• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Larrabee Demo

Perhaps in a few console generations, one of them could be an all Intel design. Intel CPU, Intel GPU, Intel SSD.
 
Hell yes! Don't count intel out yet, they had a good card in the I740, it just wasnt powerful enough. It was a good card though with relatively few problems with games which is amazing.
 
I will be curious to see how Larrabee stacks up once it comes out. Good competition is good for prices and the consumer.
 
ShuttleLuv said:
Hell yes! Don't count intel out yet, they had a good card in the I740, it just wasnt powerful enough. It was a good card though with relatively few problems with games which is amazing.
Click to expand...

That was just flawed in how it accessed textures, not "not powerful enough".
 
Actually it was one of the first cards to use the AGP bus for texturing, so it had the leg up there. It was just too slow doing so.
 
What a useless tech demo, they have been doing water effects since DirectX8 that look just as good.
 
cybereality said:
What a useless tech demo, they have been doing water effects since DirectX8 that look just as good.
Click to expand...

Show me any effect that doesn't use ray tracing that does real-or even convincing-reflections or diffraction and I will be suitably impressed. I don't think this is a particularly good choice of demo scenes, but it's clear that there's some pretty impressive stuff here. These kind of effects were not-long-ago in the realm of hours-long renders. It'll still be a few spins before this is anywhere close to suitable for mainstream games, but it's coming, and will usher in a new era :p

A new era of vendor lock-in.
 
I don't even think Intel has revealed what their planned market is for the Larrabee; Develelopers, gamers, or integrated graphics.
 
cybereality said:
What a useless tech demo, they have been doing water effects since DirectX8 that look just as good.
Click to expand...

can you back that up with an example? A picture would be fine with just some explanation of the game. I tried to search but all I could find was very poor looking water.
 
honestly, i was like oh neat realtime raytracing, then i saw the helo's come in and it looked terrible the animation was just terrible like no framerate, i have seen better graphics on current gen stuff, i just wasn't impressed
 
Kelv said:
can you back that up with an example? A picture would be fine with just some explanation of the game. I tried to search but all I could find was very poor looking water.
Click to expand...
Did I say DirectX8? I'm sorry, I meant DirectX*7*. Just check out this short clip below which is one of the demos included with the old Blitz3D engine (DirectX7):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIfPHC3tisE

Its not to say thats the most impressive water I've seen, but remember this demo came out maybe 5 or 6 years ago (or longer). I also remember some more impressive water demos using DirectX 8 shaders (from like 4 years ago) but I can't find them at the moment. Really, if that's all Intel's got they might as well just not even bother.
 
Pretty impressive for DirectX7 ! some type of hybrid ray trace with rasterization tech might be viable.
 
Digital Viper-X- said:
in this case, tech specs are useless as this technology is so different from the current GPUs
Click to expand...

GPU technology keeps changing rapidly. I think it's very relevant to know how many of those x86 cores Larrabee has now, what its GFLOP/TFLOP rating is with regard to floating point and what shader model and such it implements at this point. Watt/GFLOP would be nice too.

Also, Larrabee isn't that different from current GPUs. A GPU is after all a vector processor, a collection of scalar processors ('Multi Processor' in nVidia speak) whereby each group can each process a single vector. AMD/nVidia GPUs have lots of little identical cores for this. Intel does too. Just that Intel decided to not go custom and instead of cram an x86 (PII?)-derived design into it. Or so we have been told.

Pretty pictures and videos always make the developer inside me skeptical.
 
vjcsmoke said:
The 5870's directcompute implementation of waves looks to be more impressive.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3643&p=8

Oh and it blew the Nvidia cards out of the water in framerates too.
Click to expand...

LOL
Epic fail...it's about raytracing, not the waves...keep 'em comming *ROFL*
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-10359276-64.html
"This is a ray tracing demo," said Intel senior research scientist Bill Mark during the demonstration. "We took the content, the textures, and geometry, pulled it out of that game and put it into our ray tracing engine."
Click to expand...
 
I'm not sure what the real advantage of doing raytracing for this kind of thing when reflection maps already work pretty well and are very fast on this generation's hardware. Seems like it would've made much more sense to demo something that was actually impressive.
 
To this day the most impressive water effects I've ever seen can still be found on Wave Race 64 and that game came out in 1996 so what the fuck Intel?!
 
phide said:
I'm not sure what the real advantage of doing raytracing for this kind of thing when reflection maps already work pretty well and are very fast on this generation's hardware. Seems like it would've made much more sense to demo something that was actually impressive.
Click to expand...

Well, this makes sense:
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1339370&postcount=77



I think an interesting question here is, "is ray-tracing going to be more efficient than scanline rendering in the long run?"

At the first glimpse, the answer seems to be obvious. Of course scanline rendering is faster. Even the movie industry agree with this (many 3D CG are still rendered with scanline rendering, only those pixels requiring ray-tracing such as glass or metal are rendered with ray-tracing).

However, if we look beyond current hardwares, it's getting less obvious now. Currently, computation power (the raw GFLOPS number) is growing faster than memory bandwidth, which is again growing faster than memory latency. The disparity is getting very large very quickly. On the other hand, the requirement for image resolution is not growing as fast (i.e. a 30000x20000 image is not necessarily better compared to current 1920x1080 images).

As a result, triangles are getting smaller, because people want better 3D models with those nice tessellations, while resolution does not need to increase as much. This some how makes scanline rendering less efficienct, and growing memory latency certainly doesn't help here.

So... is ray-tracing going to be the best and the most efficient way to render a 3D scene? I don't know. But it certainly doesn't hurt to try, though.
Click to expand...
 
I think they are trying to talk about it's simplicity more then anything else.

Blitz3D also sucked in comparison.

And i would imagine raytracting is the future because it dousent need to be programmed for in every new engine, and scales well with new generations of hardware. Not like the current stytem of effects overlapping effects. Probably a pain in the ass to make anything look even remotely real with the mainstream methods.
 
Atech said:
Well, this makes sense
Click to expand...
I just think it's curious that they chose to demo an effect that we're already achieving with relatively good visual fidelity and with fairly good efficiency on current hardware rather than demoing something that would be difficult or impossible with current hardware (like a bunch of chrome cars or what have you). Sure, with raytracing, these reflections can be done with greater accuracy and with much less of a performance hit (practically free), but that's not something that will excite developers nor will it excite consumers. We have good looking water of raster-based hardware already, so show us something we haven't seen.

I see great potential in Larabee and raytracing in general (given that I'm a huge fan of wavetracing), but Intel isn't taking much of an initiative to impress anyone with Larabee. The only conclusion I can draw from that fact is that Larabee is unimpressive. It's unfortunate, but I'm certain Intel would be more forthcoming about what Larabee is capable of if it were, in fact, capable.

Suffice to say that Intel is going to struggle with the the first generation of the Larabee architecture if it isn't really appealing to anyone.
 
Isn't Larrabee supposed to be initially released as a mid-range GPU anyway? I would be hard to see how it could be impressive in that case, or how it could do things current GPUs can't. It's not like Intel invented the future or anything :)
 
Elledan said:
Isn't Larrabee supposed to be initially released as a mid-range GPU anyway? I would be hard to see how it could be impressive in that case, or how it could do things current GPUs can't. It's not like Intel invented the future or anything :)
Click to expand...

how is it significant :p? the Radeon 2900 had higher "flops" then the 8800 but lacked behind it severely in games. Even now the ATI cards boast higher flops
 
Digital Viper-X- said:
how is it significant :p? the Radeon 2900 had higher "flops" then the 8800 but lacked behind it severely in games. Even now the ATI cards boast higher flops
Click to expand...

Becuase it tells you that yoy shouldn't expect the "larrabee1" to rock your boat...it's aimed at mainstream.
L2 or L3 might be a different matter...
 
Hamish Campbell said:
To this day the most impressive water effects I've ever seen can still be found on Wave Race 64 and that game came out in 1996 so what the fuck Intel?!
Click to expand...

Yeah, WaveRace64 did have some amazing looking water. Haven't played it in years but it probably still looks good.
 
cybereality said:
Yeah, WaveRace64 did have some amazing looking water. Haven't played it in years but it probably still looks good.
Click to expand...

Again it not about the waves (which are computional light compared to raytracing)...it's about RAYTRAYCING!
Say it again:
RAYTRAYCING!

Why do people insist on not getting this?
 
Atech said:
Again it not about the waves (which are computional light compared to raytracing)...it's about RAYTRAYCING!
Say it again:
RAYTRAYCING!

Why do people insist on not getting this?
Click to expand...

Because modern game engines use a combination of ray-tracing, rasterization and photon-mapping already? What's so darn special about only using RT when it just makes the scene look worse?
 
Elledan said:
Because modern game engines use a combination of ray-tracing, rasterization and photon-mapping already? What's so darn special about only using RT when it just makes the scene look worse?
Click to expand...

Because of the post i linked to earlier...it's a hardware issue on the horision ;)
 
Atech said:
Because of the post i linked to earlier...it's a hardware issue on the horision ;)
Click to expand...

*blank stare*

Yet RT has a lot of limitations with scene rendering. Now if you were talking about PM + RT, I could get into it :)
 
Larrabee = FAIL

Watched most of the qw vid and wasn't impressed.cry engine 3's water blows this out and replaces it. and not just the water but the whole environment.maybe they should use id tech 5?
and also they've been telling us that larrabee is coming in the next 12-18mths since 2006 well it's fall 2009 and i still haven't seen anything but another quake wars "ray traced" demo thats running about 20 fps.:rolleyes:
 
w/e i still want it to work. if they can do it well enough, and put one in a laptop, then i wouldnt have to buy one with ATI or untrustworthy NV card in it.
 
Patman08 said:
Larrabee = FAIL

Watched most of the qw vid and wasn't impressed.cry engine 3's water blows this out and replaces it. and not just the water but the whole environment.maybe they should use id tech 5?
and also they've been telling us that larrabee is coming in the next 12-18mths since 2006 well it's fall 2009 and i still haven't seen anything but another quake wars "ray traced" demo thats running about 20 fps.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Why do all people insists on looking at the water and NOT the raytracing...in a RAYTRACING demo? :rolleyes:
 
Atech said:
Why do all people insists on looking at the water and NOT the raytracing...in a RAYTRACING demo? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

because the "water" is the result of the ray tracing?
Geez wtf are you trying to say? lol if the water looks like crap and is rendered via Ray Tracing, then guess what, by looking at the water you're looking at RT.
 
Digital Viper-X- said:
because the "water" is the result of the ray tracing?
Geez wtf are you trying to say? lol if the water looks like crap and is rendered via Ray Tracing, then guess what, by looking at the water you're looking at RT.
Click to expand...

Water rendered by raytracing? *ROFL*
You mean the REFLECTIONS on the water surface don't you...the water surface is not the point...and they made if "flat" for a reason...you wouldn't be able to see the raytraycing if the surface was filled with hydrodynamics...erhmm scratch that YOU are still not able to the the light ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top