DenogginizerOS
BenjaminBirdie's Thomas Jefferson
Nostromo said:
So, how is Heavenly Sword coming along?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Capcom Claims: 360 GPU = Nvidia 8800 series SHOCKER
- Thread starter Dorfdad
- Start date
- Status
So, how is Heavenly Sword coming along?
no where to be seen, as I wrote many many timesypo said:
edram does not make sense any more to speed up AA rendering, it's only useful when you have to burn tons of fillrate (loads of particles, yeahh!!)I would be not surprised if another platform out there has a tipically lower cost associated to AA..
Moderation Unlimited
Banned
Nostromo said:Umh..wait a minute, you were talking about frame buffer effects: AA is not a 'frame buffer effect', and most frame buffer effects (let say motion blur, depth of field, etc..) are big consumers of texture bandwidth, not frame buffer bandwidth, therefore edram is not needed at all (as it works on Xenos, you can't store a texture on edram)
Again, you were talking about frame buffer effects, not HDR rendering and anti aliasing
Though it's pretty clear from released and upcoming games that HDR+AA on PS3 is that difficult to achieve, isn't it?
Marco
I didn't mean to intermingle the two directly. I was only doing so because I was trying to point out that utilizing the extra bandwidth on the daughter die for framebuffer effects frees up bandwidth for other functions that are bandwidth intensive, like AA and HDR.
-ImaginaryInsider
Member
ypo said:
I think the official phrase was "with tiling, 2x MSAA is a negligible hit on performance".
(4x MSAA is something like a 5% hit.)
Also, from what I've read of the article in question, it doesn't seem like Capcom is using the edram for tiling, so the "free AA" thing wouldn't apply anyway.
Moderation Unlimited
Banned
Bud said:
:lol
DenogginizerOS
BenjaminBirdie's Thomas Jefferson
Nostromo said:I wish I could answer to those kind of questions, but since no sane dev would ever answer to a question like that.. I can't
Jaffe would....
To be fair, Crysis was demonstrated on an 8800 running at a resolution higher than 1080p. Considering that it was an unfinished, un-optimized DX10 version of the game and it was still rather playable at such a resolution, I'm sure the 8800 will handle the game well.antiloop said:
Those functions may be bandwidth intensive...if you're running a game with very simpler shaders, otherwise you're going to be tipically limited by your ALUs (and if you're not youd shuold better pump up shour shadersModeration Unlimited said:
)..that means that even without edram you have tons of bandwidth to burn. Except a few cases of course -> alpha blending + simple shaders
Edra, made a lot more sense during the PS2 days than now.
Don't get me wrong, it enables devs to do some amazing things, it's just that I believe that the same problems that edram addresses today could be addressed in a different way.
JMichael said:
The Ninja Theory diaries chronicle this to a fair degree. It eventually boils down to this:
Publisher 1 was Sony.
http://www.ninjatheory.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=18&Itemid=52
Earlier diaries record first attempts at pitching the game to various publishers at different conferences etc. Quite an interesting read.
DenogginizerOS
BenjaminBirdie's Thomas Jefferson
Nostromo said:He's a superstar in charge of his own games..I'm just an insignificant programmer working on a huge massive project, not really the right guy to asnwer to those kind of questions
Serious question. What is more efficient: edram or the alternative cat skinning methods you are alluding to?
4x MSAA should have a 5% hit according PR..in this LP they have a 20% hit on the total rendering time of a frame. Given that a lot of rendering work does not depend by AA (so it does not cost more or less if AA is enabled or not, take post processing effects as motion blur as example) it's obvious that 4x AA cost in this particular game is way higher than 20%.-ImaginaryInsider said:
Tiling can't be really avoided if you want to do AA rendering on 360 so they're using it for sure even though we don't know how efficient their implementation is.
Moderation Unlimited
Banned
Hey Nostromo, kind of a related tech question, but not really:
Would you have any idea why the Unreal Engine 3 is having such a difficult transition to the PS3? Is it on the CPU side (getting it to work with adequate performance on the SPUs), or is RSX the culpret? Or perhaps I'm way off base, and it has to do limitations stemming from memory allocation/pooling (discrete pools on PS3 vs. unified pool on X360). What say you? I know UE3 does alot of texture/shader passes (up to 10 if I remember correctly). Isn't RSX good at that stuff?
Would you have any idea why the Unreal Engine 3 is having such a difficult transition to the PS3? Is it on the CPU side (getting it to work with adequate performance on the SPUs), or is RSX the culpret? Or perhaps I'm way off base, and it has to do limitations stemming from memory allocation/pooling (discrete pools on PS3 vs. unified pool on X360). What say you? I know UE3 does alot of texture/shader passes (up to 10 if I remember correctly). Isn't RSX good at that stuff?
For opaque surfaces rendering (no trasparencies) modern PC GPUs that don't use edram are doing EXTREMELY well.DenogginizerOS said:
For non opaque surfaces edram is exceptional as it gives you so much realworld fill rate to burn..but it seems to me that you have to completely design a GPU around that, while a simple on chip buffer that cover a small portion of screen (let say 64x64 pixels) would be enough to simply render transparent primitives (that usually are the vast minority of the on screen primitives) using the CPU to tile them (imhp 360 and PS3 CPUs would be extremely good at that..)
What released PS3 have AA+HDR? What upcoming PS3 wiil have it aside from HS?Nostromo said:Though it's pretty clear from released and upcoming games that HDR+AA on PS3 is NOT that difficult to achieve, isn't it?
Marco
Basing on the article it's more like 13-18% loss, not 20%.
I'll launch a PC game in few minutes to see how big perfomance loss is on my Geforce 7900GS.
Moderation Unlimited
Banned
Nostromo said:
I was just referring to comments that Mark Rein had made in prior months, and the fact that all UE3 titles on PS3 have been delayed incessantly for some reason.
I'd really like to know what's holding it up. I get the feeling that CELL is the culprit, and maybe limitations derriving from how PS3 pools its memory.
F1? MotorStorm?szaromir said:
I talked only about 4x AA so far, 18% does not seem to me that much distant from 20%
18% is the total hit on the frame rendering time, not the AA hit, as there are rendering passes that are not affected by AA.
They also say that motion blur takes about 6 ms and since a full 30 hz frame last 33 ms we can compute a more accurate hit for the 4x AA:
(33 - 6)/(33/(1.18) - 6) = 23%
That's for sure a much more accurate estimate of 4x AA costs
Completely meaningless test..
Moderation Unlimited
Banned
JMichael said:
Well, it obviously has enough memory (512 MB for PS3 vs. 522 MB for X360). It's a question of how that memory is allocated (pooled) and utilized (OS, other non-game related overhead, etc.) IMHO.
Rein didn't say that, Preston Thorne did (and what he said could be construed as misleading). Rein said that UE3 wasn't a launch title engine. I agree with the latter comment though, working with two memory pools, the status of Sony's SDK's, and most likely the Cell architecture itself are the main reasons for the delay.JMichael said:
Nostromo said:Can't talk for them, what I can say is that SPUs fly! no kidding guys, they're fast
Hw long do you think it'll take for developers to "get" it, and be able to harness the so-called blazing speed, and have it show the games we play?
I played the Motorstorm demo on a stand (I live in Europe, so that was the only way to pley on PS3) and I thought it had no AA, but maybe it's effect of playing on 55' TV a meter in front of it.Nostromo said:F1? MotorStorm?
That's pretty big performance hit then. I just read the topic on B3d and a dev from Lionhead said that you could (almost) achieve these (in)famous 5% after some optimizations. Granted it takes some time, I assume achieving AA+HDR on RSX is no piece of cake either.
Maybe, byt I wanted to know how big impact it has in my PC games (I usually have AA turned on anyway)
To start it does not take much time, we have APIs for that, you don't have to get crazy programming a multithreading system for it.SnakeXs said:
To write ultra optmized code it takes time, but..it's so f&$%/£8g fast that to be honest writing very optmized code is not going to be a priority for many titles, expecially at the beginning, as decent code would run just fine.
Obviously one needs to know what he's doing and why, otherwise things can go horribly wrong, but really..IMHO it's not so complicated as some famous devs and some press made it sound to be. Anyway I don't wanna judge anyone, I think that in a relatively short period of time we all see what CELL is capable to do.
I'm as curious (if not even more) as ppl not working in the industry, cause that thing is so flexible that I can't way to see what studios like Naughty Dog, Insomniac, Kojima Prod, etc.. will use it!
InsertCredit
Member
Oh come on.OverHeat said:
It's nice of him to answer a few (if not, almost all) of our questions. No need to talk him down.
BlueTsunami
there is joy in sucking dick
Douchey posters FTL!
- Status