qwerty2000
Newcomer
This means that we'll be seeing the polygon count over 1 billion in real time then?
qwerty2000 said:This means that we'll be seeing the polygon count over 1 billion in real time then?
No, (as performance isn't really speculated upon in the patent). But it 'could' mean we won't necesserily have to render polygons at all if we feel like it...This means that we'll be seeing the polygon count over 1 billion in real time then?
Fafalada said:No, (as performance isn't really speculated upon in the patent). But it 'could' mean we won't necesserily have to render polygons at all if we feel like it...This means that we'll be seeing the polygon count over 1 billion in real time then?
This means that we'll be seeing the polygon count over 1 billion in real time then?
For example, a rendering process capacity of the order of several hundreds [Mpolygon/sec]
it'll be more like less than 1 billion polygons/sec. probably several hundred million polygons/sec. that would be a 10 fold increase beyond the highest polygon/sec PS2 games. (in line with what EA said recently)
Teasy said:Just FYI, you can't really go by polys per second with FarCry since its a PC game and framerate varies wildly depending on what hardware you play it on. Better to look at polys per frame. Also I think the reason Far Cry looks so good is more about effects then polygon counts (well its a good mix but mostly texture detail and shader effects).
But yeah 100 or 200 million polys per second average in game on next gen consoles would be fantastic. I wasn't trying to say that it wouldn't be a good leap or anything. Just saying that's what I expect next gen.
Megadrive1988 said:comparing PC games to console games is kinda worthless, in most cases, since PC games never almost never push a specific PC configuration (CPU, GPU, memory, bus, etc).
console games are a good comparison naturally. most console games this generation push under 10 million polys. a fews push 10-20 million polys. so 10-20 million is the max. the first generation games on next-gen consoles should easily be 100-200 million polys so that's a 10 to 20 fold increase. I expect next gen consoles be capable of pushing in the middle hundreds of millions of polys when really pushed hard. so 400 to 600 million polys with some pixel shading and some effects. that should be achivable if nextgen consoles are tranforming billions of polygons. we'll say 2 to 3 billion raw or flat shaded polygons. remember the GSCube could do 1.2 billion raw or flat shaded, from its 97~98 GFLOPs peak. even if PS3 CPU gets only 256 GFLOPs, it'll still surpass GSCube by alot.
Megadrive1988 said:comparing PC games to console games is kinda worthless, in most cases, since PC games never almost never push a specific PC configuration (CPU, GPU, memory, bus, etc).
console games are a good comparison naturally. most console games this generation push under 10 million polys. a fews push 10-20 million polys. so 10-20 million is the max. the first generation games on next-gen consoles should easily be 100-200 million polys so that's a 10 to 20 fold increase. I expect next gen consoles be capable of pushing in the middle hundreds of millions of polys when really pushed hard. so 400 to 600 million polys with some pixel shading and some effects. that should be achivable if nextgen consoles are tranforming billions of polygons. we'll say 2 to 3 billion raw or flat shaded polygons. remember the GSCube could do 1.2 billion raw or flat shaded, from its 97~98 GFLOPs peak. even if PS3 CPU gets only 256 GFLOPs, it'll still surpass GSCube by alot.
ERP said:Megadrive1988 said:comparing PC games to console games is kinda worthless, in most cases, since PC games never almost never push a specific PC configuration (CPU, GPU, memory, bus, etc).
console games are a good comparison naturally. most console games this generation push under 10 million polys. a fews push 10-20 million polys. so 10-20 million is the max. the first generation games on next-gen consoles should easily be 100-200 million polys so that's a 10 to 20 fold increase. I expect next gen consoles be capable of pushing in the middle hundreds of millions of polys when really pushed hard. so 400 to 600 million polys with some pixel shading and some effects. that should be achivable if nextgen consoles are tranforming billions of polygons. we'll say 2 to 3 billion raw or flat shaded polygons. remember the GSCube could do 1.2 billion raw or flat shaded, from its 97~98 GFLOPs peak. even if PS3 CPU gets only 256 GFLOPs, it'll still surpass GSCube by alot.
And where exactly are we storing these 100's of millions of polys?
I just recently did some rough math for a product for a next gen platform that seemed to imply I could draw more polygons in one frame than I could store in main memory, and that was using a pretty compact vertex format.
It's nice to talk about procedural generation of geometry, but much harder in practice to do in a useful way.
Panajev2001a said:ERP said:Megadrive1988 said:comparing PC games to console games is kinda worthless, in most cases, since PC games never almost never push a specific PC configuration (CPU, GPU, memory, bus, etc).
console games are a good comparison naturally. most console games this generation push under 10 million polys. a fews push 10-20 million polys. so 10-20 million is the max. the first generation games on next-gen consoles should easily be 100-200 million polys so that's a 10 to 20 fold increase. I expect next gen consoles be capable of pushing in the middle hundreds of millions of polys when really pushed hard. so 400 to 600 million polys with some pixel shading and some effects. that should be achivable if nextgen consoles are tranforming billions of polygons. we'll say 2 to 3 billion raw or flat shaded polygons. remember the GSCube could do 1.2 billion raw or flat shaded, from its 97~98 GFLOPs peak. even if PS3 CPU gets only 256 GFLOPs, it'll still surpass GSCube by alot.
And where exactly are we storing these 100's of millions of polys?
I just recently did some rough math for a product for a next gen platform that seemed to imply I could draw more polygons in one frame than I could store in main memory, and that was using a pretty compact vertex format.
It's nice to talk about procedural generation of geometry, but much harder in practice to do in a useful way.
Using NURBS and Subdivision Surfaces ? Would that help you in the scenario you were working on ?
I've said this before I seriously looked at both of these technologies for a racing game a few years ago and it was cheaper to store a very highres model (>25000 poly's) than to store the subdivision surface model or the nurbs model. You have to get really close to a 25000 poly car model for the polygons to become obvious (the model had bulbs in the headlights!).
I'm expecting way more that 100-200 million polys. I'm looking at 1-3 bpps in real time and 10-16 bpps raw.
The same place where we store 'bilions of texels' on current consoles?ERP said:And where exactly are we storing these 100's of millions of polys?
I agree, people are all too quick to forget the overhead asociated with various HOS approaches. Outside the ideal shapes that don't really show up in games based on real looking stuff much, the worthwhile benefits in storage don't really come until you start zooming in really close at stuff.They can be useful, but my experience is that they end up not so much saving you space as allowing you to get closer to the model.
Screw subdivision, we'll just define NURB primitives on this new rasterizer and do away with polygons all together.Panajev said:Using NURBS and Subdivision Surfaces ?