESS they can get into the next generation of console hardware. That's all the matters anyways, as PC game development is almost dead anyways.
JigenD 2 years ago
You guys are commenting on texture -resolutions? Wow, talk about missing the point... Hint: It is ray traced! The same technique used when we do 3D movies etc, unlike rasterization that is done in modern 3D games. Ray Tracing is far superior but very costly [in cpu cycles], hence its limited use for games in general. But that might be changed soon.
Zarkow 2 years ago 4
Heh, this video does not really give raytracing any justice as quake 3 graphics were originally rasterised. In a years time when people actually get to play with this new technology, we will probably get to see a lot of interesting demos, whit some real next-gen graphics.
opliik 2 years ago
Those who do not understand why it's an amazingly cool feat should just shut up. It's raytracing in realtime! 3x GTX280's would not give 1 fps on this scene if they were to raytrace it.
nizedk 2 years ago 6
This has been flagged as spam show
Why would anyone like to raytracing realtime?
Its useless.
MeitziQQ 2 years ago
Yes, but extermely realistic!
AndrewFaulds 2 years ago
Do a lot of CG work in the film/tv industry huh?
It is far from useless, though your comment is.
Joviex 2 years ago
@nizedk It would give exactly the same performance. It would just be 5 times hotter, and 5 times more expensive.
jayjjj3 1 year ago
@nizedk Intel gma fan?
allofyousuckla 11 months ago
Crappy audio.
triso666 2 years ago
GPU won't be handling that, though
warty4ev3r 2 years ago
As long as I can play GTA 4 on a 15" laptop with good settings, I'm happy.
sangolt88 2 years ago
Show me that thing playing Crysis like my 2 gtx 280's and ill be impressed! Dont show me an ex nvidia demo about the 6 series
apatcas 2 years ago
reminds me of rainbow six raven squad and other games of the 90s...
water was ok, but the ships texture was crap!
Wambo07 2 years ago
This is pre-production hardware and drivers running a demo probably being filmed on someone's mobile, then scrunched to play on YouTube. I don't think that's the basis to be judging what the textures look like.
MrReeey 2 years ago
ive seen a lot of cellphone-videos and I DID compared this to such videos.
Ok, maybe its not as bad as some 90s-games, but this is not the newest or best graphics.
(sry bad english im german)
Wambo07 2 years ago
it's not a video, it's generated in real time. if you played the game, you could interact with it. not so with a video
abiggerdog 2 years ago
it is a Youtube-Video.
Wambo07 2 years ago
that's it??? what was this crap???
St3aua86 2 years ago
Very cool!
xoSushi 2 years ago
the point is that it's rendered in real time
chitedhi 2 years ago 2
So.. is it faster comparing to other state-of-art GPUs, in terms of ray tracing?
wegra 2 years ago
still looks like a game from the 90s
Wambo07 2 years ago
wow
maxdboy100 2 years ago
wowza i know ms flight simulator 2004's water doesn't look that good. it almost looks like rainbowish oil floating on the water
psychoclown420 2 years ago
nice graphics but, the reflection is not realistic.. So what is the point...
jellotime91 2 years ago
nice and cool vid
musa0217 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
1st
SamBrears 2 years ago