NVIDIA Ira Demo Running On Project Logan

is it just me...but a digitized floating head reminds me of that bad guy in Robocop 2....

love the low power consumption in it though.
 
Crazy Nvidia demos and hardware promises dont excite me anymore. They need to deliver.

Looks good.
 
Wow! PS4 and Xbox One will be smoked by the next gen NVIDIA tablet architecture within a year. Of course that's if NVIDIA actually delivers in a timely fashion.
 
bpmurrGT said:
Wow! PS4 and Xbox One will be smoked by the next gen NVIDIA tablet architecture within a year. Of course that's if NVIDIA actually delivers in a timely fashion.
Click to expand...

This is not the full demo that runs on the desktop cards. Thus version was simplified for Logan (geometry, textures, etc...)


If you actually read about Logan, you would not post that about the XBOne or the PS4. It will not surpass or be near the XBOne or the PS4..
 
Ashbringer said:
Firstly, it's a single head. It shows us nothing, cause try putting a few of those into a game with full scenery going and I'm sure it'll bog the system down to hell. Anyone remember the Radeon 8500? They had a similar tech demo like Nvidia's new Ira. Except it's a girls head that talks. That's from 2001 and we have games that barely look that good now. Animation makes or breaks how a game looks, and a lot of games have terrible animation.
Click to expand...

Wow, thats a sad reminder on how little we have really driven graphics in games over the past decade. :(
 
neat for a tablet I suppose. Means gaming on tablet can get more high res. Just thing.. one input point.. maybe two.. wooooo.. Might as well be watching a rendered on the fly movie.
 
martinmsj said:
This is not the full demo that runs on the desktop cards. Thus version was simplified for Logan (geometry, textures, etc...)


If you actually read about Logan, you would not post that about the XBOne or the PS4. It will not surpass or be near the XBOne or the PS4..
Click to expand...

I doubt if renaming the next version of "Tegra" to "Kepler" is really going to do much for nVidia. BTW, this press release is so pompous and self-inflated it very nearly reads as if it was written by an idiot--or else someone who thinks everyone who reads it will be an idiot...;) With nVidia, you never really know for sure----shudder---
 
With all the hardware and technology that Nvidia is showcasing lately, has there been any actual hardware for sale using stuff like the new Tegra 4? And, are there any OEMs working on using them?

Heck, Google's newly revised Nexus 7 no longer uses the Tegra 3 and is now using the Snapdragon S4 Pro. Someone mentioned that on another forum that we won't see Tegra 4 devices or actual shipping parts until 2014. And with Logan, not until 2015 when something newer that would outclass it by PowerVR, Mali, or Adreno is released in a more timely manner.

The more I read the news, the less and less I read about Tegra-based devices. Heck, even Intel's upcoming revised Atom SoC (Bay Trail? or was it SIlvermont?) is going to get some use in mobile phones in Asian markets. Tegra? I have yet to see more actual product news than technology demos such as Logan's Kepler architecture.
 
Even if it is scaled back a bit, for a mobile device it looks pretty impressive to me. Now to see if NVidia can actually deliver.
Now what we need is for desktop games to come up to at least somewhere near the level of this "mobile" demo. Then we can rightly justify shelling out big bucks for the latest hardware. ;)
 
mynamehere said:
Even if it is scaled back a bit, for a mobile device it looks pretty impressive to me. Now to see if NVidia can actually deliver.
Now what we need is for desktop games to come up to at least somewhere near the level of this "mobile" demo. Then we can rightly justify shelling out big bucks for the latest hardware. ;)
Click to expand...

That's a great idea, too bad it's not feasible. As people have pointed out(and linked to an old ATI tech demo) the entire problem with expecting nvidia or any company to "deliver" on this, is that in an actual game you need to render more than just a floating head.

Can the hardware do this for 40 characters at once? Can it even do it for 10? Can it do it for 10 characters while rendering a full body, the environment, backgrounds, and physics of objects in the environment?

No.

These tech demos are great examples of "Look how awesome our card is at doing exactly one thing that isn't really usable in a real world scenario!". Unless your goal is to do nothing more than maybe make an interactive Max Headroom, it's pointless.
 
mynamehere said:
Even if it is scaled back a bit, for a mobile device it looks pretty impressive to me. Now to see if NVidia can actually deliver.
Now what we need is for desktop games to come up to at least somewhere near the level of this "mobile" demo. Then we can rightly justify shelling out big bucks for the latest hardware. ;)
Click to expand...

Merc1138 said:
That's a great idea, too bad it's not feasible. As people have pointed out(and linked to an old ATI tech demo) the entire problem with expecting nvidia or any company to "deliver" on this, is that in an actual game you need to render more than just a floating head.

Can the hardware do this for 40 characters at once? Can it even do it for 10? Can it do it for 10 characters while rendering a full body, the environment, backgrounds, and physics of objects in the environment?

No.

These tech demos are great examples of "Look how awesome our card is at doing exactly one thing that isn't really usable in a real world scenario!". Unless your goal is to do nothing more than maybe make an interactive Max Headroom, it's pointless.
Click to expand...

If you want a good tech demo that can be used as an example akin to the Nvidia Logan's head demo, play with Mario's face in Mario 64.

The amount of polygons in Mario's head in the face morphing is higher than what the actual Mario character has in actual gameplay.

There is no game I could think of currently that has the same high number of polygons showcased in a tech demo that has used that same amount of detail in real-time gameplay. The technology is not there yet or it'll be the case no matter what.

Just look at the Unreal Engine 4 Tech Demo: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8v3GA9jSasQ

Runs entirely on a single GTX 680. Entirely scripted real-time events, no actual gameplay.

The moment you add AI, physics-based effects, and multiple characters that have to react to what the player is doing, other things will have to be sacrificed to optimize and ensure the game runs smoothly. Tricks have to be done to compensate for the much lower polygon count such as AA, higher resolution textures, lighting effects, shadow effects, bump mapping, mip-mapping, tessellation, etc. Crysis 3 looks good because of those effects. Crysis 1 looked great because it pushed too much on hardware that could barely run it at that time it was released. And, as a result, the Crytek Engine has scaled back considerably to run on something as low as the 360 and PS3.

Show me a game that has both high polygon count equivalent to its engine's tech demo done in real time with full AI-controlled characters, physics-based effects, real time lighting and shadow, and high resolution textures with high AA on and full tessellation, and runs at 60 FPS minimum (no lower) at 1080p, 1440p or 1600p all the while utilize a single GPU with 2GB to 4GB of VRAM.

I guarantee you there is not a single game that does that-- that is as detailed as its higher polygon, higher resolution textured tech demo.

You can do great things in a tech demo to showcase what's POSSIBLE with it, but can only be done if shown using a single object such as a head. Or, Mario's head showcasing what the N64 was capable of pushing if it was only rendering in real time a single 3D object on screen. Or, Ira's head with reduced polygon count and reduced texture resolution on a single 3D object on a mobile version of Kepler.

But, once you add all that "fluff"-- physics, AI, etc.-- there is no way that real-time game is going to be as detailed as the real-time tech demo.
 
Merc1138 said:
That's a great idea, too bad it's not feasible. As people have pointed out(and linked to an old ATI tech demo) the entire problem with expecting nvidia or any company to "deliver" on this, is that in an actual game you need to render more than just a floating head.

Can the hardware do this for 40 characters at once? Can it even do it for 10? Can it do it for 10 characters while rendering a full body, the environment, backgrounds, and physics of objects in the environment?

No.

These tech demos are great examples of "Look how awesome our card is at doing exactly one thing that isn't really usable in a real world scenario!". Unless your goal is to do nothing more than maybe make an interactive Max Headroom, it's pointless.
Click to expand...
I know, but a man's gotta have a dream right?
I think it'd be a huge step if they could find a way to do it with just whatever's up close, sorta like games that only use high res for what's up close and lower res for objects/background that are off in the distance. Though it's probably still not practical yet. Even if they were to dial it back to a level where it's just visually passable, it would be a bit of a leap from what we now have. Sadly, even then it'd probably require quad Titans in SLI to run a game on lowest settings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top