More info about RSX from NVIDIA
- Thread starter nAo
- Start date
jvd said:
cool, the whole city, buildings, streets etc looks so insane. it looks too good to be true, i currently can't imagine playing a game with that much immersion.
personally i think the last few years of gaming have been a bit flat. now that ps3 and xbox 360 are coming out i can't wait
Why does Epic demonstrate their own thing with assets created by Webzen?scooby_dooby said:mckmas8808 said:I know this video is from the G70 tech demo, but this is the least that we can expect from the RSX. Watch with care.
http://streamingmovies.ign.com/pc/article/628/628005/unrealdemo_062105_wmvlowwide.wmv?
lol, judging form the vehicle they're driving..that's Huxley, a MMOFPS, that probably requires a HD.
So, you can expect to see that on PC and X360, but I dunno bout RSX!
Jawed said:
Honestly though, a few simple multitextures will eliminate at least the obvious tiling. A couple of random speckled maps for the concrete/tarmac at different scales, a bump map for the slabs, and maybe another map or two for dirt placed irregularly. They can be pretty small too so won't take up any noticeable bandwidth over normal texturing.
You can use 2 textures to create a non-repeating pattern. Doesn't need 20. Plus the textures only need be small - not a difficult job? Why do it? Sure you can move those assets (small as they are) to another aspect of the game, but there's nothing more obviously CG than regular tiles for what shouldn't be tiled surfaces. You've gotta admit tose tiles in that G70 demo were amazingly obvious. An extra few kb of textures and 10-20 minutes (?) work would have a dramatic benefit to the scenery.
Nope . For grass...
Create 2 textures of 128x128 pixels.
Give them a random noise pattern in shades of green say
Scale one texture's UV use to 1.0 and apply to ground mesh
Scale second texture's UV use to 0.73 (for example) and apply to ground mesh with blend type set to multiply
Using different texture scales, the tiles tile at different points, and given the random nature of the texture creates variation that's not very apparent. Obviously your choice of scales matters. Scaling one to 0.5 of the other obviously shows a repeated pattern as the frequency is regular. It's in choosing irregular frequencies that repeated patterns are elliminated. And of course it only works for certain irregular texture types like the noise of grass or tarmac. But it does work and extremely well, and it's in these irregular materials that tiling really stands out
. For grass...Create 2 textures of 128x128 pixels.
Give them a random noise pattern in shades of green say
Scale one texture's UV use to 1.0 and apply to ground mesh
Scale second texture's UV use to 0.73 (for example) and apply to ground mesh with blend type set to multiply
Using different texture scales, the tiles tile at different points, and given the random nature of the texture creates variation that's not very apparent. Obviously your choice of scales matters. Scaling one to 0.5 of the other obviously shows a repeated pattern as the frequency is regular. It's in choosing irregular frequencies that repeated patterns are elliminated. And of course it only works for certain irregular texture types like the noise of grass or tarmac. But it does work and extremely well, and it's in these irregular materials that tiling really stands out
And for a road ? or for a building ? Very noticable . You will see it with 2 textures .
Best to just make procedual textures at that point
As for the grass what your saying was done in eq2 and you can see the same textures used again . Its not very hard to notice at all. Esp when you spend days in the virtual world
Best to just make procedual textures at that point
As for the grass what your saying was done in eq2 and you can see the same textures used again . Its not very hard to notice at all. Esp when you spend days in the virtual world
Can't say I've seen it in other games, but my own efforts have worked extremely well.
mckmas8808
Legend
Hey guys check this out. Do you think this is possible? And notice he said a full step ahead. That goes in line with what I heard with Nvidia stating that the RSX is a full generation ahead of the G70.
"The difference with G70 is that it is even larger than previous die sizes, which means that it is quite possible that full product yields may be quite small. Could it be that, in order to alleviate this, the defect rate is already built in to the current GeForce 7800 GTX and 24 fragment shaders is not the full number that G70 supports? Whilst many have speculated on an Ultra variant still to come and have been looking at the overclocks of the GTX’s to speculate where it may hit, perhaps it could be the case that there are 32 fragment pipelines in G70 and the fully working die are quietly being collected for use at a later date?"
Just saw this on the beyond3d website. Could it be that the fully working die are(which could bring the number of pipelines to 32) meant for the RSX?
Edit: Ah ya beat me to it. Not the same article, but it's bringing up the same point.....
Just saw this on the beyond3d website. Could it be that the fully working die are(which could bring the number of pipelines to 32) meant for the RSX?
Edit: Ah ya beat me to it. Not the same article, but it's bringing up the same point.....
The GeForce 7800 GTX doesn't have enough transistors to have 32 pixel pipelines.
Think about it for a moment. The GeForce 7800 GTX has 50% more pixel pipelines than the GeForce 6800 GT/Ultra, and its pixel pipelines are more capable. And yet it's not quite 50% larger in the number of transistors.
Since pixel pipelines make up the majority of the transistors in the core, 32 pixel pipelines are just not remotely possible for the GTX. However, I seem to remember the RSX being made on a 90nm process, and since it'll be in production longer it may be feasible, price-wise, to deal with lower yields at start, so it's concievable that it could have 32 pixel pipelines. Me, I just hope that the "step ahead" includes that it supports MSAA on FP render targets. 32 vs 24 pixel pipes is relatively minor compared to that, in my opinion.
Edit: Clarified first sentence
Think about it for a moment. The GeForce 7800 GTX has 50% more pixel pipelines than the GeForce 6800 GT/Ultra, and its pixel pipelines are more capable. And yet it's not quite 50% larger in the number of transistors.
Since pixel pipelines make up the majority of the transistors in the core, 32 pixel pipelines are just not remotely possible for the GTX. However, I seem to remember the RSX being made on a 90nm process, and since it'll be in production longer it may be feasible, price-wise, to deal with lower yields at start, so it's concievable that it could have 32 pixel pipelines. Me, I just hope that the "step ahead" includes that it supports MSAA on FP render targets. 32 vs 24 pixel pipes is relatively minor compared to that, in my opinion.
Edit: Clarified first sentence