• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Could PowerVR be adding real-time hardware ray tracing to their 3dchips?

Pottsey

Pottsey

Pottsey

Soldato
Joined
29 May 2006
Posts
5,381
Imagination Technologies just bought Caustic technology who specialise in real-time interactive ray tracing and this technology can mix with traditional polygon based methods. Could we start seeing at some point real-time interactive ray tracing in mobile devices? It’s possible we might end up with mobiles looking better then desktop 3dcard if mobiles get ray tracing first .Imagine an Iphone 6 looking better then NVidia’s or AMD’s latest desktop 3dcard. Perhaps a dream but a possibility now.

“Caustic technology also allows coexistence of traditional polygon based rendered objects and inclusion of life-like ray-traced elements in the same scene.”

“Imagination gains access to unique and patented technology which enables real-time ray traced and cinema quality 3D graphics to be implemented in a novel and highly cost-effective manner. The capability can be efficiently added to Group’s highly successful POWERVR Graphics Processing Units (GPUs) “

source http://www.imgtec.com/corporate/newsdetail.asp?NewsID=603
source http://www.insidermedia.com/insider/south-east/44141-/
 
Baboonanza said "There is only one reason why ray-tracing would be more useful on a mobile than a PC"
I didn't mean more useful on the mobile, I mean we could end up with better graphics and better looking games on mobiles compared to the best desktop PC 3dcards. If PowerVR do raytraceing the graphics would blow away anything desktop 3dcards could do. The mobile chips have already just about caught up with the desktop chips see for the mobile chips http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDvPIhCd8N4

PowerVR have already been ahead of Nivida in areas and mobile phones have been advancing graphics wise much faster than the desktop. If it keeps going like this mobiles graphics features will take over desktop 3dcards within years.


Ordokai said "No. Unless, for instance, the number of rays being traced is absurdly small and used as a guideline for 'traditional' methods to fill in the blanks, which quite frankly defeats the purpose of having it in the first place. Point is, with all the cut corners the result will not even remotely be what we have come to understand under the term 'ray tracing'. I suspect they're using the buzzword to attract attention to their stuff. Remember how 2.5D games abused the 3D slogan ? Yeah, something like that."
Going by the videos its fully raytracing. See http://www.youtube.com/user/CausticGraphics#p/u/4/LSwjXDCknpo
it's not cutting corners and defeating the point. It seems far more than just buzz words.
 
Baboonanza Said “What? Care to give any examples of area where they are ahead of Nvidia/AMD?”
The PowervVR chips had many features well before Nvidia/AMD and in some case’s still better. Free FSAA in that you have FSAA with no or almost no performance hit, Unified shaders long before Nvidia/AMD, Hidden Surface Removal well beyond what Nvidia/AMD have.



Baboonanza Said “If you think a mobile graphics chip is going to be able to perform anything like a 300W graphics card you're dreaming.”
It’s not a dream. A mobile chip with hardware ray tracing will outperform and look far better than what a none ray tracing 300W graphics card can pull off. If something like the Iphone 5 or 6 has a PowerVR ray tracing chip and desktop cards just keep going like they are than the Iphone graphics will be ahead of the PC.

A 300W desktop graphics card cannot compete against a decent ray ray-tracing chip. That is why ray-tracing is often called the Holy Grail; the first people to pull it off at useable speeds at decent costs will be able to pull off amazing cinema quality graphics.
Hardware ray-tracing could be one of the most exciting things to happen to graphics in many years.

I didn’t say outperformed in my first few posts, I said better features and looks better. We could end up with games looking so good on the phones that a desktop 3dcard cannot look as good. The phone might not be able to perform at the same high resolution as the desktop but at the low resolution say 1024x768 the 3d desktop card will look far, far worse than the phone.



Baboonanza Said “And real-time ray-tracing is just as practical on an iPhone as it is on a Desktop - not at all. “
Why not? It looks 100% practical. In fact it’s more practical for mobile over desktop. The ray-tracing video I linked to seemed practical and looked better than what current 3dcards can pull off.



Baboonanza Said “That video you posted is admittedly pretty good for a mobile game - it's almost PS2 graphics - but it's light-years behind a modern PC. Notice the lack of any detail in the background environments, the fact that there are only ever 2 characters on screen at a time, the really choppy frame-rate, the poor textures, the low resolution”
Almost PS2? Show me a PS2 game half that good, its well beyond PS2.
Did you load the default low res Youtube video? Try watching the HD video.

http://www.ultimaaiera.com/wp-content/gallery/news-images/infinityblade11.jpg
http://pocketfullofapps.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/infinity-blade_1.jpg
There is no way a PS2 could pull that off, it even has high FSAA. I don’t see any jagged edges.

http://www.tapscape.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Infinity_Blade_10.jpg
http://toucharcade.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/mzl.ulffeocx.jpg

How can you call that a lack of detail in the background?

That is not poor textures or low resolution and I didn’t see any choppy frame rates in game. As for the background it’s perfect for the size of the screen it’s meant to be played on.



Baboonanza Said “If you think a mobile graphics chip is going to be able to perform anything like a 300W graphics card you're dreaming.”
Perhaps you should read up no PowerVR chips more. A 300W PowerVR chip would be an estimated x3 to x5 faster than a 300w NVidia chip. Or another way to put it a 100mhz PowerVR chip tends to perform at the same speed as a 300Mhz to 500mhz Nivida chip.

Due to the way PowerVR chips work you get far more bang for the buck. PowerVR are pretty much kings of performance per watt and they seem to be advancieng faster than everyone else. They are already more than a generation ahead of Nvidia and ATI in the mobile markets.
 
Last edited:
Not much chance of that, been trying for years but my grammar and spelling is still very poor. I edited the ones I spotted. I still cannot get their, there, & they're correct either.
 
Ordokai “And this relates to making mobiles devices able to run real time raytracing at decent framerates how ?”
PowerVR just bought the company responsible for the first decent real-time raytraced graphics and sound like they plan to implant it in their highly efficient 3dchips. The same 3Dchips that almost all major phones with decent 3d graphics use and will be using for years to come. If they pull this off surly you can agree it’s going to be a major advance in graphics, with the potential to look far better than what AMD or Nvidia can do.

I thought it was more like 15fps but anyway that was with a 2 year or older card that was at 75mhz (from memory) or some very slow speed made more as a proof of concept then a mass production card. If they can pull that off with a very cheap and very slow card imagine what they could pull off with a powerful card as efficient as PowerVR’s chip.

Am I really the only one that see’s the potential for real-time raytraced graphics?
 
Ordokai “The scenario you propose of mobile devices overtaking PCs just does not seem possible. Simply put, there are factors at play here besides the screen resolution.“
To clarify, I am not saying Mobiles will 100% take over desktop graphics. I am just saying that potentially if mobiles do get real times ray tracing graphics before desktop cards it’s a very real possibility mobiles will end up looking much better and overtake.

Why does that not seem possible? It’s certainly not guaranteed but it now seems possible. Or am I missing something, why isn’t it possible? Why can real time ray tracing on mobiles not look better than none ray tracing desktop cards?
 
Monkeynut said "Pottsey can you PLEASE quote people in the proper manner. "
But that is what I am doing according to the correct rules of the English language. You see " those are called quotation marks, used for quoting people :)



Ordokai "In fact, you would have to ramp up a whole deal of components to achieve complex and awesome-looking scenes."
Why would you? PowerVR has near perfect hidden surface removal unlike everyone else. PowerVR only renders what can be seen cutting down the power needed to render a screen massively. What components would need to be ramped up? I don't see any apart from the GPU which would be ramped up anyway as we are talking next generation or the generation after. The point of hardware ray tracings is the whole thing is done on the GPU. Apart from database issues there is no extra strain on the rest of the system if the GPU can handle the workload.


The devices are already using SSD's so that's the data transfer and database access problems fixed. As far as I can see the only thing holding us back is the GPU.



Klo said " Raytracing doesn't suddenly make everything better, it makes the lighting more realistic, but if the textures etc are still low quality, it won't make that much difference."
Yes but PowerVR solved the bandwidth problem and have more than enough spare bandwidth and storage space for good textures. That's hardly a problem.

I didn't say Ageia's Physx was the future, I said that if we call have hardware phsyics then games could be so much better then today. It's the lack of hardware phsyics that's holding us back. After seeing some of the hardware physics coming in Eve online and other games I believe I was correct in saying hardware physics is the future.
 
drunkenmaster said " Sometimes companies buy other companies just to stop them being a threat, sometimes they want the quality engineers/coders, and most importantly lots of people buy companies and never ever use the IP they got from buying them."

You didn't read any of the links I posted did you or do any research.
" “Well, we don’t want to tip our hand but this acquisition opens up the potential for highly photorealistic imagery to reach new real-time applications and markets, including consumer, not possible previously, via its integration with POWERVR, which is the de facto standard for mobile and embedded graphics.

" “We would not have acquired this [Caustic] technology if we did not believe we could get it into handsets,” he added, commenting on the new deal.

http://www.mobilebusinessphones.com...mises-photo-realistic-3d-graphics-on-mobiles/




drunkenmaster said "rap low res textures, crap ability to game over a long time due to power, crap resolution, crap screen size, crap control methods, but super doopa ultra realistic lighting............ yeah I don't think that will be something that takes the world by storm."
You do like making stuff up as proven many times before. You mean high res textures, no power problems can play for ages as tile based cards use much less power and more than just super lighting. I forgot its HD as well so not low resolution, it's made to output to TV's. As for crap control that completely depends on the device and has nothing to do with the 3dchips.

http://www.cubixgpu.com/img.php?foto=i/ray_tr_home1.jpg&rat=600
http://thepriorart.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/nvidia_automotive_rt2.jpg
http://www.cadsoftsolutions.co.uk/software/sketchup/su_podium/files/page80-su_podium_01.jpg
http://www.cadsoftsolutions.co.uk/software/sketchup/su_podium/files/page80-exterior_sm.jpg

This is the type of graphics we are talking about, photo realistic with nice curved surfaces, no or few jagged lines, no bad looking edged polygons with curves being made up of clear big straight lines.

Where are you getting this crap resolution and low textures rubbish from? Are you aware the devices already output to TV's getting around your screen size problems and as we are talking about next gen it's only going to get better. As for textures is supports and runs just fine high res textures. It sounds like you are just creating problems out of thin air.



drunkenmaster "Then theres the other argument "it was 2 years ago and a 75Mhz card, in a proper PC".
Sorry but the key answer here would have been, it was a 2W card two years ago and today could be done in 0.2W in a tiny form factor giving acceptable framerates, as this wasn't mentioned I'm going to go ahead and assume they can't."
So you think a company who specialises in tiny form factors and mentioned they are implanting this technology and spent a lots of money on a company's technology whom they cannot use? You think this because A technology that in a slow card over 2 years ago made as a proof of concept ran at over 50x faster than everyone else, a card not made to be as small as possible only to see if the idea would work.

http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/shows/2002/CeBIT/part1/powervr_fpga.jpg You see that, that's a PowerVR MBX running on a FPGA broad at a little over 10% of the speed of the final product - 14MHz as opposed to 120MHz for the final product and a higher W rating then the final product. Going by your logic they cannot possible get that into a phone.
People like you said PowerVR could never pull off Xbox and better graphics with free FSAA in a mobile and look at what they did. Before PowerVR people like you where saying the state of mobiles today wouldn't happen any time soon.
 
drunkenmaster said "Phsyx does nothing better, just much more accurately, but, you can't actually tell the difference because, when a box explodes from inside, the mind can't tell where each shard should be, one goes left, one goes right, neither is "right" in the minds eye, both are fine."
Yet you and others complained when simple less accurate simulations are done and the explosions are the same with shards exploding in the same as the eye can tell. I am sure you complained the explosions are all the same in some older games. Proven the Eye can tell the difference.

Anyway as per normal you totally miss the point of hardware physics. There are 3 options do the same physics at the same accuracy as before only much, much faster. Option 2 do the same physics at the same accuracy as before only more of it so you get more for no less FPS then before. Option 3 do more accruate physics.



drunkenmaster said "Here we apply the same argument, ultimately accurate lighting to a 0.1mb texture on a 2 inch screen that looks woeful but lighted well, its laughable."
That argument is pointless because ray tracing is renowned for great textures, powervr are renowned for some of the best lossless texture compression and for having extra bandwidth and more free ram for textures then other cards. Textures are not a problem. Have you seen Rage on the Iphone? It has the Rage megatextures without any problem.

Its more of a case of the same textures with proven better looking lighting with ray traceing or the same or worse textures with worse lighting without ray tracing.

2" screen? Current screen size's go up to 10" or more at 1024 × 768 or more with being designed to output HD to HD TV's.



drunkenmaster said " Dev's don't want to learn how to code for raytracing and producing ultra quality stuff on mobiles that increases cost dramatically and increases time to market, just to produce "old" stuff on pc's and every other platform."
Yeah just like they wouldn't want to program for a tile based card over normal cards. Just like they wouldn't want to program for all the different PowerVR features like the different compressed texture. If anything the millions upon millions of games sold for PowerVR's device shows the devs love this kind of stuff.

EDIT: Where is your evidence costs would increase? What if it’s easier to program for and produces better results? Lots of people have been raytracing for years even I can managed to make some raytracing screens and I am no real programmer. The skills are already out there. Why would raytracing increase time to market? Are those facts you postedf or just a wild guess work you are marking up and acting as though they are facts?
 
Last edited:
Duff-Man Said “But to suggest that ray-tracing will be implemented on mobile devices is just not realistic.”
The CEO of PowerVR has directly said that’s what they are doing, after seeing all the things they have pulled off I wouldn’t bet against them. Saying that it wouldn’t surprise me if we didn’t see it in mobiles first but I do believe we will see it in PowerVR chips first and much sooner than most people expect although perhaps not next generation but the generation after.

As for the 1999 number I am wondering if that’s a typo or if someone got confused and was thinking of Raytraceing Quake from around that time? I know this http://www.maximumpc.com/files/u58308/CausticGraphics_RayProcessor.jpg is from 2009 is low speed at 75Mhz at runs Raytraceing at 3 to 5 FPS. According to various sources the 2010 card is 14 times faster putting Ray Tracing at 43 to 70fps.

The people at PowerVR seem confident they can incorporate that into mobile chips. It’s also clear the people at Caustic have made a major breakthrough in the speed of Raytraceing.

There are some nice videos at http://vimeo.com/4202946 which also proves if anything it lowers development time. He was going on about how artist no longer have to worry about lighting tricks and it’s all done automatically on the fly.

Some stunning images here http://caustic.com/gallery_images.php I like the car scene.
 
Duff-Man Said “As a very basic requirement, we will need more than the compute power of today's high-end GPUs to run at mobile standards for size and power draw (i.e. just a few Watts) before it can be implemented in mobile devices. That alone is many years away.”
Are you sure? It’s hard to get data on the 2010 card but from what I can gather the 2010 card overall is must simpler and less powerful then todays high-end GPUs yet can run raytraceing at 30+ FPS. Assuming that’s true and I haven’t been able to confirm it is, it would be might be easy to implant in mobiles devise's (ok easy might not be the best word, perhaps doable).

Overall I agree with you, it’s just the timeframe I don’t agree with. I believe there is a very and I do mean very small chance we will see ray tracing in the next gen chip. A very high chance in the generation after and almost guaranteed in the generation after that. Then again I do tend to underestimate timeframes needed.



Duff-Man Said “So, we're looking at *at least* a factor of ten improvement to get playable framerates on that resolution, and a further factor of 8 (or so) to scale up to HD resolutions.”
They say that have already achieved a factor of 14 improvement this year. Taking that into account I believe they could get that further x4 within two years.

I guess the biggest question is can they scale down the hardware while keeping the needed performance. Only time will tell I guess.
 
The thing is you don’t seem to be factoring in that they found a software and hardware combination that allows them to compute a massive amount of ray’s with a low amount of FLOPS. That’s what the breakthrough is. Before the breakthrough I would have agreed with everything you just said.

If the breakthrough is as good as it seems then they don’t need anything anywhere near the power of top end GPU’s to get fast 30fps+ ray tracing.

This might be simplified too much but if the current PowerVR chips have way more FLOPS then the first Caustic board and the technology is compatible which PowerVR seem to think it is. Then in theory the new PowerVR chips will be able to have to power to ray trace far faster than desktops cards all the while having far less power.

It’s looking like they don’t need to increase the FLOPS up to the level of current high end GPU’s. Just how many FLOPS could the 75mhz card have had? That managed to outperform top end GPU’s by a factor of what x5?

PowerVR have always been about smarter work, get more for less. Not the brute force put as much processing power at the problem as you can like AMD and Nvidia.

I don’t think looking at current desktop GPU’s is an indication that this cannot work at mobile level. AMD and Nvidia have always been vastly inefficient compared to PowerVR.

Anyway we might not agree on timeframes but I think we can both agree this will not be next year if it arrives at all.
 
Baboonanza said “Their own demo,full-sized custom add-on board, VGA resolution (800X600 max) at 5 times frames a second.
And you think they are going to bring ray-tracing to mobile devices? Dream on.”
The first gen dev board from 2009 was 5 FPS the next gen broad from 1010 was x14 faster or so they say which is around 50 to 70 FPS. Assuming they keep the current pace and have one generation a year even if it’s less than a x14 improvement then by 2011 we should get a 3rd gen board with just enough speed needed for games. But we won’t be seeing a PowerVR chip with this till a 4th gen in 2012 at the very easiest. It’s not hard to imagine by 2012 or 2013 a PowerVR chip with the power to pull this off. It’s not as far out as you might think. I would be very surprised if this arrives after 2015. My guess is between 2012 and 2015 with it most likely being 2013 or 2014.

The IP is very clearly for both mobile and none mobile chips. The CEO said they got to tech for handhelds and consoles.




Baboonanza said “And to make ray-tracing practical on a mobile device would require a performance improvement of literally 100s if not 1000s of times. And since ray-tracing isn't one single algortihm it would require multiple, significant breakthoughs.”
Not sure where you get those numbers from. They only need about x20 performance over the 1st gen chip and only about x3 performance over the 2nd gen chip. Not 100’s or 1000’s of times more performance. A x3 performance over 2 to 3 years should be doable.

I don’t deny that this is still years away, but I believe it’s much closer than most people think.
 
Sorry my post wasn't clear. When I said a factor of 20 I meant for a 1024x768 res for mobile screens.

As for more complex screens needing more power I was wondering about how that would work with tile based cards that remove all hidden surfaces. I assume the rays would have to be in the pipeline before the objects are removed and cut out so they are not rendered.

I was think thinking you could have fun stuff like a ray traced photo realistic head with a real photo textured on of freinds for talking head when you ring.



MoodyB said "http://www.pixelux.com/dmmEngine.html
How would you class DMM then ?"
Not sure I follow; DMM is not hardware physics so it doesn't fit into any of the options I posted. The options I posted are for hardware physics only.
 
MoodyB said " It was more from the point that with tools like DMM, Euphoria, Bullet, Havok & ODE there's no real need for hardware based phsyics, in games at least."
I disagree as all those are limiting us big time. Many physics effects in games are skipped or scaled down looking worse because we are limited by software solutions. The CPU just cannot handle high end physics forcing many games to cut corners or scale effects down.

If everyone had hardware physics we would have far better physics then we have today. As for what I consider hardware physics, well anything done in hardware like a PPU or GPU

EDIt: Take this from the 2011 Eve online expansion http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrtwESnTOwY&feature=player_embedded
Hair and cloth/clothes like that on a CPU just doesn't work at useable speeds. Now add in that she's going to be in a star base in an MMORPG with lots of people like that and you need hardware physics. Then you have liquids which just don't work well on the CPU in real-time.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom