Live data from Hacker News

PowerVR GR6500: Ray tracing is the future and the future is now

blog.imgtec.com

11–20 of 99 posts

Re: PowerVR GR6500: Ray tracing is the future and the future is now

#11
post #3

It's best to remember that ray tracing isn't the be all and end all of graphics since it's far harder for artists to control the results than the other hacked up ways. One consequence of this is their example comparison, where I think it's entirely subjective to say the ray traced output is better. Neither is particularly great. The big win is around indirect lighting, but the development of that in standard rasteris…

You might feel differently if you ever had to do shadow mapping on traditional hardware. Even in AAA games, there are tons of artifacts in the shadows. Same goes for reflections.

I don't see why it's harder for artists to control the results... can you elaborate? It seems like it's going to be 90% the same. You have a point on a surface, you have a camera vector and light vectors, you supply a small piece of code and out pops a color. The major differences in the pipeline are in the scaffolding: depth tests, reflections, and shadows will be done in different ways. The differences for artists are that they'll have to learn a system with different limitations.

My guess is that game graphics are going to follow the developments in movie CGI. Pixar switched to ray tracing in 2013, and games will switch when hardware powers up and expertise filters down.

Re: PowerVR GR6500: Ray tracing is the future and the future is now

#12

What's the difference between ray tracing and path tracing? And could we have a path tracing chip? This demo was pretty impressive. I think they said they used 4 Titans at 720p. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKqxonOrl4Q

Ray tracing works backwards from the way actual optics works. It sends out a ray for each pixel and then finds out what it falls on then does math to figure out what it should look like. In a simple example, you have a few light sources and you trace a ray back to an object (polygonal surface), then you shoot off other rays from there toward the light sources (or you shoot off potential reverse reflection rays). If something is blocking a light source you adjust the amount of shadow being rendered or you bounce off of that surface again toward the light sources, and so on. Making it possible to render shadows, reflections, and so on with decent fidelity.

In contrast to that technique you have "radiosity", where the illumination at each point on a surface is calculated based on its environment. Radiosity is better at rendering diffuse light, ray tracing is better at rendering reflected light.

The underlying difficulty is that illumination is a maddeningly combinatorial problem. In principle every part of every object in a scene contributes illumation to every part of every other object. The light falling on a desk lamp from the LEDs of a clock also illuminates the desk itself, and so on. Radiosity and ray tracing attempt to solve those problems by making simplifying assumptions and performing a subset of the calculations necessary to illuminate and render a scene completely faithfully. In principle a more proper ray tracing algorithm would be to send out a huge number of rays in every direction for every image field ray, then follow each of those through their evolution, sending out yet more for surfaces each fall on, and so on. But that's far too computationally intensive (it's an O(n!) level problem).

Path tracing is similar to these techniques but makes different simplifying assumptions. And the most important aspect is that instead of deterministically calculating everything in a specific way it uses a monte-carlo method of statistically sampling different "paths" then using the data to estimate the resulting illumination/image rendering. Path tracing results in a compromise between ray tracing and radiosity of being able to render both reflective and diffuse light well, though it has its own short-comings.

Re: PowerVR GR6500: Ray tracing is the future and the future is now

#14
post #7

I dont know much about the differences but the samples images (like the yacht) don't look particularly impressive or real to me.

I don't think it _is_ super obvious. Rather, I think the goal is to properly fill in the scene with the very subtle clues we unconsciously look for.

I had a similar experience working a bit with Radiance years ago. The output looked mediocre, at best, but it was reporting a real view of the scene; it's call to fame is that it outputs real energy values in physical units (like energy per unit solid angle or luminance or such). But despite the cartoony models I provided, it did demonstrate subtleties that weren't hacks (needed for this application), things that you wouldn't think to or bother implementing directly.

This? This grabs a lot of needed visual artifacts faster and more correctly without crazy hacks (or so it seems - it does say hybrid rendering).

Re: PowerVR GR6500: Ray tracing is the future and the future is now

#15
post #3

It's best to remember that ray tracing isn't the be all and end all of graphics since it's far harder for artists to control the results than the other hacked up ways. One consequence of this is their example comparison, where I think it's entirely subjective to say the ray traced output is better. Neither is particularly great. The big win is around indirect lighting, but the development of that in standard rasteris…

You might feel differently if you ever had to do shadow mapping on traditional hardware. Even in AAA games, there are tons of artifacts in the shadows. Same goes for reflections. I don't see why it's harder for artists to control the results... can you elaborate? It seems like it's going to be 90% the same. You have a point on a surface, you have a camera vector and light vectors, you supply a small piece of code and…

> The differences for artists are that they'll have to learn a system with different limitations.

If current-generation AAA games are any indication, either very few artists ever learned the raster workarounds or few artists ever had time to implement the workarounds.

I think ray-tracing will be a game changer. Raster shadows are easy to get subtly wrong and very difficult to get right. Cube-maps are easy to get subtly wrong and very difficult to get right. Transparency is easy to get subtly wrong and very difficult to get right. The list goes on.

> Even in AAA games, there are tons of artifacts in the shadows. Same goes for reflections.

Exactly! I can't count the number of times I've seen shadows pointing in the wrong direction, having the wrong color, having the wrong penumbra/antumbra, casting through solid objects, etc. Cube-map reflections are even worse (yay for faucet handles reflecting forrest scenes) especially when they're moving. Expect to see a reflection slide up the body of a car as it comes to a stop? If you're not in a car-racing game, forget about it.

All of those problems can be overcome with artist sweat and tears. The code has already been written and is in the big engines, but the effects still regularly fail to happen in AAA titles.

Ray-tracing makes it easy to do things right. None of the raster techniques have achieved that landmark. This WILL be a game changer.

Re: PowerVR GR6500: Ray tracing is the future and the future is now

#16
post #3

It's best to remember that ray tracing isn't the be all and end all of graphics since it's far harder for artists to control the results than the other hacked up ways. One consequence of this is their example comparison, where I think it's entirely subjective to say the ray traced output is better. Neither is particularly great. The big win is around indirect lighting, but the development of that in standard rasteris…

I'm sorry man, but that sounds crazy. Raytraced scenes are much easier for artists to control the results because things actually behave like you would intuitively expect (if the amount of rays is high enough).

If raytraced scenes were hard to control, why would every single animated movie be raytraced?

Raytracing really is the be all and end all of graphics. The more rays you can render, the more realistic your scene will be, up to 100% realism.

Of course, we can come pretty far with the hacks as well, and it's hard to say if hardware raytracing can come close to the quality hardware shader hacks can achieve on traditional GPU's in real time.

Re: PowerVR GR6500: Ray tracing is the future and the future is now

#17
post #13

Two thoughts: I would love to see a video of a dynamic environment (aka actors/objects moving in a scene). Also, how long before cryptocurrency miners use these to gain step function over current gpus.

> Also, how long before cryptocurrency miners use these to gain step function over current gpus.

I can't imagine these ever being cheaper than ASICs.

Re: PowerVR GR6500: Ray tracing is the future and the future is now

#19
post #16
post #3

It's best to remember that ray tracing isn't the be all and end all of graphics since it's far harder for artists to control the results than the other hacked up ways. One consequence of this is their example comparison, where I think it's entirely subjective to say the ray traced output is better. Neither is particularly great. The big win is around indirect lighting, but the development of that in standard rasteris…

I'm sorry man, but that sounds crazy. Raytraced scenes are much easier for artists to control the results because things actually behave like you would intuitively expect (if the amount of rays is high enough). If raytraced scenes were hard to control, why would every single animated movie be raytraced? Raytracing really is the be all and end all of graphics. The more rays you can render, the more realistic your scen…

It's both true and false. The same reason movies still use light panes, make up etc etc. You don't want random pure reality[1].

[1] no really, you don't.

Re: PowerVR GR6500: Ray tracing is the future and the future is now

#20
post #7

I dont know much about the differences but the samples images (like the yacht) don't look particularly impressive or real to me.

They should have showed the car moving. You'd have seen the reflection slide up the hood in the raytraced demo.

It takes A LOT of work and planning to get light and shadow correct in a raster setting. Most AAA games don't bother. Raytracing makes it easy to get them right, which will make all the difference in the world.

Post reply on HN