Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion [2022]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Excuse me @Dictator could you please try it on an ARC gpu to see how well it performs in comparison to the AMD GPU? I'm betting the game will do better in it's current state on Intel GPUs.
Didn’t he say near the end of the (superb!) video that it doesn’t run on them? Just after he shows that it’s broken on Radeons.

I greatly appreciate that he covered all the bases, including the complaint that the new textures change the vibe. “We have our reasons” isn’t an entirely satisfactory explanation, but cool that he looked into it. Maybe it involves future work by Valve/NV.
 
Didn’t he say near the end of the (superb!) video that it doesn’t run on them? Just after he shows that it’s broken on Radeons.

I greatly appreciate that he covered all the bases, including the complaint that the new textures change the vibe. “We have our reasons” isn’t an entirely satisfactory explanation, but cool that he looked into it. Maybe it involves future work by Valve/NV.
Sorry, I missed that part. Thought it could be a DXR 1 versus DXR1.1 sort of thing.
 
Didn’t he say near the end of the (superb!) video that it doesn’t run on them? Just after he shows that it’s broken on Radeons.

I greatly appreciate that he covered all the bases, including the complaint that the new textures change the vibe. “We have our reasons” isn’t an entirely satisfactory explanation, but cool that he looked into it. Maybe it involves future work by Valve/NV.
right that. Only runs on Vulkan for now. However it seems that the Vulkan version of the game, which you can select in the menus, has a lot of glitches even on nVidia GPUs, that's why I asked.
 
The game uses VulkanRT API already, maybe Intel doesn't support it yet?

I know Intel supports Vulkan, but VulkanRT?
this is where I got the info


edit: VulkanRT is supported.

 
Reality does not bounce light infinitely, the energy and photons are eventually absorbed after a few bounces. The amount of real bounces depends on the surface properties. Mirrors like surfaces can bounce photons around tons of times before absorption, something like dirt? Not as many.
Regarding "4 Bounces" I state in the video. "4 Bounces" is not the limit in Portal RTX - that is just what the ultra setting is. You can set it up to 10 beyond Ultra. It is extreme diminishing returns though for visual differences beyond 4 tbh in portal.
Are people talking bounces specifically, or general ray recursion? In traditional raytracing, you trace numerous recursions ('bounces', although some are transmission through rather than reflection off) up to a set limit accounting for a maximum number of reflections. When that iteration count is hit, you terminate with a fudge factor. This works in most cases but not transparency, where glass generates many, many recursions. A trace through a wine glass to a reflective (polished wood) surface would be a ray to the glass surface, ray to other side of the glass surface, ray through contents/space inside the glass, ray through the other side of the glass, ray to the wood surface, and reflected ray. Additionally, the ray to the inside of the far side of the glass will also have reflections of rays passing through the glass material. 4 bounces would definitely be limiting; IIRC 7 was a reasonable minimum. Something like looking through a window at a glass of water in a diner would need a lot more iterations. Where the recursion threshold was reached, you'd have artefacts based on the termination state. eg. returning black from a terminal recursion would see black pixels where there should be a reflection or transmission.

However, if just talking about secondary illumination, after a few bounces the relative impact of further bounces is minimal and not worth the calculations and everything I've said above is pointless. ;)
 
4 bounces would definitely be limiting

Yeah, 4 intersections would only get you through a wine glass, but not able to see what's on the other side. The idea of path-tracing being limited to 4 bounces seems odd to me - I'd expect to see tons of artifacts. Maybe it's enough to generate surface caches, accumulate over time, and denoise to hide glaring discontinuities. I dunno -- nothing about any of these RTX "path-tracing" demos look anything like what I've come to associate with 'path tracing'. The scene illumination doesn't look natural to my eyes, especially considering how many of these rooms have a blown-out white window as the primary light source.

I'd wager that if you were to stick an object in front of the primary light source in the room that the room wouldn't go dark, right? Presumably they're still including some ambient coefficient into the calculation that's not the product of ray -> ... -> emitter
 
Last edited:
Haven't played portal rt but my general impression of the space is: 4 bounces is obviously nowhere near enough to capture anything in reality with the kind of granularity a film renderer expects, but for a games path tracer you're like, not doing any internal bounces in a glass surface or whatever, not even trying to handle any "object" with more than one ior, caching a lot for the nth bounce, reprojecting a lot of temporal info from previous traces, doing a bunch of biasing and weighting to get minimal noise, probably doing certain things like GI at a much, much lower resolution and scaling up, and so on.
 
Technically Portal RTX is impressive and the new DF-video makes me appreciate more what has been achieved.

Pathtracing can run decently at lower settings even on the RTX 2060 Super. I would be interested in Pathtracing on more complicated AAA games. Hopefully there will be a pathtracing graphics setting in addition to the hybrid renderer in the future. Until then I won't change my opinion much about the feasibility of patrcaring in large-scale projects.
 

Great video @Dictator I can see now how path traced gaming is so different from individual RT effects or even a few a once.

In the video you mention the limit of the current technology for this game is 4 bounces. Doesn't reality bend light infinitely in real life? I wonder if a future proofing mechanism could be to unlock ability for more bounces in the future

Excellent video @Dictator. Are there any more details on how the tracing through portals was done? I’m guessing in the hit shader you can just launch a new ray and set the origin to the exit of the portal you’re shading. It’s incredible how “easy” some things become with RT.
 
Excellent video @Dictator. Are there any more details on how the tracing through portals was done? I’m guessing in the hit shader you can just launch a new ray and set the origin to the exit of the portal you’re shading. It’s incredible how “easy” some things become with RT.
You say that but that statement goes against the account of a former Nvidia employee ...


Portal rendering is hardly trivial even with ray tracing because the concept of portals violates our near universal observations of the idea of conservation of energy which is central to physically based rendering ...
 
You say that but that statement goes against the account of a former Nvidia employee ...


Portal rendering is hardly trivial even with ray tracing because the concept of portals violates our near universal observations of the idea of conservation of energy which is central to physically based rendering ...
I think that @trinibwoy means It is easy from the perspective that ray tracing allows you to do it "elegantly" by doing something with the rays being shot when they hit the portal.
Morgan McGuire seems to be talking about how the fact that it can be done literally just breaks what PBR means since it is going above and beyond the conservation of energy.
 
Just finished Portal RTX.

Looks nice but I not as good looking as I was expecting, maybe it's the basic art style.
the art style of the game is what it is, looks like an industrial environment, never found it attractive -one of the reasons I didn't touch the original Portal-. Tbh I usually don't find attractive those games inspired in cities like GTA or Cyberpunk, although I like games like Gotham Knights or Spiderman.

The Witcher 3 and Skyrim's art style -with mods, without mods the art style of Skyrim is kinda meh- is much more akin to my tastes.
 
Last edited:
Reality does not bounce light infinitely, the energy and photons are eventually absorbed after a few bounces. The amount of real bounces depends on the surface properties. Mirrors like surfaces can bounce photons around tons of times before absorption, something like dirt? Not as many.
Regarding "4 Bounces" I state in the video. "4 Bounces" is not the limit in Portal RTX - that is just what the ultra setting is. You can set it up to 10 beyond Ultra. It is extreme diminishing returns though for visual differences beyond 4 tbh in portal.
Is that defined within the engine parameters for surfaces? I mean the estimated absorption of a specific surface? Or is it generic at this time?
 
Is that defined within the engine parameters for surfaces? I mean the estimated absorption of a specific surface? Or is it generic at this time?

If it's being done properly then absorption should automatically be a byproduct of the tracing and material shading calculation. You only have X amount of light emitted into the scene, and depending on the material you get a certain amount of RGB reflected and transmitted/absorbed. Whatever isn't reflected is absorbed (or filtered + transmitted), and vice versa. Angle of incidence also gets factored in for materials that have a fresnel component, making surfaces more reflective and less transmissive when looking at a near parallel angle.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top