The Official Navi21 (RX 6000) rumor thread.

Status
Not open for further replies.
acroig said:
I stand corrected, TY.
Click to expand...

Don't take my word for fact. I could be completely wrong. It's just my understanding on how it works. I just know that real time shadows/lighting is based off light source, and it has to work the same with Raytracing. Since the devs don't prerender anything for raytracing effects, what is rendered is completely controlled by the drivers/hardware, which also has to be based off light source, it's location, etc.
 
I'm not interested in spending time reading all replies here and getting into discussion of the launch, so will just quote OverclockN' since its how I feel as well.

OverclockN' said:
While I think it's important to recognize the different features and which card is at the top of the heap for the preferred resolution...it would be silly to dismiss how close the cards are now and what it means for future hardware.

This is going to be GREAT for competition, pricing, and later performance. We needed this. :drool:
Click to expand...

:up:

Also, my thinking of the Nvidia / AMD showdown was going to come down to availability. Regardless of what card had the better performance, it was irrelevant if you couldn't easily buy them without resorting to unconventional means. Had AMD managed to meet demand they would be the winners in my book. But judging from what stock is looking like, they also failed to do that so far. In that case since neither Nvidia or AMD could have the proper supply I am for now saying Nvidia is on top due to slightly better performance on average, and getting their product "released" two months earlier.
 
NWR_Midnight said:
Don't take my word for fact. I could be completely wrong. It's just my understanding on how it works. I just know that real time shadows/lighting is based off light source, and it has to work the same with Raytracing. Since the devs don't prerender anything for raytracing effects, what is rendered is completely controlled by the drivers/hardware, which also has to be based off light source, it's location, etc.
Click to expand...

You always sound so sure I took it for gospel. ;) :p
 
Meteor_of_War said:
Also, my thinking of the Nvidia / AMD showdown was going to come down to availability. Regardless of what card had the better performance, it was irrelevant if you couldn't easily buy them without resorting to unconventional means.
Click to expand...

I think both AMD and nV will ramp up in Dec. For AMD AIB cards release on Black Friday. MC lines will be miles long.... :bleh:
 
NWR_Midnight said:
Example is surfaces that are dark and dull as intended, still get ray traced adding a shine to it, and some reflection to it, when it shouldn't as dark and dull surfaces do not reflect light, they absorb it, making it look unrealistic
Click to expand...


Can you give some examples of this? If this was remotely accurate it would have been picked up by countless tech sites far more familiar with ray tracing.


NWR_Midnight said:
Even windows, with reflections, Nvidia tries to reflect everything all the time, when in fact, reflections and the intensity is determined by light source, amount of light reflecting off all the surfaces, angle, etc.
Click to expand...



This is exactly how reflections in Control, Battlefield 5, and Watch Dogs Legion behave. By definition (and I'm talking about real ray tracing), you will get an actual representation of reality because you're actually following the path of a ray. We're a far ways from pinpoint, fully ray traced rendering but what we've seen thus far is very accurate in terms of reflectivity, lighting, transparency, distortions, etc.. In other words, ray traced reflections are about as realistic as you can get and not "unrealistic" as you've described. Unrealistic would be the current tricks with SSR that look really out of place. Digital foundry did a very good video on ray tracing in Watch Dogs legion, covering an area in the park during rain that was far more "realistic" with ray traced reflections than without.



Unfortunately, your explanations seem to be masking the shortcuts seen in console ray tracing and the discrepancies seen in Watch Dogs Legion. Instead of trying to justify what's not being rendered as a poor adhoc explanation for what you think should be rendered, look at the analysis itself. Everything points to a bug in the ray traced render in WDL, which when fixed should look no different than Nvidia's ray traced image under the DXR spec.
 
acroig said:
I think both AMD and nV will ramp up in Dec. For AMD AIB cards release on Black Friday. MC lines will be miles long.... :bleh:
Click to expand...

Yeah stock should improve over time, naturally. Also drivers will mature.

I think comparisons of each product will need to be revisited in a few months time. I'm sure a lot will change. Very happy that I was able to get something to enjoy relatively early on. Lots of folks going to still be struggling through the end of the year to secure theirs.
 
Exposed said:
Can you give some examples of this? If this was remotely accurate it would have been picked up by countless tech sites far more familiar with ray tracing.






This is exactly how reflections in Control, Battlefield 5, and Watch Dogs Legion behave. By definition (and I'm talking about real ray tracing), you will get an actual representation of reality because you're actually following the path of a ray. We're a far ways from pinpoint, fully ray traced rendering but what we've seen thus far is very accurate in terms of reflectivity, lighting, transparency, distortions, etc.. In other words, ray traced reflections are about as realistic as you can get and not "unrealistic" as you've described. Unrealistic would be the current tricks with SSR that look really out of place. Digital foundry did a very good video on ray tracing in Watch Dogs legion, covering an area in the park during rain that was far more "realistic" with ray traced reflections than without.



Unfortunately, your explanations seem to be masking the shortcuts seen in console ray tracing and the discrepancies seen in Watch Dogs Legion. Instead of trying to justify what's not being rendered as a poor adhoc explanation for what you think should be rendered, look at the analysis itself. Everything points to a bug in the ray traced render in WDL, which when fixed should look no different than Nvidia's ray traced image under the DXR spec.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to get into another argument on what YOU see, and what I see. it's pointless. You have your opinion, I have mine. Leave it at that.
 
NWR_Midnight said:
I'm not going to get into another argument on what YOU see, and what I see. it's pointless. You have your opinion, I have mine. Leave it at that.
Click to expand...


Well you made a statement about ray tracing accuracy and justified AMD's anomalies for WDL even though it has been identified as a bug. I just wanted to get to the bottom of it. There can only be technical discussions on this, not perceptions, especially since we're bringing the DXR spec into light.
 
Exposed said:
Well you made a statement about ray tracing accuracy and justified AMD's anomalies for WDL even though it has been identified as a bug. I just wanted to get to the bottom of it. There can only be technical discussions on this, not perceptions, especially since we're bringing the DXR spec into light.
Click to expand...

For my education, is he wrong? I really don't know exactly how this is rendered.
 
Exposed said:
Well you made a statement about ray tracing accuracy and justified AMD's anomalies for WDL even though it has been identified as a bug. I just wanted to get to the bottom of it. There can only be technical discussions on this, not perceptions, especially since we're bringing the DXR spec into light.
Click to expand...

Why are you trying to bait me into an argument.
 
acroig said:
For my education, is he wrong? I really don't know exactly how this is rendered.
Click to expand...


For the most part yes. When using ray traced global illuminations, it replaces the standard lighting and shadow system. RTX shadows just does the shadow calculations. RTX reflections just calculates rays bouncing off a surface. This is done during the scene building process and not rendered "twice". The drivers and hardware should not have an impact on the final image's shadows/reflections and intensity unless shortcuts are taken or there is a genuine bug somewhere in the pipeline.


Remember, ray tracing is all calculations, nothing more. The RTX cores don't do any rendering, they just do the math. The same complex ray tracing calculations done on RT cores can also be done a simple cores, at a much slower rate of course. This is how it's done on Pascal cards, the calculations are just offset to somewhere else. This is also how its done AMD cards although they like to call there cores "ray accelerators" but it's really part of the same unified pipeline, not dedicated like RT cores.



Now, DXR determines your number of rays, what's being ray traced, etc... The math is offloaded to the GPU which then renders the final result. This can theoretically all be done via CPU (at maybe 1 fps or less) but the image shouldn't be different unless shortcuts are taken somewhere in the pipeline, most likely the software/driver level not the hardware.



The only aspect I'm not entirely sure about is the denoiser, I don't know if that's controlled under DXR or up to the hardware to denoise. This wouldn't affect what's being in terms of what's being reflected though, number of rays, etc..
 
Last edited:
Exposed said:
For the most part yes. When using ray traced global illuminations, it replaces the standard lighting and shadow system. The drivers and hardware should not have an impact on the final image's shadows/reflections and intensity unless shortcuts are taken or there is a genuine bug somewhere in the pipeline.


Remember, ray tracing is all calculations, nothing more. The RTX cores don't do any rendering, they just do the math. The same complex ray tracing calculations done on RT cores can also be done a simple cores, at a much slower rate of course. This is how it's done on Pascal cards, the calculations are just offset to somewhere else. This is also how its done AMD cards although they like to call there cores "ray accelerators" but it's really part of the same unified pipeline, not dedicated like RT cores.

Now, DXR determines your number of rays, what's being ray traced, etc... The math is offloaded to the GPU which then renders the final result. This can theoretically all be done via CPU (at maybe 1 fps or less) but the image shouldn't be different unless shortcuts are taken somewhere in the pipeline, most likely the software/driver level not the hardware.

The only aspect I'm not entirely sure about is the denoiser, I don't know if that's controlled under DXR or up to the hardware to denoise. This wouldn't affect what's being in terms of what's being reflected though, number of rays, etc..
Click to expand...

Look 99% of people on this thread aren't interest in this argumentative crap. Stop derailing the thread. Put your big boy pants on and don't respond. Same to MWR.

Acroig stop fishing.
 
What I'll never understand, AMD knew they were sitting on a winner, so why the hell didn't they go balls to the wall with stock for day 1.

Especially knowing four weeks ago, they have an opportunity to grab share from Nvidia.

Perhaps it's an answer as easy as the pandemic. But holy hell, how do you not get everyone and their mother on the line making as many of these cards they could make.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top