PDA

View Full Version : A not bad realtime GI approximation.

bloodbob
10-Feb-2004, 11:13
http://www.cs.ucf.edu/graphics/GPUassistedGI/

I couldn't get the OpenGl binary to work on my 9500 pro though the DX9 worked well ( don't force AF ). Quite impressive maybe in 5 or 6 years we might see something like this in games well I can dream anyway(of course with wieghted trilinear filtering implemented on the GPU).
vnet
10-Feb-2004, 14:09
Doesn't seem to work on cards other than ATI according to the system requirements listed... :evil:
3dcgi
11-Feb-2004, 04:15
Well, Ati did sponsor the research so it not surprising that the testing was done with a Radeon.
Razor04
11-Feb-2004, 04:28
You have to admit it is a little strange though since ATI has such a good reputation for following the spec exactly.
Humus
11-Feb-2004, 06:16
Worked fine on my 9800, both GL and DX.
davepermen
11-Feb-2004, 06:40
You have to admit it is a little strange though since ATI has such a good reputation for following the spec exactly.

it's not atis fault others don't.. :D
lost
11-Feb-2004, 07:15
Is it just me or is the direct3d implementation plain buggy? It looks like the procedural textures are broken as well as proper light interpolation, but its running at 70ish fps and the opengl version that appears to be rendering properly is running at 3-4 fps...

Is it the same for you all as well?
bloodbob
11-Feb-2004, 08:18
Is it just me or is the direct3d implementation plain buggy? It looks like the procedural textures are broken as well as proper light interpolation, but its running at 70ish fps and the opengl version that appears to be rendering properly is running at 3-4 fps...

Is it the same for you all as well?
Can you upload a screenshot of both? The d3d might only be 1 reflection I guess.
lost
11-Feb-2004, 15:50
Ok here are both...

openGL with 2 bounces (http://home.earthlink.net/~lostsoulftp/opengl.PNG)
direct3d (http://home.earthlink.net/~lostsoulftp/directx.PNG)

^^that is what I see
Daliden
11-Feb-2004, 21:01
Ok here are both...

openGL with 2 bounces (http://home.earthlink.net/~lostsoulftp/opengl.PNG)
direct3d (http://home.earthlink.net/~lostsoulftp/directx.PNG)

^^that is what I see

On my 9500 PRO with Cat 3.10, both D3D and GL looked the same as your GL shot. GL loads a long time but works (albeit slow), D3D runs at something like 35 fps.
bloodbob
12-Feb-2004, 08:07
Ok here are both...

openGL with 2 bounces (http://home.earthlink.net/~lostsoulftp/opengl.PNG)
direct3d (http://home.earthlink.net/~lostsoulftp/directx.PNG)

^^that is what I see

Okay your D3D looks seriously @#!$ed up lol my D3D looks just like (well very similar) the OpenGl version. The thing that may be slowing down the OpenGl version is it might not be using static vertex data when you move the model in D3D it drops to a crawl ( you can move the light fine ). Someone might wanna check with the author why the speed is so much different I could be wrong D3D might only be one reflection.
This is what I see ( with a blue floor I was testing it to make sure it wasn't just intensity )
http://www.lexicon.net/mccann/blueGI.jpg

Make sure you didn't have AF enable forced on you should prolly disable forcing AA too I guess. Put it this way when AF is forced on mine it looks more whacked then your D3D.
Waltar
12-Feb-2004, 12:48
Neither work with any nv3x :(
Snyder
12-Feb-2004, 14:21
Ok here are both...

openGL with 2 bounces (http://home.earthlink.net/~lostsoulftp/opengl.PNG)
direct3d (http://home.earthlink.net/~lostsoulftp/directx.PNG)

^^that is what I see

Yep. Same here. Are you using Cat. 4.1 like me?
lost
12-Feb-2004, 15:08
Yeah, and I had AF at 8x...