![]() ![]() In your own link, Vray beats the other engines consistently and by a fair margin. That would seem to not support your fastest render engine argument. You can denoise on CPU, but the speed is much, well, slower. Nvidia has dedicated Tensor cores for this task, while others use the normal core GPU. You are not doing this with CPUs, are you? The denoisers, these are not CPU based. His presentation is about making use of real time ray tracing, with GPUs. It is pretty simple, really.Īnd that Matt Pharr presentation.The dude works at Nvidia. It is a chicken and egg thing, studios are not going to make games that need more until we get more GPUs that have more. The only reason 4K games use less than 8GB of VRAM is because 99% of all GPUs in gaming have less than 8GB. The moment consoles make more than 4GB a mainstream thing is the moment that GPUs will do the same. ![]() And again, look at future consoles to predict where this segment goes. You cannot predict what new features game studios come up with that require more VRAM. To suggest that 1080p will only ever need 4GB is also short sighted. To suggest otherwise is very short sighted. It doesn't even matter what the users are doing, it matters more what the competition is doing. In 5 years the low end cards went from 0.5 to 2 or 4GB of VRAM. Nvidia has released far larger VRAM specs since then, as well as the DGX-2 which has 512GB VRAM.Īnd again, check actual history. They talk about the limits of VRAM here, but remember this was back in March. To date, Flow has helped artists shade hundreds of assets across several feature films like Coco and The Incredibles 2." An application called Flow was built around that renderer to deliver a real-time shading system to our artists. "Over the past several years, and predating the RenderMan XPU project, Pixar’s internal tools team developed a GPU-based ray tracer, built on CUDA and Optix. But they are moving towards using GPU even more now. The movies Coco and The Incredibles 2 both feature GPU rendered animation. Pixar was using Nvidia OptiX ray tracing before RTX came along. Even with less samples per sec, the CPU based bidirectional path tracer mode converges faster than the non bidir GPU one.ĭude, Pixar has been using GPU for several years. Look back in the early days of Luxrender, where the CPU has bidir and the GPU don't. Just because a hardware is generating more samples doesn't automatically mean it will converge faster. So, a renderer employing those variance reducing techniques don't need as much samples as a pure brute force renderer. As he outlined, there are algorithms that minimizes variance using the same amount of samples (moving from uniform, to cosine sampling, light/BRDF sampling, combining light/BRDF sampling via MIS, making extra use of BVH info etc). The most important reason you need more samples is to cut down variance (noise). Read up Matt Pharr's presentation - Real-Time rendering’s next frontier: Adopting lessons from offline ray tracing to real-time ray tracing for practical pipeline. I'd say you're missing the whole point of rendering. The engine that renders the most samples is going to be GPU, if the engine is properly optimized in any capacity for GPU. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |