Next gen lighting technologies - voxelised, traced, and everything else *spawn*

[JoeJ]

That's why rasterization makes use of mip-mapping, bi/tri/ansiotropic, right.
In texture space you still can do this to reduce cached texture memory requirements in the distance.

Yeah, but i've already included this in my guess about a factor of 8. It's really a guess - not sure how much resolution we need behind the camera.

But as you mention this, shading both mip levels affecting a trilinear fetch would be an interesting option to eliminate shader aliasing, so better image quality. Makes sense maybe for a selection of problematic materials or detected fireflies.

The more you think about it, the more complications arise.
NVs texture shading support with Turing comes surprisingly too. Maybe they already have plans to extend this towards caching. I guess so and i would welcome this kind of 'new fixed function stuff'... exceptionally
I wonder how they handle the issue of specular reflections for VR. Probably the eye position is always the center between our physical eyes and showing the same reflections to both is acceptable.

I'm glad to read your enthusiasm. Gook luck with your work and please don't forget to share your findings!

Thanks! I hope i get there before others or at least within my lifetime

 

[milk]

The more you think about it, the more complications arise.
NVs texture shading support with Turing comes surprisingly too. Maybe they already have plans to extend this towards caching. I guess so and i would welcome this kind of 'new fixed function stuff'... exceptionally [emoji14]

Texture space shading can be done without Nvidia's extentions, I think they are more of a convenient shortcut for devs than a revolutionary feature. I initially thought there had been some architectural change that made this sort of thing more efficient for Nvidia to be bringing that up, but someone said in another thread that under the hood it's mostly just software. I guess the efficiencies had already come with HW support for tiled resources.
Ready at Dawn talked in one of their presentations about how they implemented texture space shading solely as a tool to compare how their shader anti-aliasing solutions were fairing up against the ground truth.
Sebbbi too, I think experimented with that which was kind of a natural continuation of his work on Trial's engine which already had full virtual texturing with decal compositing done at runtime and cached for multiple frames.
So even if nvidias extension does not provide it's own path for caching, I'd guess you can still use it and handle caching on your own.

 

[JoeJ]

Texture space shading can be done without Nvidia's extentions, I think they are more of a convenient shortcut for devs than a revolutionary feature. I initially thought there had been some architectural change that made this sort of thing more efficient for Nvidia to be bringing that up, but someone said in another thread that under the hood it's mostly just software. I guess the efficiencies had already come with HW support for tiled resources.

Thanks, makes sense. I assumed they have a faster way than rendering IDs, downloading to CPU to manage tiled resources, etc. But surely thy could do something like that at driver level.

Likely i will not implement this myself. Although i already have all the logic in compute for the GI samples i assume extending this to full res textures would take me too much time.
But i may try a small sample using an environment map to see if cached specular is practicable at all. If not the whole idea becomes very questionable...

 

[Jupiter]

Is this new? I cant remember.

 

[BRiT]

Not new. Its in at least 2 other B3D threads.

 

[imerso]

If the trend is to continue using hacks, some time ago I wrote a little ray tracer and hacked something similar to "Imperfect Shadow Maps" paper into it.

That made its "GI" very fast, with reasonable image quality which definitely resembled full path-tracing.

Now I wonder if that would still work well. I might give it another shot soon.

 

[DavidGraham]

NVIDIA and DICE worked on the first update for DXR in BFV, up to 50% more performance:

Specifically, GeForce RTX 2080 Ti users will now be able to play at over 60 FPS at 2560x1440 with DXR Raytraced Reflections set to Ultra. GeForce RTX 2080 users will be able to play at over 60 FPS at 2560x1440 with Medium DXR Raytraced Reflections. And GeForce RTX 2070 users will be able to play at over 60 FPS at 1920x1080 with Medium DXR Raytraced Reflections.

https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/battlefield-v-december-4-dxr-update/

The patch fixed a lot of the bugs in the first release, and literally adds gops of fps to the bugged scenes (somewhere between 20 to 40fps increases), as shown in this video comparison:

 

[Scott_Arm]

@DavidGraham Looking forward to seeing sites do all of their bf5 ray-tracing benchmarks again. I didn't understand why people got so wrapped up in the performance numbers like they were set in stone.

 

[Malo]

Quite a good video showing the changes they made, not just a purely fluff piece but going over some of the details on what caused the issues and how they approached some optimizations. Good stuff and glad to see the RT implementation reaching playable speeds now.

What should have happened is DICE not releasing RT reflections in BFV until those optimizations and fixes were in place. Did Nvidia push them to release sooner? Did they not have enough QA and wanted to get it out for release? Whatever the reasons, it was bad for both EA and Nvidia. It could have waited a few weeks.

 

[Scott_Arm]

Quite a good video showing the changes they made, not just a purely fluff piece but going over some of the details on what caused the issues and how they approached some optimizations. Good stuff and glad to see the RT implementation reaching playable speeds now.

What should have happened is DICE not releasing RT reflections in BFV until those optimizations and fixes were in place. Did Nvidia push them to release sooner? Did they not have enough QA and wanted to get it out for release? Whatever the reasons, it was bad for both EA and Nvidia. It could have waited a few weeks.

It is kind of an odd choice to release it in that state when the fixes were coming so soon.

 

[troyan]

They wanted to have Raytracing out at the same time. Dont see anything wrong with it. Dice was very open about their implementation since the Gamescom. BF5 is an evolving game (aka not finished) so the implementation from the start matches perfect with the state of the game...

 

[DavidGraham]

It is kind of an odd choice to release it in that state when the fixes were coming so soon.

Did they not have enough QA and wanted to get it out for release? Whatever the reasons, it was bad for both EA and Nvidia. It could have waited a few weeks.

Sadly, the whole Battlefield V game is an exercise in lackluster releases, the game shipped with few maps, modes and single player missions, DICE promised to add more in the coming months. I guess NVIDIA also wanted to avoid the negativity of launching a poster child game without DXR since day 1.

 

[Malo]

I guess NVIDIA also wanted to avoid the negativity of launching a poster child game without DXR since day 1.

Yet they released RTX cards months before any RT title whatsoever. All these decisions surrounding RTX confound me.

 

[nutball]

Yet they released RTX cards months before any RT title whatsoever. All these decisions surrounding RTX confound me.

Yeah, the timing of a lot of this does seem a bit weird, especially given that they were launching these cards into a competitive vacuum.

TBH though I read a lot of the criticism about the un-stunning RT performance as being a reflection that the tech was launched first by The Wrong Company.

 

[vipa899]

glad to see the RT implementation reaching playable speeds now.

Ive noticed that the majority feels 30fps as unplayable.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Yet they released RTX cards months before any RT title whatsoever. All these decisions surrounding RTX confound me.

Perhaps they were fed up of ahving no titles and really pushed for it? It's the USP for the RTX line without any games using it, perhaps they felt sales suffered?

 

[vipa899]

Upcoming titles probally have better ray tracing optimizations at start then bfv. Ray traced GI is impressive, Exodus displays.

 

[Malo]

Ive noticed that the majority feels 30fps as unplayable.

For an online shooter? It is. For a single player experience? Definitely playable. I'm talking about it reaching 60fps+ far more often with the optimizations but of course it needs to be reviewed again.

 

[vipa899]

Perhaps not RT but a gen ahead of console versions with proper GI.

 

[vipa899]

For an online shooter? It is. For a single player experience? Definitely playable. I'm talking about it reaching 60fps+ far more often with the optimizations but of course it needs to be reviewed again.

Maybe, but 30fps is putting me off even in SP games. Might look nice in screens but much gets lost at 30fps.