Originally posted by bridgman
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Initial Radeon vs. GeForce Vulkan Ray-Tracing Performance On Linux
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Jumbotron View PostAMD DID get crushed. Look at the Geometric Mean results again.
- Likes 6
Comment
-
Originally posted by birdie View Post
FTFY.
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Since nvidia already opened this can of worms long time ago, I see no alternative for AMD but to compete in that.
The "proper way" for ray/path-tracing in games would be something like "probability hit boxes", materials dependency and randomization, to get "more realistic graphics". Either way, the reality of the situation is that you can acomplish similar graphic output with 10 times less compute power without r/p-t. It probably have it's limited use for simulations, for games, I just can't see it as "worth doing".
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Very interesting outcome, although like other commenters have said, it seems to mostly fall into two buckets for now.
I'd be interested in more benchmarks: trough wine/proton, and Quake II RTX.
Besides this, can this vulkan-based RT API be leveraged by blender? Would that be more efficient than OpenCL?
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Blender does not support Vulkan, although it is planned. I guess that it could accelerate evee realtime renderer but I doubt that cycles could be ported to Vulkan. Vulkan-RT is supported by AMD's ProRender (which integrates well into Blender) but according the tests I did today, it works only on Windows, not on Linux with these released drivers. However, as it is now covered on driver side, hopefully ProRender for Linux will introduce support in the next release...
Comment
Comment