Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Mar 2013
- Posts
- 5,447
Yeah that's why Jen was hating on the new consoles, they are a direct threat to RTX, he is ******** his pants.
This 100%^
New Xbox and PS5 will hurt GPU sales there is no doubt. They should be scared.
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.
Yeah that's why Jen was hating on the new consoles, they are a direct threat to RTX, he is ******** his pants.
Where you been Gregster? Not seen you for a while. Been busy playing all those RTX games that keep getting released have ya?Thread has not disappointed. So many people showing their bias, they don't have a clue what is what with RT.
Yeah that's why Jen was hating on the new consoles, they are a direct threat to RTX, he is ******** his pants.
This 100%^
New Xbox and PS5 will hurt GPU sales there is no doubt. They should be scared.
@D.P. stop falling for the Leather Jackets marketing antics mate
Ray Tracing is a technology that's been around almost as long as Nvidia, Microsoft DXR is just Ray Tracing, DXR simply makes it agnostic, Microsoft have been working with Nvidia, Intel and AMD to make Ray Tracing 'Direct-X Agnostic'. It is not something that has been bestowed upon us by the great Jenz to Microsoft and with that to the rest of us Plebeians.
Yes, Ray Tracing has been used in games since long before Nvidia Coined "RTX".
And to leave out the other two partners in "Making Ray Tracing Direct-X Agnostic" is disingenuous, DXR is coming to Consoles 'Much to Nvidia's frustrations i'm sure' and in DXR form, Nvidia are not going to be working with Microsoft to make DXR for AMD GPU's, or Intel for that matter.
Not hard to do, if I was him I would just highlight and quote the whole post.How the heck to you pull any of that garbage out of my post?
Not hard to do, if I was him I would just highlight and quote the whole post.
j/k
I don't think RTX as it works today is going anywhere, It'll simply be adapted at the software level as needed, that said Nvidia may not be that eager to maximise it's adaptability as it could be weaponised as a reason to upgrade to incoming ranges, they haven't done that before have they?
RTX is a generic term for raytracing. Nvidia does use it as a brand but developers refer to RTX, e.g. adding RTX to a game engine when they will use MS DXR as the API.
Kronos has basically already committed to using Nvidia's extension as the default API. Other parties can debate dome changes and if concensus is agreed then changes may be made. Note that the Nvidia extensions are based on MS DXR which is what MS and Nvidia worked on together and are already hardware agnostic. It is mostly an exercise in renaming API calls from VK_NV* to VK_
You dont seem to understand what an API is? The Nvidia extensions are essentially just method names and variable signatures. How that interacts with the hardware is entirely up to the driver, as such the API is hardware agnostic as long as it supports the same underlying functionality.
Microsoft and Nvidia worked together on the DX12 ray tracing API called DXR with minimal external input as AMD had no hardware.
MS have no real control over what the Kronos group decides in terms of API. You can only patent and copyright specific implementations, not vague ideas. An API is just a naming convention with a contract to provide the specified functionality. Much of the Vulkan and DX12 API is very similar if not identical by design. E.G the HLSL shading language used by vulkan is the exact copy of Microsofts DX12.1. The raytracing API mostly exists as functions in the HLSL shader language. This allows cross-API functionality and makes it easier for devs to move from DX12 to Vulkan or support both APIs.
And thus ray tracing in Vulkan will resemble MS DX12 DXR which is largely designed by Nvidia.
If AMD require wildly different API then they will have to work with MS to develop a new API and they wont be DXR compatible. That would be quite a failure for AMD in the short term and unrealistic. What is more likely is AMD will first produce DXR compatible hardware and confirm to the API largely proposed by Nvidia. In the future AMD will have a larger say in necessary changes. Short term they can specify different feature sets
None of this is particularly bad for AMD. Ms will have only accepted Nvidia's API suggestion if they believed it was fairly hardware agnostic and a sensible API.
Yes, VKRay is Vulkan extensions for RT. So far only nvidia has had any RT to speak of, so they have defined extensions, which are likely to be brought into the Vulkan standard.
Vulkan is a competing API to DirectX, which has DXR, yes. It is cross platform and aims to be just as hardware agnostic as DirectX, but also cross-platform.
DXR is a standard defined by microsoft, there are no 'nvidia extensions' to this, the nvidia drivers provide a DXR implementation using nvidia RTX hardware at the back end.
Well, they provide their own drivers which also fulfill the DirectX DXR API. It's not proprietary nvidia extensions to the API that are suddenly going to be made obsolete when it's standardised or when AMD come along. Each just provides their own drivers to fulfill the DX API requirements.
Similarly with Vulkan, there are RT extensions to the API (called VKRay), and drivers will be made to fulfill the requirements of the API.
The RT extensions are nvidia-only right now, but they aren't that way because nvidia went ahead and just made their own proprietary thing separate to what Vulkan had defined - they are made that way because Vulkan didn't have an RT API at all, so nvidia went ahead and added them. It looks like Intel and AMD will feed into standardising this, and Khronos will eventually publish that standard, but there's no reason to think it will be *very* different from what nvidia have already defined, or that somehow nvidia have been evil and written proprietary extensions to things.
Big "open-source" achievements aren't too common for NVIDIA or Microsoft much less together, but thanks to their open-source work on the DXC DirectXCompiler it's possible to easily convert HLSL DXR shaders to SPIR-V for Vulkan.
NVIDIA has written a new technical blog post on bringing HLSL ray-tracing to Vulkan with the same capabilities of DirextX Ray-Tracing. This effort is made feasible by Microsoft's existing open-source DirectXCompiler (DXC) with SPIR-V back-end for consumption by Vulkan drivers. Last year NVIDIA contributed to the open-source DXC support for SPV_NV_ray_tracing. This in turn with the open-source tooling allows converting DXR HLSL shaders into SPIR-V modules for Vulkan.
For now this DirectX Ray Tracing to Vulkan depends upon NVIDIA's NV_ray_tracing extension until the cross-vendor Vulkan ray-tracing extension(s) are finalized and published.
For those wanting to learn more about this current NVIDIA-led approach with Microsoft's open-source DXC compiler, see the NVIDIA developer blog. "The NVIDIA VKRay extension, with the DXC compiler and SPIR-V backend, provides the same level of ray tracing functionality in Vulkan through HLSL as is currently available in DXR. You can now develop ray-tracing applications using DXR or NVIDIA VKRay with minimized shader re-writing to deploy to either the DirectX or Vulkan APIs. We encourage you to take advantage of this new flexibility and expand your user base by bringing ray tracing titles to Vulkan."
Several studios have partnered with our friends at NVIDIA, who created RTX technology to make DirectX Raytracing run as efficiently as possible on their hardware
RTX is essentially NVIDIA's DXR backend implementation.
I imagine that the NV_ extensions to Vulkan look pretty similar to the eventual standard will be - instructions at that level of abstraction are usually pretty hardware independent, especially if the API extensions nvidia designed were effectively put there to cover the work already done under DXR.
Vulkan and DX are competing APIs, yes, just as OpenGL was (still is? You don't hear much about that any more). Vulkan is aimed (AFAICT) at being clean and legacy-free, and being able to utilise multi-gpu setups with relative ease. The other one you'll hear about is "Metal", but that's Apple exclusive.
This 100%^
New Xbox and PS5 will hurt GPU sales there is no doubt. They should be scared.
Its funny everyone ripping the pi$$ about Nvidia having no RT games, when AMDs HW RT card will have none either when it comes out, as it'll only have the couple Nvidia have been running too, only about a year later
But we should be over joyed. It means competition all around and lower prices.
Again even MS says that RTX,etc is to enable DXR to work on top of Nvidia GPUs to use specific hardware functionality their GPUs have to accelerate RT. Remember RTX,or Nvidia extensions
I doubt the Nvidia extensions will actually work on AMD or Intel GPUs. Doesn't Quake 2 RTX use Vulkan RT?? Well,it doesn't work on AMD GPUs.
Unless you can show me that both AMD and Intel are essentially going to do things in the same way as Nvidia,the hardware will be different
Plus there is nothing stopping Nvidia from still supporting its own extensions on top of that
I would imagine if Nvidia makes any significant changes on the hardware side,it will be quicker to push their own improved extensions,than wait for the cross vendor Vulkan extensions to be changed.
RTX is not "Nvidia extensions" it's their range of cards that implement RT and DXR. I'm not sure why you would think "RTX" refers to anything other than the hardware and its driver?
Again even MS says that RTX,etc is to enable DXR to work on top of Nvidia GPUs to use specific hardware functionality their GPUs have to accelerate RT. Remember RTX,or Nvidia extensions are NOT required for DXR to run under Windows as it will run in an agnostic software mode. RTX and any Nvidia extensions are there to target specific Nvidia hardware to enable a speedup in RT calculations.
RTX is not "Nvidia extensions" it's their range of cards that implement RT and DXR. I'm not sure why you would think "RTX" refers to anything other than the hardware and its driver?
Several studios have partnered with our friends at NVIDIA, who created RTX technology to make DirectX Raytracing run as efficiently as possible on their hardware
The nvidia drivers won't, certainly, as the hardware will be different. But at the RT API level it's likely to be very similar, defining high-level ray operations. The only RT API in Vulkan so far is the one nvidia have defined, it looks quite likely to form the basis for the standard API in Vulkan.
So vulkan only has raytracing as the nvidia raytracing extension. AFAIK AMD cards don't support that. Radeon Rays, on the other hand is an OpenCL raytracing library (or something). Q2VKPT was done AFAIK with VK_NV_RAY_TRACING so it's nvidia only AFAIK, though possibly you could run it with MESA, I don't know, but I don't know if the nvidia Q2 uses anything more RTX specific than VK_NV_RAY_TRACING.
Downloaded the source just for quick fun during a study break.
Gotta go back to studying. In short, it's not just a question of a hardcoded NVIDIA GPU check in the code (there seems to be a Nvidia driver version check though, which is easy to remove). If you don't have a (physical) device that supports VK_NV_ray_tracing Vulkan extension, nothing will run. Probably it is so reliant on this extension that you'd have to rework the raytracing part of the code completely, but then you would arguably have a completely different game on your hands. Unless AMD starts magically supporting VK_NV_ray_tracing, this application is a no-go.
- Commented out the "No ray tracing capable GPU found" check you are mentioned. This throws an unhandled exception since no device is picked.
- Hardcoded it to pick "Device 0" even though it's an "Unknown AMD GPU". This throws a handled "Couldn't initialize Vulkan error." No sense commenting this error check out since if an actual Vulkan device is not created, nothing afterwards will run properly.
- Log says that a Vulkan device was not created since it "Failed to validate extensions in list", namely "Device extension VK_NV_ray_tracing not supported by selected physical device or enabled layers.". Commented out VK_NV_ray_tracing from the list of requested extensions.
- A Vulkan device still can't be created. Log says: "terminator_CreateDevice: Failed in ICD C:\WINDOWS\System32\DriverStore\FileRepository\u0342715.inf_amd64_680c98a4f78c6e03\B342717\.\amdvlk64.dll vkCreateDevicecall" Not sure what the code requests during device creation that causes this failure, don't have time to delve into this, as I don't know anything about Vulkan. Probably the absence of VK_NV_ray_tracing makes everything invalid during device creation.
That's entirely irrelevant, as the hardware is addressed by the driver, which implements the API, but the API remains the same.
You don't think that there are different Vulkan and/or DX API calls for talking to Nvidia or AMD hardware right now, in none-RT operations, do you? But the hardware in Turing, Pascal etc is entirely different to RDNA, GCN etc. The APIs at the level of Vulkan or DX are identical. That's the whole point.
But it would be pointless, the only reason they have extensions right now in Vulkan is because vulkan has no RT APIs. Once it has, they'll be fine for all vendors.
Vulkan isn't a driver, it's an API, the drivers then make that work.
And I would imagine that significant hardware changes would have no effect whatsoever at the level of Vulkan, because anything hardware specific would be handled by their driver. So long as the API is defined well enough at the beginning, there should be no need to change the vulkan specification just because of new hardware.
For now this DirectX Ray Tracing to Vulkan depends upon NVIDIA's NV_ray_tracing extension until the cross-vendor Vulkan ray-tracing extension(s) are finalized and published."
It doesn't help that in all the Nvidia marketing videos they show the comparison of games with and without Ray tracing as "RTX On" and "RTX off" So now people assume RTX On = Ray Tracing On.