Unigine DirectX 11 benchmark

Discussion in 'PC Gaming' started by Neb, Oct 23, 2009.

  1. Sxotty

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2002
    Messages:
    4,890
    Likes Received:
    344
    Location:
    PA USA
    Does it really look as terrible as the youtube video with crazy shimmering constantly?

    edit:

    The other video looks better thankfully. Still whoever is responsible for the road made of boulders should be shot.
     
  2. crusher_pt

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2003
    Messages:
    43
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Portugal
    My results... graphic card´s clocks at 610/1500/920. DX9 only... :)

    1024x768 0xAA 4xAF
    [​IMG]

    1600x1200 0xAA 4xAF
    [​IMG]

    1600x1200 4xAA 16xAF
    [​IMG]
     
  3. vazel

    Regular

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    992
    Likes Received:
    3
    #23 vazel, Oct 24, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 24, 2009
  4. nutball

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2003
    Messages:
    2,152
    Likes Received:
    482
    Location:
    en.gb.uk
    Not impressed. Shimmering, stuttering, LOD popping everywhere. The depth-of-field de-focus thing is way over-done.

    And I only get 1.2FPS (admittedly that's at 2560x1600@8AA on an HD5850 :grin:)
     
  5. Neb

    Neb Iron "BEAST" Man
    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2007
    Messages:
    8,391
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    NGC2264
    It is becouse the surfaces originally are flat. So when this techdemo that exaggerates the 3D bumping the textures get distorted along the edges (stretching). Though it would still get with less bumping. Should not be very visible and it is and was already present in games that use parallax mapping and parallax occlusion mapping. So I dont get the worries. I didn't hear anyone complain about this in Crysis for example...
     
  6. fellix

    fellix Hey, You!
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2004
    Messages:
    3,489
    Likes Received:
    400
    Location:
    Varna, Bulgaria
    4890 @ 950/4600MHz, 1600*1200

    No AA:
    [​IMG]

    4xAA:
    [​IMG]

    8xAA:
    [​IMG]
     
  7. Laa-Yosh

    Laa-Yosh I can has custom title?
    Legend Subscriber

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2002
    Messages:
    9,568
    Likes Received:
    1,452
    Location:
    Budapest, Hungary
    Yeah, obviously, if you try to displace something out of a plane, there'll be stretching. That's why I say that you need a better base model, where you have to move vertices around by just a smaller amount.
     
  8. Sinistar

    Sinistar I LIVE
    Regular Subscriber

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    648
    Likes Received:
    61
    Location:
    Indiana
    "Program Files (x86)\Unigine\Heaven\data\demos\heaven.zip\heaven\config\camera.config"

    Contains the settings for Depth of field, you can turn it off there.
     
  9. homerdog

    homerdog donator of the year
    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2008
    Messages:
    6,153
    Likes Received:
    928
    Location:
    still camping with a mauler
    Actually I found it rather bothersome in Crysis, but never bothered to post about it. The ground can look very weird and distorted when you crawl around on your belly.
     
  10. Sxotty

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2002
    Messages:
    4,890
    Likes Received:
    344
    Location:
    PA USA
    I have often found parallax mapping annoying. I think it is more common than you think Nebula.
     
  11. Silent_Buddha

    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    16,139
    Likes Received:
    5,074
    Hell, I'd take the blurriness for the absolutely HUGE improvement in IQ.

    I can't think of the last tech that was this influential on how well a 3D game looked. HDR? Hmmm, close, but not quite. Maybe the introduction of Dx9.0 and programmable shaders. That's going back about 7 years? To the last time a new 3D tech got me really excited.

    Regards,
    SB
     
  12. vazel

    Regular

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    992
    Likes Received:
    3
    I'm seeing that tessellation in this demo causes a significant performance hit. So if all those new polygons from tessellation takes that big a toll is the point of tessellation to save space in memory? Because after tessellation is done creating all the new polygons it still has to be rendered just like the rest, right?

    From a post at neogaf.
    Edit: This guy at neogaf explained it. I should've finished reading that thread lol.
     
    #32 vazel, Oct 24, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 24, 2009
  13. Laa-Yosh

    Laa-Yosh I can has custom title?
    Legend Subscriber

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2002
    Messages:
    9,568
    Likes Received:
    1,452
    Location:
    Budapest, Hungary
    He's actually very correct, which is a surprise from a Neogaf poster ;)
     
  14. Malo

    Malo Yak Mechanicum
    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2002
    Messages:
    7,029
    Likes Received:
    3,101
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    I'll take Parallax Mapping anyday, it was one of the aspects of CE2 I thought was the most visually impressive. Though of course this next step, Tessellation, is a much bigger improvement still. Obviously it was very exaggerated in this demo in parts where it shouldn't be (boulder path). Would Parallax be better used in those circumstances where you don't need such extensive differences? Better performance?
     
  15. Silent_Buddha

    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    16,139
    Likes Received:
    5,074
    IMO, no. Not even close after having seen both in action. There's places in the demo you can see much less exaggerated use of tessellation, and it's still quite impressive.

    Regards,
    SB
     
  16. loekf

    Regular

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Messages:
    613
    Likes Received:
    61
    Location:
    Nijmegen, The Netherlands
    Indeed... very impressive. 37.3 fps + 940 points on my machine.

    /me starts saving for a DX11 card.
     
  17. Berek

    Regular

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2004
    Messages:
    271
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    It's a fantastic demo of a technology... I just hope that games will have what we see here. How many times have we gawked at demos, but not games with the demoed technology?

    It looks like DX11 is being pushed much faster (and more successfully) in game development than DX10 was, so perhaps there is hope. I may be buying a card sooner than I think.
     
  18. Kaotik

    Kaotik Drunk Member
    Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2003
    Messages:
    8,183
    Likes Received:
    1,840
    Location:
    Finland
    And there's quite simple reasons for it too; DX10 required complete rewrite of "everything", it wasn't compatible in any way with DX9 so there was a lot of work to be done.
    Going from DX10 or 10.1 to 11 however is said to be trivial and quick job, so once you're there, you'll have a lot more time in your hands to implement new fancy things and do it properly, compared to when you had DX9 graphics engine in your hands and had to make it DX10 suddenly.
     
  19. assen

    Veteran

    Joined:
    May 21, 2003
    Messages:
    1,377
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    Skirts of Vitosha
    ATI Radeon 5750, stock frequencies, 1920x1080 fullscreen in both cases:

     
  20. Sxotty

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2002
    Messages:
    4,890
    Likes Received:
    344
    Location:
    PA USA

    You mean it is actually impressive instead of unimpressive like the exaggerated use of tessellation.
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...