Comments Locked

22 Comments

Back to Article

  • monstercameron - Thursday, September 18, 2014 - link

    pcss, doesnt cryengine already support variable shadow penumbra and antumbra?
  • JarredWalton - Friday, September 19, 2014 - link

    Yes, I believe you're correct, though I don't think Crysis 3 uses PCSS. I don't know if PCSS is better optimized, but it's a free tech to use if you want it -- less work for the developers. Many of the effects are available elsewhere, but GameWorks is a free library that you can use. (Obviously, there's more to it than just plugging into the library, but I'm not a game developer so I'm not sure how easy/hard it is to use.)
  • nevertell - Friday, September 19, 2014 - link

    So most of these features are only available for Windows on x86 ?
    What I mean by that, there is no desktop linux support ? This begs the question, how are these features implemented ? Because linux and windows drivers share 95% of their code base.
  • JarredWalton - Friday, September 19, 2014 - link

    I'd assume that the real issue here is going to be PhysX on Linux. My understanding is PhysX is still CPU-only on Linux, because NVIDIA hasn't ported all of the necessary code over -- and really, Linux isn't all the popular as a gaming platform (outside of Android stuff, obviously) so they're spending their time elsewhere. Where the GameWorks code doesn't explicitly require D3D or PhysX, though, it should still be possible to support alternative OSes.
  • nevertell - Friday, September 19, 2014 - link

    I'm not here to get upset about people not supporting my OS of choice, just curious about their implementations. And as I am by no means a hardcore gamer, the stuff that's available on Steam for linux is good enough. It's only the bad ports that are explicitly horrid (Like Witcher 2).
    That said, if these libraries were to be implemented on linux as well, it could make porting easier. I'm guessing they'd still need bindings for opengl, as I still believe they are just providing a library to use with dx. But I may be wrong.
  • jann5s - Friday, September 19, 2014 - link

    well, steam is creating steamOS, which is debian based, so gaming on Linux may gain some momentum.
  • nevertell - Friday, September 19, 2014 - link

    They've had SteamOS in beta for a while, Steam is available on linux for more than a year and linux users are about 1% compared to the whole steam userbase. It has never reached 2%, as far as I know.
  • decoy11 - Friday, September 19, 2014 - link

    Its great that Nvidia is providing graphics technology to game developers but for godsakes please EOL PhysX 2.xx . I don't know which side wants to keep using that tech but PhysX 3.xx is out over a year now and it would probably help the image of PhysX if they completely switched over.
  • kyuu - Friday, September 19, 2014 - link

    Perhaps I missed it, but the article doesn't seem to address the issue of whether these technologies are proprietary to Nvidia on x86. Basically: are these feature that will work with AMD GPUs, or are they strictly Nvidia only like PhysX? Also, please don't bring up CPU-based PhysX; unless something has changed recently that I'm not aware of, PhysX runs like ass even on strong CPUs and has to be turned off if you don't have an Nvidia GPU.
  • kyuu - Friday, September 19, 2014 - link

    I guess I should say if they're proprietary to Nvidia on Windows, since technically the new consoles are x86.
  • decoy11 - Friday, September 19, 2014 - link

    The only benchmark I have for PhysX are these 2: http://physxinfo.com/news/11297/the-evolution-of-p...

    http://physxinfo.com/news/11327/multithreaded-perf...

    Its done by someone related to Nvidia and he hasn't release his benchmark tools.

    Also CPU-PhysX is very popular you just don't know it is there. If you looked you would know that CPU-PhysX has been included into many games and many engines. The reason you think it runs like ass is because the options to turn off PhysX in games aren't actually turning off PhysX just the Advance PhysX stuff that is meant to be run on Nvidia Graphics Cards.
  • kyuu - Saturday, September 20, 2014 - link

    Right, I know it's just certain PhysX features that are turned off, but the fact remains they run like ass without an Nvidia GPU. Even though you technically can run them on the CPU. So that's why I'm wondering if these new Nvidia-developed features are proprietary to their cards, since Nvidia isn't known for developing technologies that work with anyone else's hardware.
  • krutou - Saturday, September 20, 2014 - link

    Too bad Nvidia isn't handing out free lunches.

    If you want the tech, pay the Nvidia premium (usually only 5-10%). Its that simple.
  • kyuu - Saturday, September 20, 2014 - link

    Ah right, of course. How silly of me. We should all become mindless Nvidia drones. Then AMD could go out of business and Nvidia would have the dGPU market all to themselves. Why, it's the very definition of a win-win scenario.
  • Rock1m1 - Saturday, September 20, 2014 - link

    Game works is Nvidia only feature, at least that is the case on Watch Dogs.
  • HisDivineOrder - Saturday, September 20, 2014 - link

    "A publisher wants to know when game XYZ is ready to ship, and the developer says it's basically done, but they're excited about some really cool features that will just blow people away, and it will take a few more months to get those finished up. "How many people actually have the hardware required to run these new features?" asks the publisher. When the developers guess that only 5% or so of the potential customers have the hardware necessary, you can guess what happens: the new features get cut, and game XYZ ships sooner rather than later."

    Interesting that you say this here in the nVidia article but when it was one of MANY times you discuss Mantle, you never describe the exact same scenario. Perhaps because it proves why Mantle is a flawed concept? ;)
  • Rock1m1 - Saturday, September 20, 2014 - link

    I read about the controversy on how it gimps the performance and optimization capability of AMD GPUs, is it true?
  • YazX_ - Saturday, September 20, 2014 - link

    i'm not sure from where did you get the chart but Gameworks is Nvidia exclusive and will not work on any other hardware, not because they cannot run it, but Nvidia have these features locked, some features like HBAO+ might work on AMD and other hardware but it will hurt performance very badly.

    about physx, yes physx will run on CPU if there is no Nvidia hardware found, but you will not get Physx particles, just basic physx. so the article is somehow misleading not stating details.

    bottom line is, GameWorks is designed to run and was optimized for Nvidia hardware, while most features will not work on any other hardware, but if it did work, it will hurt performance so bad, so you will end up turning them off (i.e HBAO+ on AMD slashes FPS into half and more)
  • PCZac - Tuesday, September 23, 2014 - link

    That is the worst description of TXAA I've ever read, Jarred Walton do some research before attempting the comment on it. Temporal anti-aliasing and TXAA remove more than just the jagged lines you see at the edge of polygons, which is the only thing other forums of anti-aliasing address. TXAA can also remove or reduce aliasing and artfiacts in the middle of polygons caused by shaders or textures. It also reduces jittering, flickering, and noise, some of which is normally caused by screen based reflections, ambient occulsion, or transparentcy. Some implementations have been blurry, but over all it looks much better in motion, and is going to be sticking around for a while. Unreal Engine 4 has their own implementation of Temporal anti-aliasing and you'll see more engines relying on it.
  • nba - Saturday, September 5, 2015 - link

    nba
  • nba - Saturday, September 5, 2015 - link

    nba
  • maincpa77 - Friday, May 12, 2017 - link

    you can download NBA live mobile hack on http://nba-livemobilehack.com

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now