cageymaru
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2003
- Messages
- 21,912
Patent is found here. I would skip to page 22 after reading the opening statement.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Patent is found here. I would skip to page 22 after reading the opening statement.
the software is dx12 spec, the hardware in which to make it function is proprietary, nvidia patented RT cores as well.Being it is part of DX12 spec is a patent needed or only if they are going about it in a unique way in which they don't want a competitor copying?
that's part of the design structure of the vega shader arch described in vega whitepapers aka. Primitive Shaders, and NCU processing HDR content.can do both texture rendering and ray tracing for active rays in a wave.
So in essence instead of specific Ray Tracing cores similar to what Nvidia is doing. AMD is claiming if I am reading this correctly a new sort of core design that can do both texture rendering and ray tracing for active rays in a wave.
Not my reading at all. It's incredible similar to what NVidia is doing. They refer to the "Ray Intersection Engine" doing the intersection testing. This is analogous to NVidia RT cores.
But the "Ray Intersection Engine" is not described, and is not subject of the patent. The patent describes the how the communication happens between the shader cores and the "Ray Intersection Engine" contained in the Texture processor.
Again that communication happens very similar to how NVidia describes theirs, and the difference is likely some subtle nuance that lets them have separate patents.
Again, my reading is that the "Ray Intersection Engine" is specific HW, that does the same job as "RT Cores". The real question, is does Navi already have "Ray Intersection Engine" in it's Texture processor units? It does seem to use a lot of transistors for the Raster perforrmance claimed.
They might have been able to design in the "RIE" but will need time to work out all the SW interactions to get Ray Tracing working well, and they will keep it quiet until they are really ready this time. No announcing features that never seem to work like with Vega.
I'm curious what section you are referring to. they specifically make claims earlier in the document that dedicated hardware 'cores' to do ray tracing are costly and too fixed in implementation. (Basically a dig at Nvidia's RT cores.)
So it will need to be coded specifically for AMD's solution? How well is that working out with primitive shaders?that's part of the design structure of the vega shader arch described in vega whitepapers aka. Primitive Shaders, and NCU processing HDR content.
As far as I understand this is only overview of what is happening inside the shader, and physically on gpu. I have no idea how they are working as it was on developers to program them on vega cards; and they (amd) never have enabled them in drivers (as far as i know).So it will need to be coded specifically for AMD's solution? How well is that working out with primitive shaders?
Being it is part of DX12 spec is a patent needed or only if they are going about it in a unique way in which they don't want a competitor copying?
That’s rather interesting. Most of it all is way above my head but if ChadD is on the right track that could be an impressive method of providing ray tracing. Without the additional die size and cost of specialized cores.
As usual, he isn't.
In this patent, AMD is stating directly that their proposed solution is using their own fixed Function "RT core" equivalent parts to calculate intersections.
But he doesn't believe NVidia when they state they have fixed function RT cores, so why would he believe AMD when they also state it.
The main differences appear to be the location of the "RT Cores" and the communications path with the Shaders.
Please quote me where they say they are separate. I'd love to see that if I missed it.
View attachment 170833
It looks to me like the Texture processor and the RAY 'processor' are one in the same on the card utilizing a shared memory space/cache.
Please quote me where they say they are separate. I'd love to see that if I missed it.
Yes... much like the various specialized paths in a general AMD or Intel CPU as I stated in my more detailed response earlier in this thread. It is another path introduced in the same Processor.
IE not a separate entity on the die itself but directly integrated into the logic of the Texture processor.
Please stop trying to sound like you're covering new ground. You're not.
They are NOT dedicated RT Cores. It is simply a specialized logic path on the Texture processor. This is not a unique methodology to add new function to a CPU.
You build in paths to accelerate specific types of processing. It makes sense. To see what one functions better in the real world will be the proof in the pudding.
As a case in point go to this URL: https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...9700k-processor-12m-cache-up-to-4-90-ghz.html
Go down to the advanced functions that are on the i7 chip in the example. THESE are the same basic logic as adding the Ray Tracing function to the Texture Processor. Yes it makes that processor a bit more complicated and adds a level of gating that wasn't there before. But the overall should be better? As I said above in this post seeing it in the real world will be the difference.
This. Right now it's all still young and needs a few more years. No hurry.I will care more when I can see how it actually performs the rest really doesn't matter.
As usual, he isn't.
In this patent, AMD is stating directly that their proposed solution is using their own fixed Function "RT core" equivalent parts to calculate intersections.
But he doesn't believe NVidia when they state they have fixed function RT cores, so why would he believe AMD when they also state it.
The main differences appear to be the location of the "RT Cores" and the communications path with the Shaders.
I wonder what the developers for the next gen xbox and PlayStation 5 are doing since AMD raytracing doesn't exist yet. If any games are planning on launching with raytracing they're probably ironically developing using Nvidia hardware right now, until this becomes available.
I wonder what the developers for the next gen xbox and PlayStation 5 are doing since AMD raytracing doesn't exist yet. If any games are planning on launching with raytracing they're probably ironically developing using Nvidia hardware right now, until this becomes available.