Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

DirectX 11

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
June 7, 2006 11:57:29 PM

Hi Guys.
DX 10 is almost here and I was courious if there is any news on DX11 yet?
From what little I know, all current real-time PC 3D graphics are all FAKE.
Such as shadows are really maps,
Physics are all fake (Even the rag doll has serious problems when reacting to other objects)
bumpy reflections are all fake.
Hair is fake,
etc etc.
Although all these shortcuts and tricks looking better in DX9, they are all still fake. It seems DX10 will use better shaders and keep makeing scenes looking better, but they are still shaders.
So, about DX 11.
Will DX 11 finally have true ray-tracing with REAL shadows, REAL refraction, REAL Physics, REAL particle Hair, etc?
If future video cards will have true ray-tracing, then I guess shaders will not be needed anymore. The hardware and APIs will be completely different?
Is this a good guess or I have no idea what I am talking about?

Thanks!

More about : directx

June 8, 2006 12:24:18 AM

and you want REAL girls coming out of the monitor to give you REAL sex lol just had to say that. no offence.
wat do u mean by REAL? according to physics, a monitor is an actual light source producing real light, so when u say reflections.. light reflecting light? how does light from the monitor reflect from the monitor? to put it simply, data will never be REAL in my opinion, we can only make it more lifelike.
a b U Graphics card
June 8, 2006 12:28:18 AM

Banana Rendering!

Sound funny, but google it!
Related resources
June 8, 2006 12:44:39 AM

While we're at it, why not go beyond flat screen monitors and go to real 3D holographic monitors? All it takes is money. Can't wait to see the graphics card race between ATI and Nvidia for that, or the price that would be charged.
June 8, 2006 12:49:54 AM

Real-time raytracing still has a long way to go,
but here is a Link to help show not all modern 3D is 30+ fps.
June 8, 2006 1:34:29 AM

Real what? Games cannot be real, they can only LOOK real. Even movies look real, but are not real. Movies in video formats are data that shows the movie. Same with games. It's all data, number etc. that make the game look real.

As for DX11, it's pointless you brought that up, since n00bs will be asking if they should wait for DX11, and if current cards can run DX11. :lol:  :roll:
June 8, 2006 1:45:01 AM

Mmmm, yeah, a $1000+ workstation class graphics card to play a game... Isn't this a bit too much??
Real-time raytracing needs a really STUPID amount of processing power, and we're talking about a STATIC object. Do you realize how much power would be necessary for games as GRAW (for example) with real-time raytracing?
ONLY raytracing, not even considering everything else...
Even thinking about that is SO crazy today, maybe in 2-3 years could be possible.
I do some renderings in 3DS ocasionally (for work), and believe me when I say, I know how much power is needed for raytracing.
Let's stay with the "fake" physics for now, they're still in development...
June 8, 2006 1:53:04 AM

lol all that crazy talk makes us 6600gt owners feel bad
June 8, 2006 2:13:21 AM

A team in Germany a few years ago got a version of Quake3 with raytracing running in real time.(20+ CPUs in a cluster of some sort)
a b U Graphics card
June 8, 2006 2:32:08 AM

Quote:
A team in Germany a few years ago got a version of Quake3 with raytracing running in real time.(20+ CPUs in a cluster of some sort)


There's alot of raytracing demos out there, real-time, but they are all rather simplistic, and all the ones I've seen CPU based (which may change later).

In order to render a scene equivalent to Oblivion or even FarCry using raytracing would require, as was said, stupid amounts of processing power. There are advantages and dissadvantages to raytracing. I don't think it'll become a reality until we start thinking we have way more than enough power.
June 8, 2006 3:27:43 AM

Quote:
Mmmm, yeah, a $1000+ workstation class graphics card to play a game... Isn't this a bit too much??
Real-time raytracing needs a really STUPID amount of processing power, and we're talking about a STATIC object. Do you realize how much power would be necessary for games as GRAW (for example) with real-time raytracing?
ONLY raytracing, not even considering everything else...
Even thinking about that is SO crazy today, maybe in 2-3 years could be possible.
I do some renderings in 3DS ocasionally (for work), and believe me when I say, I know how much power is needed for raytracing.
Let's stay with the "fake" physics for now, they're still in development...


Woulda two year old Cray supercomputer run a raytracing game fine? cause were not using it at all; infact were turing it into a CoD server...yeh, a brand new Cray in to a CoD server
June 8, 2006 3:39:21 AM

Thanks.
I think you know better what is involved.
June 8, 2006 3:44:24 AM

of course everything in a PC 3D graphics is fake.unless just like what illicitsc said, u want real girls coming out from the monitor?
June 8, 2006 3:52:44 AM

Points taken.
I really don't expect to get a DX11 card anytime soon. I just speculate now.
However, if you want games with Pixar quality graphics, it comes at a price. And I am not talking about 1000 Crays to watch a car explode.
a b U Graphics card
June 8, 2006 4:08:37 PM

Quote:
Games cannot be real, they can only LOOK real.

What? You mean I am not really "The Hero of Kvatch", "The Grand Champion of the Arena", "handy with a sword", and greeted by the comment "Look at the muscles on You"!? Are the 4 houses and all the gold not reality either? Bummer, I was thinking I had become invinsible and my day job was the fake. :roll: :roll: :tongue:
June 8, 2006 4:54:44 PM

You mean all that ingame currency that the retarded people of the world are buying with real money doesn't actually exist? 8O

Why are you even bringing up this topic? You're asking us whats going to be in something that Microsoft hasn't even started on yet. They don't even have DX10 working perfect yet. Stick to the here and now. Thats like asking us what features CPUs will have 10 years from now.

DX11 will be able to destroy you molecule by molecule and reassemble you inside the game. Don't die though because it works on Matrix principles. Also if the power dies you no longer exist. Buy an UPS.
a b U Graphics card
June 8, 2006 5:30:20 PM

To hell with DX10 let alone me saying where you can stick DX11!

And just as a sanity check, it's all FAKE...it's all just renderings on a monitor screen...unplug a while and get out in the REAL world, you know the one, the world that you escape from while thinking up crap like this...

I can see it now...a slew of posts from dumasses asking when and where they can can get DX11 cards and if the next version of M$'s overpriced OS will support it or not...
June 8, 2006 6:41:27 PM

Quote:
Games cannot be real, they can only LOOK real.

What? You mean I am not really "The Hero of Kvatch", "The Grand Champion of the Arena", "handy with a sword", and greeted by the comment "Look at the muscles on You"!? Are the 4 houses and all the gold not reality either? Bummer, I was thinking I had become invinsible and my day job was the fake. :roll: :roll: :tongue:

You must play Oblivion too much... but since I know exactly what you're talking about I must play too much too...

As for real this and real that, we have to consider if it will make a significant difference in visual quality given current hardware, or if current hardware can be upgraded easily enough so that such changes WOULD be significant. When "real" effects start happening will have a lot to do with whether the market is ready and supporting tech is available.

Also: a friend of mine has some stereoscopic gaming goggles that his dad accidentally bought for about $800... (its a long story) too bad that he needs an Nvidia card for full stereoscopic support and he is a staunch supporter of ATI... plus, we tried it with the 6600go on my lappy and couldn't get it to work anyway.

To many people replying: Of course its fake! Its pixels on a screen. What he means is that the game isn't actually doing the calculations to make the effect true to nature, its doing some shortcut which yields basically the same visual image... at least thats my take on it.

-mcg
June 8, 2006 7:25:15 PM

Quote:
You mean I am not really "The Hero of Kvatch"?


They call you the Hero of Kvatch, too?

Those two timing Kvatchians! :p 
June 8, 2006 7:28:07 PM

Quote:

a friend of mine has some stereoscopic gaming goggles that his dad accidentally bought for about $800... (its a long story) too bad that he needs an Nvidia card for full stereoscopic support and he is a staunch supporter of ATI... plus, we tried it with the 6600go on my lappy and couldn't get it to work anyway.


You can get a pair of edimensional stereoscopic glasses for $100-ish, they'll support Ati cards as well as LCD screens... at least they're advertised as such.

What kind of stereoscopic gogles are $800? Do they have two LCD screens in them or something?
a b U Graphics card
June 8, 2006 9:53:48 PM

Quote:
You mean I am not really "The Hero of Kvatch"?


They call you the Hero of Kvatch, too?

Those two timing Kvatchians! :p 
lol, 8O I thought I was special :cry: 

After a two week break, I got three good nights of Oblivion in one week. Fun game, addicting music. I even pause it and leave the music playing while I do work on other machines. :oops: 
June 8, 2006 10:47:52 PM

When are Directx 30 video cards gonna be available and how much will they cost exactly?

kthx
a b U Graphics card
June 8, 2006 11:40:22 PM

Quote:

After a two week break, I got three good nights of Oblivion in one week. Fun game, addicting music. I even pause it and leave the music playing while I do work on other machines. :oops: 


I mute my music nowadays. :lol: 

BTW, if you get the collector's set you can listen to the 'score'. :p 

I have been accused of casting destruction spells around the office, but that's usually after a lunch with Vietnamese soup with NewJersey Death hot sauce! :twisted:
June 9, 2006 2:45:03 PM

Quote:
...addicting music. I even pause it and leave the music playing while I do work on other machines. :oops: 


What about the music from morrowind? I still find myself humming it sometimes, not necesarrily because I like it all that much... listened to that exact same tune for about a zillion hours... yeesh.
a b U Graphics card
June 9, 2006 3:07:19 PM

Doubt I'd want to take in in the car or anything, I just find it pleasant music and one of the very few games where I don't mute the music. Most racing games I turn off music the first day and leave it off. Anyway, I have been playing Oblivion while doing windows installs, updates, defrags, etc. and find myself just listening to the music.
a b U Graphics card
June 9, 2006 3:09:55 PM

I bought morrowwind just before Oblivion but have not played it yet. *ES noob* But I find the oblivion tune coming out of my mouth at weird times too. The opening BF2 video's music used to do the same thing to me.
June 9, 2006 3:32:50 PM

Quote:
and you want REAL girls coming out of the monitor to give you REAL sex lol just had to say that.


That would be the best computer upgrade ever!
June 9, 2006 4:03:29 PM

*yawn* I wish I could delete topics.
June 9, 2006 4:07:56 PM

Quote:
*yawn* I wish I could delete topics.


try ignoring them
June 9, 2006 5:11:32 PM

Anyone know when the K12 is coming out? I heard future processors might run on fingernail clippings and chest hair, and they'll be 324987329723 times faster.

What about hovercars? The anti-christ?

:roll:

Say a prayer. God knows.
June 9, 2006 6:08:23 PM

Geez, already talking about dx11?? how about DX12!!
As human civilization will continue, the technology as well will advance, You can wait forever and there will always be something better than todays "top of the line" Even if they did plan on dx11, it will be in several years to come, just like S.M 4.0A Technology that is still years ahead of us gamers. The physixs isnt real, its just calculated algorithms, estimating the probable turnout of certain objects. SO please dont mention any type of upcoming technology is you know nothing about it. Leave that to the n00b's

But the way, hows everybodys summer vacations going along??
Me just lots of lan parties ahead :twisted:
June 11, 2006 7:20:38 AM

Well, I can see that this thread has digressed just a tad... :roll:

Anyhow, to Cleeve:
Check http://www.3dvisor.com/ The price seems to have come down a bit from the release.

-mcg
August 2, 2007 4:02:08 PM

Buy a Ps3 it can already do this, im running linux on my ps3 and running a frame renderer on this it renders in real time, besides the games that are in works force unleashed ect. which use real time rendering it requires alot of power.


August 2, 2007 4:34:04 PM

techguy911 said:
Buy a Ps3 it can already do this, im running linux on my ps3 and running a frame renderer on this it renders in real time, besides the games that are in works force unleashed ect. which use real time rendering it requires alot of power.
This thread is about Direct X11 speculation; the PS3 uses a Direct X9 GPU based on the G70.
August 2, 2007 5:15:38 PM

Well, AMD has listed on their roadmap for late 2008 and into 2009 about DirectX 11-based GPUs based off of R7xx using Shader Model 5.0+... something tells me they know something we don't.

Ray-tracing is just way too far off. The problem is that, once you transition to ray-tracing, you're immediately talking about a large step backwards until it scales. I don't think consumers will be too happy with that.

My best guess is that DX11 will have some more shader feature support (not sure if geometry shaders support branching and looping yet, if not, that's probably coming), increased memory management support (including the memory virtualization that seems to have been nixed in DX10), and some increased integration with a new 3D audio API (which Microsoft is currently working on).
August 2, 2007 5:42:56 PM

To get back to the original poster, though... computer graphics and animation are nothing more than mathematical approximations of real-life phenomena. All that will happen in future years is for the approximations to get more and more precise.

If you want REAL, though, get outside and create it. Barring that, you're left with the best possible mathematical representation.
August 2, 2007 6:10:51 PM

killer_roach said:
If you want REAL, though, get outside and create it. Barring that, you're left with the best possible mathematical representation.


This is true killer_roach. I use Studio Max 9 to create models and animations from them, sometimes including figure models from Poser 7. It's a hellish amount of CPU power to render just one second of animation at 30fps especially when you start to include your post processing effects, advanced lighting and a little motion blur which can easily pile up 1 second of animation to 90+ frames of rendering at video quality resolution. There is a reason these folks use RENDER FARMS!

Back to the original dude's question and from my experience with rendering "real" raytracing,..., WHY!, would you want to do that in a game????

Fake is good. It makes it quick easy and available to all. Just like a movie studio. They don't really build a whole town or civilization everytime the make a movie. Its all fake, sets but you can't tell the difference if its done right.

I love fake, long live FAKE!!!
August 2, 2007 6:50:48 PM

TheGreatGrapeApe said:
Quote:
A team in Germany a few years ago got a version of Quake3 with raytracing running in real time.(20+ CPUs in a cluster of some sort)


There's alot of raytracing demos out there, real-time, but they are all rather simplistic, and all the ones I've seen CPU based (which may change later).

In order to render a scene equivalent to Oblivion or even FarCry using raytracing would require, as was said, stupid amounts of processing power. There are advantages and dissadvantages to raytracing. I don't think it'll become a reality until we start thinking we have way more than enough power.

Some university showed real time raytracing using the Geforce 8800 GTX during the Cebit. It was interesting stuff but almost nobody paid attention thanks to the almost nude girl 15 feet away and the ongoing body painting...
August 2, 2007 6:56:26 PM

Umm, when is DX 97 comming out? will i need a new power supply for an uber DX 97 video card?
August 2, 2007 7:27:12 PM

I heard that MS is releasing DirectX 11 in Q3.

I heard it was easy to code because nobody even has real DirectX10 hardware or software yet so all they had to do was update the text on the Windows Software box.
August 2, 2007 8:21:11 PM

killer_roach said:
Well, AMD has listed on their roadmap for late 2008 and into 2009 about DirectX 11-based GPUs based off of R7xx using Shader Model 5.0+... something tells me they know something we don't.

Ray-tracing is just way too far off. The problem is that, once you transition to ray-tracing, you're immediately talking about a large step backwards until it scales. I don't think consumers will be too happy with that.

My best guess is that DX11 will have some more shader feature support (not sure if geometry shaders support branching and looping yet, if not, that's probably coming), increased memory management support (including the memory virtualization that seems to have been nixed in DX10), and some increased integration with a new 3D audio API (which Microsoft is currently working on).


Yep... some minor updates, not so much new. Any big leap will have to wait some years more...
August 2, 2007 9:09:33 PM

Want real do ya? Well, I'll let you in on a secret. Today I played a completely 3D game, where I sat in a capsule of sorts. It was a driving game, and it was awesome. Dirt got splashed all over my windshield and was streaked when the wipers went to clean it, cars swerved, the AI was insane with other drivers even getting pissed off at me at times, flicking me off, and then constantly trying to passing me in retaliation. Hell, at times I even had to worry about engine trouble, due to the lack of previous maintenance on the car. And physics? Boy were there ever physics. When cars collided you could see pieces of the body work fly off, distinct crumple patterns, and completely unscripted swerving.

Wait a minute. I'm sorry, that was my commute to work this morning. ****, I guess reality isn't too far way then, is it? A game is a game, you want reality, walk outside.
August 3, 2007 12:52:00 AM

Most of you are missing the OP's point. To the OP, I severely doubt this will happen for another 15 years. When it does, it will completely revolutionize the graphics and physics engine industry. I doubt DirectX or OpenGL would be the systems to even begin to handle this. Either something else would arise, or DirectX would undergo another severe overhaul.

I believe what you are talking about is something I have a dream about. I've wanted to develop an engine system that will do just what you are talking about.

- Light effects rendered based on the material the light is striking, and the light consequently traveling back to the "eye," aka the camera.

- Virtual worlds built not out of 2D planes floating in space, connected at the edges, with shader texture layers applied over top; but as actual 3D materials, surfaces, fluids, gaseous clouds. Worlds built out of "atoms" as it were. This would enable true fluid dynamics modeling to occur.

- Physics rendering systems based on the material system mentioned above. For an FPS example, if you shot someone, they would die because your bullet or plasma bolt would cut or sear into them, slicing a blood vessel built into their character model which is feeding their body energy, causing them to bleed out and die. :: You could fire a tactical nuke at a cliff, and the explosion would blow a hole in the cliff, possibly sheering off rock and biting into the lake bed above. The water would then flow out in a waterfall because its bed had been disrupted.

The greatest benefit I see to all this is honestly fluid interaction, with material interaction on the order of the cliff example coming close second. Gameplay would change with the new possible non-preprogrammed interactions available in the world. In GTA, you really could level a building with enough explosives, instead of programming specific mission sequences in.

In some way, I think this model of world design and rendering would actually make it easier on game designers as they would have to program far fewer custom effects and interactions. It would be taken care of by the world renderer.

Another interesting note is that the rendering engine as it exists would shift focus completely: FROM the position of rendering polygons and then rendering light effects on them TO the position of solely rendering how light interacts with particle surfaces. Interestingly, with a strict and true ray-tracing viewpoint, the camera would be immersed in a light field, and would detect what was coming into the viewport's plane of vision. This is in opposition to detecting what is visible outward from the plane of vision and then culling out what is not, including everything above, below, to the left and right of the viewport.

Anyway, that's my interested technophilic rant, my two cents.
August 3, 2007 1:00:47 AM

sailer said:
While we're at it, why not go beyond flat screen monitors and go to real 3D holographic monitors? All it takes is money. Can't wait to see the graphics card race between ATI and Nvidia for that, or the price that would be charged.


im guessing thats what is comming next. seriously though, i got a oced e6400 3.5 ghz and the only thing that lags me is cpu stress testing and even then i can still open up a browser or two. anything over that is sort of overkill for now.

ray tracing would be pretty cool. give it 4-5 years for that to become real. maybe in the next windows lol.

oh, your worried about the power? technology will change so much within 4-5 years that power wouldn't even be an issue.

remember those big vacuum tubes they used in the old days of computers that took up space and a lot of power... well now... we got something new now dont we? ( compacitors or transistors i think it was) :p  patience is ALWAYS key.

August 3, 2007 3:59:30 AM

Well I've just got back from the year 2057 in my Delorian and I can asure you that Dx15 renders in real time. You do need a powerfull GPU from IntelAMD and one of their Core10Quado CPU but it runs fine at 45 fps on my 3D bubble helmet. :kaola:  :kaola: 
August 3, 2007 7:15:50 AM

isnt it called dx 10.1?
August 3, 2007 7:39:26 AM

Oh my good i didn't think people can ask something like this. Games are fake! You can't change that. I mean there aren't full dx10 games and your asking for dx11.
August 3, 2007 8:33:08 PM

cristip60 said:
Oh my good i didn't think people can ask something like this. Games are fake! You can't change that. I mean there aren't full dx10 games and your asking for dx11.


LOL yep, just what i was thinking. but maybe in dx 15 or so we might see holographic pron... oh boy... now thats something to look forward to. hell, i would even invest in it :p  LOLOL


i noticed that dx11 gets more hits than dx10 lol. dx11 is more hype and it isn't comming out until another 4-7 years! ( and thats a small estimate)
!