NVIDIA Fermi (GT300) ray tracing demo

Saaking - 55 days 22 hours ago

It's hard to believe that video games will one day reach such a high level (at least on PC). Damn, that's just amazing.

Agree(12) | Disagree(2) | Report

SuperM - 55 days 21 hours ago

Next gen. Believe!

You have to keep in mind though that all the performance of the chip has been put into rendering just the head. So if you are making a big environment you probably cant put that much detail into the face.

Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report

NeoCloud - 55 days 20 hours ago

Sorry but this article is false. "NVIDIA Fermi to have lifelike 3D, mobile GPUs soon."

These models were made with projected textures onto 3D geometry. See the official link here:

http://forums.cgsociety.org...

Agree(4) | Disagree(0) | Report

hakis86 - 55 days 20 hours ago

You can't even really tell that it's fake!!

This is breathtaking...this is the best I've ever Seen.
Nvidia.. I have so much respect for you.

Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report

MNicholas - 55 days 12 hours ago

Bullshots. Typical Nvidia.

Who can forget the hilarious claim that the original Xbox could push 125M polygons per second!

This ship is absolutely huge. There is only one application for which it is a better solution than anything we have today and old-fashioned PC based gaming isn't it.

Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report

evrfighter - 55 days 11 hours ago

given enough time any gpu and render these shots. Stillshots are meaningless.

If anything is to complimented about Nvidia. They're 3d artists are of extremely high caliber and that's about it.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

MNicholas - 55 days 11 hours ago

http://forums.cgsociety.org...

Direct Link:

http://www.heerkogroefsema....

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

Major_Tom - 55 days 1 hour ago

Jumps on anything Nvidia related with nothing but praises even though this article is faker than Pamela Andersons breasts

Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report

Kakkoii - 55 days 1 hour ago

@MNicholas:

It was actually 125 million particles a second. And it wasn't a claim, but the raw spec of the chip. Along with 115 million vertices a second.
You have to remember... this is each SECOND. Normal video and gameplay is at around 30 frames per SECOND. So divide the number by 30 and you have you real-time spec. Seems a lot more realistic now, doesn't it?

@Major_Tom: Up to your trolling again I see :)
And I made that comment before I knew it was fake. Your saying something like this wouldn't be worth praise if it wasn't fake? Don't be so ignorant. And my comment was hardly in a fanboyism manner. I had stated even if it Fermi wasn't able to be rendering this in real-time, the detail is still amazing in terms of 3D models. That's the main thing I'm praising. Sadly it projection similar to what LightStage does. And thus I am not as impressed anymore :)

(P.S, constantly commenting on my comments like that makes you a hypocrite :P )

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

champ21 - 55 days 22 hours ago

unfortunately..

due to focus now being on consoles.. we wont see games looking this good until the next gen of consoles are out.

till then we are stuck with Unreal engine 3 for the most part.

developers just wont invest so much to make such a good looking game for the pc alone. they would rather make something that works on all 3 platforms (pc, ps3, 360).

Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report

nbnt - 55 days 22 hours ago

@champ21

you do realize he said KILLZONE 4.. right?

Agree(8) | Disagree(1) | Report

CrippleH - 55 days 22 hours ago

We won't be seeing this type of graphics for at least 10-15 years that's my opinion.

Agree(4) | Disagree(0) | Report

TheIneffableBob - 55 days 22 hours ago

Yeah, probably 10 years if consoles continue to dictate how triple-A games are developed. I'd love it if PC games were in the spotlight again. Then we'd start having much more significant advances in graphics.

Agree(7) | Disagree(4) | Report

ReviewsArePolitics - 55 days 22 hours ago

If you are so concerned by the hardware developers take in mind when their AAA games are being made, why not make your own company that focuses on making *exclusives* for the best technology (one that requires you to upgrade your computer just about every 6 months). Let's see how sustainable your business model is...

Isn't it amusing how PC gamers think so highly of themselves and yet complain about their hardware not being taken advantage off even though it's the only hardware that becomes obsolete the moment you purchased it, not to mention the platform where piracy is the most rampant, and that it's not a platform with uniform hardware.

What are hardcore PC gamers good for anyway? Evidently they don't know how to run businesses, they don't know anything about economics, and apparently not about game development. Just good at whinning and spending their welfare/parents money in hardware they don't need.

Oh well, back to uncharted 2.

Agree(4) | Disagree(20) | Report

CernaML - 55 days 22 hours ago

I usually agree with the comments you make, but now you're just being a douchebag. Besides, your comment is a little more appropriate for the Xbox Live community.

" Just good at whinning and spending their welfare/parents money in hardware they don't need. "

Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report

CrippleH - 55 days 21 hours ago

There are some people who upgrade computer like people upgrading Cars man. It gives them satisfaction and great graphics to boot. They are funding our technology pretty much by buying those graphic cards.

I salute them.

Agree(4) | Disagree(0) | Report

TheDudeAbides - 55 days 21 hours ago

I think NVIDIA is out of the game, Intel is about to do PS4's GPU

Agree(3) | Disagree(5) | Report

SuperM - 55 days 21 hours ago

Next gen consoles will most likely have even more powerfull hardware then that. So saying we wont see this graphics for 10-15 years i think is kind of ignorant. We will see it in 3-5 years when the next gen consoles come out.

Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report

CrippleH - 55 days 20 hours ago

It's ignorant to a degree but look at the target render. You notice it's just a head. No body, environment, physics, and other factors. That's why these tech demos always look better, they always focus on 1 thing or little amounts of things.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

STONEY4 - 55 days 17 hours ago

@Gamer Politics

"(one that requires you to upgrade your computer just about every 6 months)."

I hate uninformed people like you. Before I built a whole new computer a few months ago, I was using an 8800GTX since 2007. Even to this day, it was still running nearly every game out there at 60fps at a high resolution on max settings. In fact, I have an old computer lying around with a 7900GTX that came out in 2005 I think, and that things still runs games ok, and still looks better than it's console counterpart in games

"Isn't it amusing how PC gamers think so highly of themselves and yet complain about their hardware not being taken advantage off"

We don't complain, because are hardware is being taken advantage of. *cough* Crysis *cough* And most of the multiplat games on the consoles have way better graphics than the consoles will be able to achieve until the "next generation." For PC gamers, there really isn't a "next generation," because were basically always in a next gen era compared to the consoles, and every few months game look better.

Agree(7) | Disagree(1) | Report

champ21 - 55 days 15 hours ago

its funny most console gamers wish pcgaming were dead...

this is mostly their mentality due to their fanboisim, they just want to see their respective console be the best at a certain game, however that just doesnt happen because even a mid range pc runs circles around consoles(unless a developer seriously botches the pc version)

a msg to the ignorant, if pc gaming were to die.. all progress as we know it would come to a halt. there is no way the console industrty can keep companies like amd, nvidia or intel alive.

if anything console gamer should appreciate the pcgamers who spend on the latest tech so that later on its passed down when a new console needs to be made.

microsoft and sony already make billions in losses, imagine if they actually had to fund the development of new gen chips if companies like nvidia or amd didnt exist, prices of consoles would surely be a lot higher then they are now.

Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report

evrfighter - 55 days 11 hours ago

lol'ing @ reviewsarepolitics

from the amount of hatred you have for pc gamers. you must have tried your hand at it and was laughed off the server.

I would have bought TombRaider: Among thieves for my ps3 but tomb raider is tomb raider.

Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report

MNicholas - 55 days 11 hours ago

Where those pictures came from:

http://www.heerkogroefsema....

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

Blaine - 55 days 7 hours ago

You are talking straight out of your a$$.

It's ok to have an opinion, but don't try to pass it off as fact, and don't believe your bs so much.

If PC gaming "were to die", "progress as we know it" would not come to a halt. There's more to high end PC components than gaming. You're forgetting the whole world outside of gaming, where people have jobs and some companies require extremely capable graphics processing technologies. AMD, Nvidia, and Intel wouldn't be relying on the console industry to "keep them alive". And, worse case scenario: the industry would *change*--not grind to a halt; keel over and die.

And I don't know where you get your financial data from (actually, I'm pretty sure those numbers are confidential, so you DON'T know them), but if Sony and Microsoft were "making billions in losses", they definitely would pull out of the gaming industry faster than the Nvidia Fermi can process that image. Also, when they partner up with other companies to incorporate their components into their consoles, they obviously pay for their development costs somehow, so console gamers are footing the bill for these "new gen chips".

I could go on and on, and my facts could be wrong themselves for all I know, but all I'm trying to say is: don't voice your opinions or unfounded convictions as facts.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

Blaine - 55 days 7 hours ago

That's a scary thought. We'll just have to stop relying on material evidence so much--especially the visual kind--and more on people's testimonies, like in the old days. Somehow, though, I don't see society making that change any time soon...

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

ReviewsArePolitics - 55 days 22 hours ago

Have fun playing this game... and by playing, I mean watching. And by watching, I mean watching pictures or videos from tech demoers, not rendered by your own PC.

Meanwhile, PS3 owners are playing Uncharted 2 right now, guaranteed fun and great graphics in one package.

lol @ disagreeing with facts

Agree(14) | Disagree(13) | Report

Saaking - 55 days 22 hours ago

Nobody every claimed UC2 looked better than Crysis. You can upgrade a PC as much as you want, thus it's obviously going to get better results than a 3 year old machine. UC2 still looks MILES ahead of anything on the 360 or Wii.

Agree(13) | Disagree(5) | Report

snipermk0 - 55 days 22 hours ago

Agreed + bubbles to ya

Agree(4) | Disagree(1) | Report

champ21 - 55 days 22 hours ago

@saaking

i completely agree UC2 looks way better then anything on the 360.. lets not even count the wii.

my brother recently got a 360 (god knows why.. hes mostly a ps3 gamer). both of us agreed the 360 was a waste of money. with gaylo being over hyped, we played the gears of war on the pc and still didnt like it(even though the pc version is better then the 360 version in everyway).

however lets not deny facts, we are at limits as long as graphics are concerned.. we wont see another leap in graphics until the next gen consoles arrive. UC3 might be out on the ps3 after 2 years, i wouldnt expect it to look much better then UC1 (which already is a great looking game considering the hardware its running on).

in the same regard since graphics progression has now become stagnant. anyone who even bought a g8800 gtx 2 years back no longer needs upgrades on a pc that old card still runs everything at 1080p just fine... a more powerful gpu isnt needed until someone wants to be gaming @ some insane resolution like 2560*1600.

Agree(4) | Disagree(3) | Report

STONEY4 - 55 days 17 hours ago

"Have fun playing this game... and by playing, I mean watching. And by watching, I mean watching pictures or videos from tech demoers, not rendered by your own PC.

Meanwhile, PS3 owners are playing Uncharted 2 right now, guaranteed fun and great graphics in one package."

You can go on Counter-Strike or Team Fortress 2 and ask random people if they've seen Uncharted 2, and I garentee you alot of them will be like "what? what's that?" Most PC gamers honestly don't give a crap about console games. I have Uncharted 2, but that graphics aren't THAT good. There are alot of meh textures, jaggy shadows, collision bugs with Nate on other objects.

Agree(8) | Disagree(2) | Report

ReviewsArePolitics - 55 days 14 hours ago

So you are proving your point with the ignorance of PC fanboys? Who said Uncharted 2 is perfect? Uncharted 2 may not look like crysis but it is certainly more fun than anything available anywhere, reviews and gamers agree.

Oh and what is counter strike ? ;) lol j/k

Also lol @ mentioning CS on a graphics thread

Agree(2) | Disagree(7) | Report

champ21 - 55 days 13 hours ago

same can be said about UC...

graphics thread and console just dont go together, it maybe be great on the hardware it runs.. but by no means can it be considered a graphics show piece.

Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report

Blaine - 55 days 6 hours ago

Sorry to be ragging on you again, but do you even know what you're talking about? I don't think you've even played Uncharted 2.

I've played the game inside and out, and I can tell you some parts are downright UGLY. Go on the train level and, instead of looking ahead and shooting your gun like you're supposed to, take a look at the trees going by. Behind a few modeled trees, you'll see an obvious static pasted background texture, and you'll even notice that as the physical edge of the level. It's a wall with a tree texture on it. It's hideous. But, on the other hand, some parts of the game ARE graphical showpieces for ANY console, PC included. In some areas (the temples, especially), the lighting, the textures, the animations, everything just comes together and create the most beautiful scenes I've ever seen in any video games on any hardware. Walk through the Tibetan village, it is jaw dropping.

Don't bash Uncharted's visuals just because they're on PS3, because like I said some of it is the best I've ever seen.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

bozebo - 55 days 10 hours ago

cloud computing for games/graphics?

what the hell are you on?

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

TheMailman - 55 days 19 hours ago

Deadm4n:

Don’t bother... this guy’s won´t even look at it. They only see what they want to see..

Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report

ULTIMATE_REVENGE - 55 days 17 hours ago

psycho360 if you think the CGI rendered heads in the PS2 tech demo's look real or even close to real life then you have some serious eye problems.

Go to SpecSavers (although I think it's too late)

Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report

ReviewsArePolitics - 55 days 14 hours ago

Psycho is still sore that PS2 beat uselessbox last gen lol who cares what a 360 fanboy mod thinks?

Agree(0) | Disagree(3) | Report

sak500 - 55 days 12 hours ago

@ultimate

I think you need glasses i'm sure that was sarcasm in psychos comment.

@reviews
Maybe yes it beat flopbox last gen and it certainly is beating its newest brother Ps3 this gen.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

TheDudeAbides - 55 days 21 hours ago

even this gets thumbs up, PlayStation gets so much love here :)

Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report

silverchode - 55 days 11 hours ago

lol u took what he said seriously

Agree(0) | Disagree(2) | Report