Well I speak German and the article does NOT say the images in this clip are ray-traced. It just confuses the issue because Intel was presenting their graphic card strategy for the future and it seems for their graphic strategy they want to leverage Intel CPUs cores on the graphics card. They are claiming on slide 8 that their gear can be used to help render non-real-time ray-tracing stuff (Autodesk) and the PCGH commentary says on that slide: a "few years from now" Intel will be able to do real-time ray-tracing. Why they showed Far Cry 2 (which is a traditional game for current hardware) is anybodies guess. They probably just wanted to warm up the audience with pretty pictures.

the Simpson's/family-guy are far from realistic but for me are my favorite shows.. IMHO far cry blows... AI is shite,,, nothing compelling.. I'd rather read man pages then /work my way through the "game"... note to game developers, please produce something that takes advantage of the new tech. otherwise please don't blame your crappy sales on piracy.

Ray tracers also happen to be very efficient at showing high polygon objects, because only what can be seen is rendered.

So in the future will we see a combination of rasterization/ray tracing?

Even if it really was ray tracing, there is NO WAY that this video demonstrated real-time ray tracing in that quality.

There is currently no hardware accelerated card available nor planned which can render ray tracing in real-time and multi-core CPU power is still years away from doing this in the same quality as modern games (Crysis, Cod4, Moha, Call Of Juarez).

Somehow I get the feeling that this whole "ray tracing" hype is completely misunderstood. Some people believe "ray tracing" equals "100% realistic and natural graphics" which is clearly not the case. Scanline renderes are actually more capable of displaying photorealistic scenes than ray tracers.

Ray tracers only do one thing really good: "to trace rays" which means it excels in performing realistic reflection and mirror effects. Nothing else, not even realistic shadows.

and yes, the second part of that video does look entirely non ray traced.
This comment was edited on Apr 7, 15:32.

Oh I agree it's very exciting and very likely the 'next big thing' in gaming graphics, and like all big graphical innovations, it's a tech we'll see first on the PC.

But that said, it's years and years away.

I agree Ray Tracing is a long way off for real time 3d. you guys should check out some pics using vray and 3d max, maya. very impressive. and exciting to think we will be playing life like games in a few short years.

Ray tracing wont be viable for a long long long long long time

That doesn't look ray traced at all.

Ray Tracing can look amazing, but it's not going to happen any time soon and Intel banking on it happenin in the next 2 odd years is going to bomb for them. The average PC gamer doesn't have quad core processors and 4g of ram yet, real time ray-tracing is going to require like 10+ cores and 15+ gigs of ram and graphically has some serious short comings, especially when it comes to light and shading.

I think eventually Ray Tracing is where it's at. But if John Carmack says it won't happen any time soon. It's not gonna happen any time soon. :p

So Blue, I guess the footage is not raytraced and Intel just showed it to make some general point on graphics.

I guess I'm going to have to give up on taking PCGH's word on these things, as this sort of confusion seems to surround virtually every one of their articles.

I think we're well past the fool me twice shame on me point by now.

The article doesn't state that the footage is raytraced. It only states that the video was shown during a presentation of Intels "Visual Computing" strategy.

In fact, the article expresses confusion about why Intel showed a Far Cry 2 video during the presentation.

So Blue, I guess the footage is not raytraced and Intel just showed it to make some general point on graphics.

I'd also be a little surprised if it was otherwise. I guess the Far Cry 2 team has better things to do than to implement an academic non-realtime raytracing renderer.

FC2 seems alot more orange'ish.

Yeah they need to run a post effect that desaturates that. But maybe that's the art style they are going for?

Edit: I think a more logical comparison would have included something without ray tracing, to get a balanced view.


This comment was edited on Apr 7, 12:03.

It is supposed to show a real scene in comparison to the ray traced one.

I don't think the FC2 clip is ray-traced at all. To me the article seems to be just a misunderstanding, of sorts.


____________________
http://personal.inet.fi/atk/kjh2348fs/ageia_physx.html | http://www.liveforspeed.net
This comment was edited on Apr 7, 11:31.

But wait... isn't it the 7th?

DAMMIT BLUE DO NOT SCREW UP MY CALENDER FOR APRIL! GTA4 comes out soon.

Well after seeing some Far Cry 2 movies and compairing the ray tracing one.. FC2 seems alot more orange'ish.

But I also thought that ray tracing including real time, would be extremely CPU intensive?

Well the first part of the clip is real wildlife footage.. other then that I have no clue.

It is supposed to show a real scene in comparison to the ray traced one.

Putting out an April Fool's joke on April 4 would certainly be tricky.

If this is genuine then it would make the DX11 joke quite ironic. Whether it is or not I have no idea.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Founder of the "I Hate Smiley Fitz" society

Remember: Riley has autism. He has trouble communicating, and in an overstimulating
environment, he can get frightened and run away, leaving his parents frantic. - Auburn

Well the first part of the clip is real wildlife footage.. other then that I have no clue

I think this is a left over April Fool's joke.

Because?

I think this is a left over April Fool's joke.