Your reaction?
Angry Angry
Cute Cute
Fail Fail
Geeky Geeky
Lol Lol
Love Love
Win Win

Nvidia’s Kepler real-time raytracing and destruction (1080p) – The Verge

Comments 30

  1. Nvidia has to make a full blown console/big tablet  not the a hand held like the Shield using Dual or Quad Keplers and allow for Steam and Onlive and windows games just get it out there and make it affordable the $400-$700 standalone  graphics card model is killing your profit and market appeal you guys have astonishing GPU tech get it out to the masses

  2. This is not realtime, it is a lie. If nvidia gpu's could do this realtime it would be available to download or buy somewhere. Is it? Ofcourse not because it is a lie.

  3. i am impressed by how they made ray tracing on stage but for your information this is running on a 3 GTX680 or Tesla equivalent at about 15-24 fps and the water quality is very bad and to make it all up i think they are running it at 720p to get this level of detail with no noise.

  4. Uhh….. Why? The AMD 7 series actually outperformed the Nvidia 6 series. Nvidia GTX GPUs have pathetic compute performance compared to AMD GPUs. To the point where in GPU Computing a 5770 will outperform a GTX 680. 

  5. The water is impressive, but the problem is that CoD tards are not going to know the difference between this and simple shaders like this – watch?v=FtiJ0ePBqvU

  6. This IS a normal desktop GPU and it's not that much faster than last gen.

    This is just a tech demo. It has no implications for actual games. You can't blow your entire graphics budget rendering a few coke bottles being destroyed.

    You're shooting for a moving target. Even in high-end offline rendering they use mostly rasterizing, because as far as ray-tracers have come, for the same amount computing power, rasterization just looks much better. That will still be true in a decade or two.

  7. GPUs aren't "way ahead" of CPUs, they are just optimized for different problems.

    Make a GPU run nasty, branchy, inherently serial, singlethreaded code and it will do way worse than a CPU. Likewise, a CPU just blows at doing FFTs or rendering graphics(embarassingly parallel problems).

    The CPU uses almost all its transistors on massive caches, out of order execution, instruction level parallelism, branch prediction, memory prefetching, speculative execution…

  8. No, we're actually heading towards simpler, less interactive games.

    AAA titles now require so many man-years to make that you must target them at the lowest common denominator.

    CPUs are stalling out. CPUs handle the nasty, branchy, hard to paralellize code, AKA gameplay; but they also babysit the GPU and tell it what it needs to do, which occupies more and more of its time.

    Doom or duke 3d had more complex level layouts and more interactive levels than


Leave a Reply to gold333 Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

log in

Become a part of our community!

reset password

Back to
log in