fightingfi
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2008
- Messages
- 3,231
Just wondering how does amd ray tracing compare with nvidia ray tracing?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We'll never know because the devs of RTX titles will not allow RT to run on non-RTX cards.
We'll never know because the devs of RTX titles will not allow RT to run on non-RTX cards.
I thought games would be using Microsoft's ray-tracing extension to DX12, so it'd be vendor agnostic?
Stop spreading FUD.We'll never know because the devs of RTX titles will not allow RT to run on non-RTX cards.
This is correct. RTX is simply NVIDIA's middleware.I thought games would be using Microsoft's ray-tracing extension to DX12, so it'd be vendor agnostic?
or maybe they realize that there's currently no point in putting the man hours into developing drivers for it yet on the consumer side.Partial Raytracing has been trying to be used since long time ago, anyone remember Watch Dogs 2 and the "NVIDIA Hybrid Frustum Traced Shadows" which is no more than just a form of RayTracing helped by conservative rasterization and voxel rendering both required Hardware Implementation (was launched with GTX 900 series Tier 1 and expanded with GTX 1000 series to Tier 2) and was added then to DX12 features, and is the base of DXR so in any instance it require more than just "compute" it require hardware implementation to be used correctly which is what Nvidia is doing right now with the tensor cores enabled to Tier 3 for max compatibility/performance
Theoretically VEGA is the only current AMD GPU with Conservative rasterization capable of Tier 1 - 3 with rasterized ordered view (however for any reason is not implemented via driver YET) and WDDM 2.5 (required for Raytracing). NVidia have support to this since Maxwell, and even Intel have support for this since skylake at Tier 3, is AMD keeping this for Professional market only? waiting more time for driver refinements? waiting to be launched as a Navi feature? it maybe due the performance penalty?, who know, but they should be able to raytrace with Vega64. however Nvidia is far ahead in this department since years ago, and they has been trying to push it, there are couple of games which utilize those technologies, The Division, Shadow of the tomb raider as examples.
or maybe they realize that there's currently no point in putting the man hours into developing drivers for it yet on the consumer side.
Yes, but Nvidia pays good money.
If AMD wants to do ray tracing in hardware I would hope they just leave it alone until they can fix their other problems first. Ray tracing is such a popular feature that there are exactly 0 games (not tech demo) .
So here's the thing.
DICE is not enabling non-RTX owners to use RT in BFV. Even though DXR is completely fine being used on any DX12 compatible GPU, DICE is using an RTX-specific codepath. This means if you own a 1080Ti or Titan V, you will not be able to use RT, even if you have the power to run it (albeit much slower than RTX cards). This also means No direct comparisons are possible between RTX cards and existing GTX cards. I'm not sure if this is the case with ALL the RTX games demo'd so far, but DICE has come out and said this specifically.
So Nvidia is treating this like PhysX. It's exclusive to specific products, even though it's more than capable to run on other hardware.
Source
If they want to sell professional level cards, they might want to hurry up and release hardware support for it soon. Consumer stuff I don't think they can afford to do both right now, who knows, maybe the CPU division will start leeching some of their money to the GPU division.
Not at all until they figured out a lot more variables they should stay away from it far away. AMD can not sell high end cards so even if AMD has a superior product it is not going to sell.
The dynamic of no games makes it a no brainer.
Here is the thing that is really bothersome to me and why AMD prolly not going win anything here even if they did support ray tracing in hardware.
When your competitor has their flagship gpu at 754mm2 you struggle with your power consumption are you really going to make hardware that competes ?
And if they do decide to start a gpu doing ray tracing it is going to take 3 years before it is done.
Read it and weep.
Even though Direct X Ray Tracing is an simple software extension that can be run on existing hardware, you won't be able to enable it on non-RTX cards. Why? Money.
Read it and weep.
Even though Direct X Ray Tracing is an simple software extension that can be run on existing hardware, you won't be able to enable it on non-RTX cards. Why? Money.
Read it and weep. Even though Direct X Ray Tracing is an simple software extension that can be run on existing hardware, you won't be able to enable it on non-RTX cards. Why? Money.
DICE said they would implement for a competitor to nVidia if it existed.
NOPE.
This. I can't point to where the heck I read it, but I remember this piece of news well - they did state that they only have one path for NV now, because only NV cards can process DXR code. When competitors have cards that process DXR, they'll add their special code to process DXR too. This is in no way different to how currently and for the past years games have had specific AMD and NV graphics paths that accelerate things their own way, exploiting their hardware's different capabilities. We don't just run games in DX9, or DX11, or DX12 mode. Both AMD and NV run that standard code with their own proprietary code. That's what RTX is: NV's way of processing DXR. AMD's is Radeon Rays currently, I'm sure they'll rebrand it for the consumer market.
DXR can run on any DX12 capable hardware. AMD (as well as pascal and Volta by Nvidia's own admission) can run DXR. AMD can as well run their own form of Raytracing called "Radeon Rays". It may be slow, but then again, it may not. we'll never know.
They use nVidia tool sets that are easier to implement RT and better utilize nVidia hardware. It’s not like turning on a bit. They would have to go through the entire process of tuning the software for AMD.
There’s absolutely no reason AMD couldn’t use the DXR paths to prove they are just as capable if they wanted to with a demo.
Why does everything have to be a conspiracy anymore?
Because Nvidia has a very real history of this sort of crap.
Well...
I see it as something similar. I don’t think they are technically blocking anyone else. I see it as nVidia’s version of Mantle. Can it run on other hardware? Sure! Will it run so shitty it isn’t worth it? Yes sir!
Because Nvidia has a very real history of this sort of crap.
The only example I can think of is when Batman:AA disabled anti-aliasing when it detected an AMD card. It makes no sense for nVidia to try to make raytracing vendor locked because it will smother adoption.
There’s absolutely no reason AMD couldn’t use the DXR paths to prove they are just as capable if they wanted to with a demo.
Because Nvidia has a very real history of this sort of crap.
AMD gave Mantle to the Khronos group, and much of what Mantle was, is now the basis for Vulkan, a 100% free and open API. nVidia has never done anything remotely like that.
Yeah, the same with Gsync, PhysX, CUDA, etc. It makes no sense for Nvidia to try to vendor-lock these things as it will smother adoption!
Yeah, the same with Gsync, PhysX, CUDA, etc. It makes no sense for Nvidia to try to vendor-lock these things as it will smother adoption!
So yeah, they definitely kicked this evolution into high gear, but don't for a second pretend they did it for and altruistic betterment of the market. They did it because it was their best shot at having good performance VS NV.
Whether they did or they did not do things for altruistic reasons is secondary. Secondary to fully reading what I said. Especially if you're going to question what I said.
Um...
View attachment 114095
I was agreeing with you. Not questioning what you said. AMD has certainly done more good for the market than NV, the latter has been quite consumer-hostile for a few years now. I was only pointing out that it doesn't mean they're not doing it for selfish reasons.
Is AMD pure? No, because none of these companies are, and I'm cynical enough to believe that even if I don't have evidence, I'm sure they've done something that wasn't friendly to the consumer. But it is very clear that they have done significantly/tangibly less than nVidia.
I don't understand why you don't get this, KazeoHin. DXR IS A MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY. Not an Nvidia one. Nvidia would definitely love to lock AMD out of it, but they can't. Because it's not theirs to control. DXR is a Microsoft DirectX standard. Nvidia's RTX is just their middleware layer to talk to DXR. From game code, to DXR, to RTX, to the actual GPU. RTX just translates DXR for NV's hardware. AMD will do the same thing either with RadeonRays or whatever they make in the end for consumers.
So, if you're going to state my beliefs, read the whole post. This wasn't an issue about "factual information". It had to do with how your represented me and my position. So, good job quoting twice and then still missing the information?
DXR is indeed a microsoft technology, and it can run on any DX12 capable GPU. I'll repeat myself. DXR is a feature that will work on any DX12 capable GPU. So why does DICE limit the RT to just RTX Cards?
DXR is indeed a microsoft technology, and it can run on any DX12 capable GPU. I'll repeat myself. DXR is a feature that will work on any DX12 capable GPU. So why does DICE limit the RT to just RTX Cards?