• DX11: Graphics Demo.
    106 replies, posted
Well it looks like DX10 turned out to be completely useless. Hardly anything took advantage of it, and it didn't have anything nearly as impressive as Tessellation. That looked pretty amazing, but like everyone else said, that path looked really sharp to walk on, and the DOF was annoying.
My laptop took a crap watching this video. It nearly died.
At first it didn't look like anything new at all, but when I realized it was real time tessaleted displacement maps and not parallax occlusion like in Crysis it got more interesting. Though it seems pretty unnecessary to use that in games right now. *MainlybecauseI'dhavetobuyanewrig* [editline]07:09PM[/editline] I think someone is rating us all dumb!
These videos are for programmers, not for people who have no idea about the technology behind it.
[url]http://unigine.com/download/#heaven[/url] Wow, i'm suprised nobody has mentioned this yet, you can download the demo there. And i think they're hugely exaggerating the usefulness of tesselation in this demo. I mean seriously, making staircases a single flat surface just so you can tesselate and displace it later to make stairs out of it? What. The. Fuck. By the way, this can fuck up the physics too at the same time, unless you make a separate collision model with proper stairs (and why the hell would you have a more detailed collision model than the model for graphics?). We've had individually modelled stairs since doom 1, tesselation isn't going to change it. The same goes for the spikes on the dragon, they should've been included in the model. Distant objects probably don't get tesselated, so those spikes probably just pop in once you get close enough. All in all, tesselation is meant to be used to make models more detailed and smooth, not to replace basic geometry with it. Other than that (and the retarded DoF), the demo looks very nice. I love the shaders on the metal roofs and the clouds.
[QUOTE=pebkac;18027618][url]http://unigine.com/download/#heaven[/url] Wow, i'm suprised nobody has mentioned this yet, you can download the demo there. And i think they're hugely exaggerating the usefulness of tesselation in this demo. I mean seriously, making staircases a single flat surface just so you can tesselate and displace it later to make stairs out of it? What. The. Fuck. By the way, this can fuck up the physics too at the same time, unless you make a separate collision model with proper stairs (and why the fuck would you have a more detailed collision model than the model for graphics?). We've had individually modelled stairs since doom 1, tesselation isn't going to change it. The same goes for the spikes on the dragon, they should've been included in the model. Distant objects probably don't get tesselated, so those spikes probably just pop in once you get close enough. All in all, tesselation is meant to be used to make models more detailed and smooth, not to replace basic geometry with it.[/QUOTE] Yeah, that's what I noticed too and they went completely insane with the polycount, some objects turn pure white when you enable wireframes. You don't need that many polygons, even without any kind of bump mapping.
holy shit
just tested my PC on DX9. runs fine, about 40 fps on 1680x1050
[QUOTE=VG Cats;18023696][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkKtY2G3FbU&feature=related[/media] i understand it now[/QUOTE] Holy [b]shit[/b] that's incredible. Am I the only one that's amazed that with dx11 you can take a flat wall and turn it into cobblestones with just a material and not be able to tell the difference than if you had modeled the stones directly into the wall? I mean shit... that's just sexy.
Ok... So it has a better solution to Parallelex mapping and they've implemented this function that adds in more polygons to a model smoothening it out without taking any extra resources... Or is that the tessallation? I can't remember. But otherwise I see no difference. Beautifully textured metal roof though. [QUOTE=Robber;18025210]Comparison without wireframe: [media][url]http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee15/FPRobber/Unigine/00013.jpg[/url] [url]http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee15/FPRobber/Unigine/00012.jpg[/url][/media] Comparison with wireframe: [media][url]http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee15/FPRobber/Unigine/00015.jpg[/url] [url]http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee15/FPRobber/Unigine/00014.jpg[/url][/media] [url=http://s230.photobucket.com/albums/ee15/FPRobber/Unigine/?albumview=slideshow]My other screenshots[/url][/QUOTE] Haha, oh wow. That's ridicilous.
Sure it looks good, but how will it run?
You're late. I already posted this, and its 2 day sold. [url]http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=833731&page=3[/url] [quote] Unigine Corp. presents their newest tech demo with their engine, now featuring DirectX 11. It runs very good with DirectX 11. If you have a DirectX 11 ready card, such as ATIs 5000 series, you can turn on tessellation, which greatly improves the image quality. In the demo, you may use the free camera and “fly” around, or you can use the “walking mode” (shooter game type movement, no flying). Video 1: benchmark [hd]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9F6zSgtRnkE[/hd] Video 2 Tessellation differences (on/off) [hd]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkKtY2G3FbU[/hd] This demo is available to the public, so feel free to try it! Please, take note, DirectX 11 is ONLY available on DirectX 10 cards, and windows vista or windows 7. However, for vista users, service pack 3 is needed (and at the time of posting, I don’t think its out). For hardware tessellation, you need a DirectX 11 card. Link: [url]http://unigine.com/download/[/url][/quote]
Looks like DX11 is all about more blur.
For those of you who seem confused about tessellation: Your graphics card has a specific budget that allows it to run the video smoothly while rendering everything on the screen. If you go over this budget, then your framerate will drop, and the user experience will be substantially decreased. Tessellation is great, because it allows the engine to automatically scale whatever it is trying to render to the correct budget for your video card, and keep your framerate in a usable range. This isn't too different from mipmapping, which was our solution to high quality textures on lower end hardware back when textures were the big thing. Mipmapping (and tessellation alike) allow graphics cards to zoom in and out and pan over huge distances, revealing huge detail on a close level, but preserve framerate (at no cost to visual quality) on huge, wide shots seamlessly. Also pebkac, not all engines have the physics engine tied into the graphics engine. In fact, I would argue that situations like that (e.g. the source engine) are a direct result of sloppy coding and poor engine management. Seperating the two engines doesn't stop you from utilizing OpenCL or CUDA either, it just allows you to avoid problems like the one you described.
I have to say, the first camera view I thought the were using Black and White 3 as a example for the new DX11, I can just see B&W 3 using this, look at the second game that looked amazing. This video got my all hpyed up until I found out DX made that themselves. I cried.
Looks pretty, not terribly realistic though, that's not to say there isn't potential.
I'm confused, there was Tessellation in the DX10 "Froblins" demo I had...
[QUOTE=AesoSpadez;18029053]For those of you who seem confused about tessellation: Your graphics card has a specific budget that allows it to run the video smoothly while rendering everything on the screen. If you go over this budget, then your framerate will drop, and the user experience will be substantially decreased. Tessellation is great, because it allows the engine to automatically scale whatever it is trying to render to the correct budget for your video card, and keep your framerate in a usable range. This isn't too different from mipmapping, which was our solution to high quality textures on lower end hardware back when textures were the big thing. Mipmapping (and tessellation alike) allow graphics cards to zoom in and out and pan over huge distances, revealing huge detail on a close level, but preserve framerate (at no cost to visual quality) on huge, wide shots seamlessly.[/QUOTE] This demo doesn't do that, it's generating many hundred thousand polygons and the framerate is plummeting. But that's the engine's fault, not DX11's. [editline]10:21PM[/editline] [QUOTE=SGorilla;18029897]I'm confused, there was Tessellation in the DX10 "Froblins" demo I had...[/QUOTE] ATI cards support it since the 2xxx series. But it's mandatory for DX11 cards so Nvidia has to add it too.
this reminds me of oblivion
The cobblestones look terrible, much to lumpy. Aside from that, beautiful.
The Demo runs at a stable 50 Fps on my 3850.
God damn can nobody make trees that don't look like paper glued to a stick?
[QUOTE=IMA SHAARK;18037991]God damn can nobody make trees that don't look like paper glued to a stick?[/QUOTE] Would you really want every single leaf to be an individual model and have the trees multiplied by hundreds?
Half of all the objects I saw where cleverly disguised rectangles.
The Depth of field is a tad bit intensive but besides from that... It's beautiful...
The tessellation is kind of bullshit. It's easily done with a written program on itself, but instead they want to be lazy and have the DirectX API do it for them.
I want DX11 Rendered Breasts...
Tesselated breasts instead of cobblestones.
[QUOTE=Neckbeard;18038998]Tesselated breasts instead of cobblestones.[/QUOTE] Indeed! My Good Sir!
That looks amazing. Now if only they had shown some people too.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.