Do you think the PS3 can have CGI Graphics in real time?

CGI = computer generated imagry, so by definition, all video games are CGI. I think what you mean by CGI is what the movies are producing, the render-farm non-realtime CGI.

OK well several things you need to consider before comparing video games doing in real-time what is done in the movies. Firstly, the renderer! There are 3 main renderers and they all use raytracing for lighting, Mental Ray, VRay, Pixars Renderman etc etc. Raytracing lighting takes a lot of computer time. To render a moderate 1080p image, with a few assets and lights takes a few minutes on my comp.

The next thing to consider is that in the movies, they render at huge resolutions and then downscale the image to 1080p. To do this, they have a whole render-farm of high-end computers working together to render each frame, again can take hours and hours if its a complicated scene.

Even the top gpu's out now cant do any meaningful realtime raytracing for lighting, the only way raytracing is incorperated into video games is when it is used to create scene lighting in an external renderer and then that lighting is baked into the diffuse texture channel.

Basically, what I'm saying is that we're waaay of doing these techniques in real time.

Oh and btw, the Cell processor having a 6 extra vector processors does not make it some uber powerful machine, I really think some of you cows really dont understand this.

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

[QUOTE="DreamCryotank"]

256MB of video RAM won't be able to hold all the textures AND 1080p. You have to sacrifice 1 of them. And then again, even if it could run at 1080p, the framerate will be in the 10s.

DreamCryotank

Thank god I run most games in 1080p.8)

Yup. Trying to run Crysis with Rygels Texture mods at 1080p on my old HD4850 with 512MB of VRAM was a valiant attempt. :lol: Everytime I turned around the framerate would dip to 5fps. :P

[QUOTE="e_stone001"][QUOTE="mitu123"] What about the PS3 exclusives that aren't being held back by 3rd parties? Why can't those games get 1080p?

karasill

CGI = computer generated imagry, so by definition, all video games are CGI. I think what you mean by CGI is what the movies are producing, the render-farm non-realtime CGI.

OK well several things you need to consider before comparing video games doing in real-time what is done in the movies. Firstly, the renderer! There are 3 main renderers and they all use raytracing for lighting, Mental Ray, VRay, Pixars Renderman etc etc. Raytracing lighting takes a lot of computer time. To render a moderate 1080p image, with a few assets and lights takes a few minutes on my comp.

The next thing to consider is that in the movies, they render at huge resolutions and then downscale the image to 1080p. To do this, they have a whole render-farm of high-end computers working together to render each frame, again can take hours and hours if its a complicated scene.

Even the top gpu's out now cant do any meaningful realtime raytracing for lighting, the only way raytracing is incorperated into video games is when it is used to create scene lighting in an external renderer and then that lighting is baked into the diffuse texture channel.

Basically, what I'm saying is that we're waaay of doing these techniques in real time.

Oh and btw, the Cell processor having a 6 extra vector processors does not make it some uber powerful machine, I really think some of you cows really dont understand this.

DAZZER7

Pixars Renderman uses both raster and raytracing btw. Today's GpGPUs can accelerate some certain ray-tracing lighting algorithms.

A fusion many-coreOut-of-Order CPU+fat GpGPU is better suited to tackle troublesome ray-tracing lighting algorithms.

[QUOTE="DreamCryotank"]

[QUOTE="mitu123"] If the PC is anything to go by, back then you would need 512MB to do 1080p well above 30FPS, and for today's games 1GB or more is require.

Thank god I run most games in 1080p.8)

ronvalencia

Yup. Trying to run Crysis with Rygels Texture mods at 1080p on my old HD4850 with 512MB of VRAM was a valiant attempt. :lol: Everytime I turned around the framerate would dip to 5fps. :P

The PS3 will never be able to produce CGI comparable graphics. We won't be seeing anything like that in games for a long time.

The graphics in that 8 days trailer looked pretty balls. There is definitely better CG out there.

People need to understand something ( and by that i mean some PS3 fanboys that still think 1080p and 60fps is still possible on PS3 )

The most important part that determines graphics performance is the GPU by far. A CPU is important and helps by not been the limiting factor to a powerfull CPU ( for instance having a dual core 6400 at 2,2ghz paired with a gtx560 ) annd also helps in mainly physics and A.I. calculations

By having said that PS3 have the equivalent of a 7800gt. An 8800gt which is only 1 genaration better is 3x times the power of that and is far been able to do CGI in real time what makes you think a PS3 can do it

The closest to CGI i have seen is 3dmark 11 and some nvidia/Ati demos of their latest 4xxx/5xx ( nvidia ) and 5xxx/6xxx(Ati ) GPU's that are rendered in real time but they are not playable

Ps3 is struggling with 720p and 30fps ( with some games having framerate troubles even at 720p resolution ) so no CGI in 5 year old hardware is impossible

Optimization is good and everything but your are not gonna see huge improvements over KZ2/U2 . Yes Devs might find a few tricks and make newer games looking better but the difference will be small thinks

No, of course not. Pc's can't even do that.

cain006

Those render farms are clustered PCs in server form factors.

Anyway, http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Larrabee-Ray-Tracing,5769.html

"In terms of performance, the Radeon 2900XT 1GB rendered Transformers scenes in 20-30 frames per second, in 720p resolution and no Anti-Aliasing. With the Radeon 3870, the test scene jumped to 60 fps, with a drop to 20 fps when the proprietary Anti-Aliasing algorithm was applied. Urbach mentioned that the Radeon 4870 hits the same 60 fps - and stays at that level with Anti-Aliasing (a ray-tracer is not expecting more than 60 fps.) JulesWorld's technology also works on Nvidia GeForce 8800 cards and above, but the lack of a tessellation unit causes a bit more work on the ray-tracer side."

I would like to see

1. ARM Cortex A9 (out-of-order dual instructions issue CPU core) 128 cores + NVIDIA Geforce 570 GTX as a fusion chip.

Or

2. AMD Bobcat X64 (out-of-order dual instructions issue CPU core) 128 cores + AMD Radeon HD 6970 as a fusion chip.

Both CPU and GPU should have a fast access to the common L3 cache.

The GpGPU alone can't solve serial type workloads i.e. need a cheap and low transistor count /small core size out-of-order CPU e.g. ARM A9** or AMD BobCat**.

**40mm^2 to 50mm^2 size via TSMC 40 nm process tech i.e. both are half the size of Intel Pineview Atom (in-order dual instructions issue CPU core).

MGS IV's cutscenes are rendered in real time and look pretty close to a CGI movie.

Do you think the PS3 can have CGI Graphics in real time?

Haha no.

If you think that trailer in the OP is comparable to a 3D animated movie, you must be dreaming. The character models in particular look awful.

Well PS3 games look a lot better than the CGI on PS1 and PS2 games. But if you are talking about Pixar movies then never, yeah games like Ratchet and Clank have that Pixar movie look but it still doesn't match the CGI in movies. We are going to have to wait a few gens for that to happen but personally it's really not that big of a deal. Games already look superb across all systems and I much prefer if developers give us more creative experiences than CGI quality games. That's is why I feel THE LAST GUARDIAN will be a landmark title come release.

The closest thing I have seen to real life graphics is BF3 and that is been run on a pretty good PC with a good graphics card. The PS3 doesn't have a chance of it.

[QUOTE="soulitane"]

[QUOTE="e_stone001"] If I had my camcorder working, then yes, but I know the textures would be a little blurry and all in 1080p and not as sharp in 720p.e_stone001

It upscales automatically..

I said that game was Uncharted 3.:P

CGI is not easy to pull off with 2005 hardware.

How about The Last Guardian, and we need to know when it ends for the PS3 to see games reach that level.

mitu123

The Last Guardian looks great, animation king 8).

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

I said that game was Uncharted 3.:P

CGI is not easy to pull off with 2005 hardware.

How about The Last Guardian, and we need to know when it ends for the PS3 to see games reach that level.

johny300

The Last Guardian looks great, animation king 8).

That or BF3. we have yet to see the last guardian in action but from recent previews it sounds fantastic

I don't think so, and Guerilla Games are complete morons about the PS3's potential.

If Killzone 3 didn't max out the PS3, then how come doesn't it play in 60fps and 1080p?

Nope. But who needs dem CGI anyways. MGS4 had it right... real time all the way 8)

Nope. But who needs dem CGI anyways. MGS4 had it right... real time all the way 8)

Mozelleple112

The only piece of real time CGI in MGS4 was watching some eggs fry. :P

yes because of the cell. its still untapped and the ps3 is not even close in being maxed out

_SWAG_

Absolutely! :P

It depends of the CGI. This gen consoles run better graphics than CGI from early 90s.

Uncharted 3 will be it's limits.

mitu123

pretty much, but then santa monica will come out and say NO! and make the ps3 cry :P just like it did with god of war 2 on the ps2 :P

and to the op, no.

It depends of the CGI. This gen consoles run better graphics than CGI from early 90s.

PAL360

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

It depends of the CGI. This gen consoles run better graphics than CGI from early 90s.

bobbetybob

pretty sure he meant cgi used in games, for example final fantasy 8 and 9 cgi :P

but even the 6th gen looked better than that cgi.

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

It depends of the CGI. This gen consoles run better graphics than CGI from early 90s.

bobbetybob

Good exception you found there :P

I was talking about something like this.

[QUOTE="-Unreal-"][QUOTE="Chutebox"]

No, not even close.

e_stone001

Really? Then while come Uncharted 2 and Killzone 3 is stuck at 720P instead of 1080P given that they are PS3 exclusives?

the power of the cell can make anything happen. Remember that.ferret-gamer

Yep. I am pretty sure if we as TC put "dig in" enough we can turn 5 year old outdated, obsolete tech, built around ancient die technology to do anything.

I am also confident that if we polish a turd long enough it will turn into gold.