Friday, December 13th 2019
Ray Tracing and Variable-Rate Shading Design Goals for AMD RDNA2
Hardware-accelerated ray tracing and variable-rate shading will be the design focal points for AMD's next-generation RDNA2 graphics architecture. Microsoft's reveal of its Xbox Series X console attributed both features to AMD's "next generation RDNA" architecture (which logically happens to be RDNA2). The Xbox Series X uses a semi-custom SoC that features CPU cores based on the "Zen 2" microarchitecture and a GPU based on RDNA2. It's highly likely that the SoC could be fabricated on TSMC's 7 nm EUV node, as the RDNA2 graphics architecture is optimized for that. This would mean an optical shrink of "Zen 2" to 7 nm EUV. Besides the SoC that powers Xbox Series X, AMD is expected to leverage 7 nm EUV for its RDNA2 discrete GPUs and CPU chiplets based on its "Zen 3" microarchitecture in 2020.
Variable-rate shading (VRS) is an API-level feature that lets GPUs conserve resources by shading certain areas of a scene at a lower rate than the other, without perceptible difference to the viewer. Microsoft developed two tiers of VRS for its DirectX 12 API, tier-1 is currently supported by NVIDIA "Turing" and Intel Gen11 architectures, while tier-2 is supported by "Turing." The current RDNA architecture doesn't support either tiers. Hardware-accelerated ray-tracing is the cornerstone of NVIDIA's "Turing" RTX 20-series graphics cards, and AMD is catching up to it. Microsoft already standardized it on the software-side with the DXR (DirectX Raytracing) API. A combination of VRS and dynamic render-resolution will be crucial for next-gen consoles to achieve playability at 4K, and to even boast of being 8K-capable.
Variable-rate shading (VRS) is an API-level feature that lets GPUs conserve resources by shading certain areas of a scene at a lower rate than the other, without perceptible difference to the viewer. Microsoft developed two tiers of VRS for its DirectX 12 API, tier-1 is currently supported by NVIDIA "Turing" and Intel Gen11 architectures, while tier-2 is supported by "Turing." The current RDNA architecture doesn't support either tiers. Hardware-accelerated ray-tracing is the cornerstone of NVIDIA's "Turing" RTX 20-series graphics cards, and AMD is catching up to it. Microsoft already standardized it on the software-side with the DXR (DirectX Raytracing) API. A combination of VRS and dynamic render-resolution will be crucial for next-gen consoles to achieve playability at 4K, and to even boast of being 8K-capable.
119 Comments on Ray Tracing and Variable-Rate Shading Design Goals for AMD RDNA2
I mean yeah,just throw in some RT with what they got spare.
They have 7nm EUV process to embrace, 350-ish mm2 chips to roll out in GPU business, at the very least. That is way more important than RT gimmick, obviously, given that even 2080 owners turn it off.
what 350mm2 chips are they rolling out ? ones that would be almost instantly obliterated by consoles on feature set ? imo that's the reason why we're not seeing anything at $600 from amd, like 5800xt/5900xt.Comparisons with 2080 super just couldn't be avoided,while people can still buy 5700xt over 2060 super cause it's just an entry level rtx card.
nvidia is a smart devil.
For UI, I don't think they had.
They didn't plan for VR either. Sony made a big deal out of it, but I don't see it taking off.Whatever makes it in into consoles, will be included in RDNA2 GPUs as well.
And thanks for "obliterated", remind me, how 2070 "obliterates" 5700Xt in sales, lol.Huge chip, big problems.
5700 5500 and guaranteed 5600 are 7nm DUV.
With 7nm EUV around the corner,, it makes no sense to invest into big chip based on already outdated process, even for AMD who is so eagerly embracing new process nodes.People buy 5700XT over 2070 super, chuckle, not sure what you are on about. RT as a feature is some sort of a scam at this point, current gen cards suck even with the handful of the current gen games that support it. There is next to no use case for it, besides tech enthusiasms of some weird sort.
2070 super can do 1080p/60 RT pretty easily,1440p RT when limited to shadows or more options at lower fidelity,which still blows current SSR out of the water.
Given, it's below 10% of the die size on Turings, it's still not quite negligible when your competitor has an option from not giving a f*ck at all, to coming up with hybrid solution that requires much smaller die size.It can do select RT gimmicks of certain kind in certain games at certain resolution... oh wait... :)
and yet this prediction of yours.You didn't even blink an eye when predicting this. did you?
You mix reality with future unknowns. Like 2070 super can do 1080p/RT easily (maybe now but not likely), and Amper will come out (there will be no Amper btw the name was scrapped) with 2080 Ti perf or higher. If the RT moves forward (I think you want this and this drives you), then 2070 Super wont be enough. Basically it will end up the same as the 2060 Super just a bit less disappointing.
PS5 is gonna have RT hardware,yet your wise ass prediction isconsoles will have RT while $450 5700xt from amd will not.I'm not debating,I'm stating the obvious.I just threw this resale value bit and you're friggin debating me on this. are you personally hurt or something ?
Merry Christmas anyway :) Hope you will get whatever you need this year cause the next one might be a disappointment for you.
The big problem with using advanced techniques like VRS is that it needs to be very well integrated into the game engine. Unfortunately, most top games today are using a third-party game engine, so the development team don't even touch the low-level engine code.It always is, and AMD definitely have some potential there.Any post-processing AA will ultimately not improve picture quality no matter how fancy it is. DLSS is a gimmick, while RT is not.
RT can already be useful if used skillfully for diffuse lighting rather than much more expensive specular lighting.
It is like you said.You said we don't know what the future holds. Better expect less than you get.Never said it will improve image quality now did I? I just want the image quality not to be worsened and that is a sincere concern from my side.
You got that one right. It can be useful but it is not about just the skillful use of it I'm afraid. RT is inversely proportional to performance. Better quality or better RT requires more horse power. So skillfulness, yes it would help to make the implementation (no glitches, no mistakes with the lighting implemented etc.) right but the horsepower to give the proper performance has to be there anyway. The last one is not here and that is why it is still a gimmick just to make a fuss around it, use it as a marketing tool scam. You have the right to think different. Just remember, the feature, Ray Tracing ( for games) has a huge business matter at this point. I think we all know what it means business right?
sorry,I had a brain freeze,wrong thread :roll: :kookoo:
but I don't think we should expect little of amd,intel and nvidia.I think they'll all have really good launches next year.
rdna 2 with rt support on 7nm+
intel with HT on i5s (this is the one I'm waiting for since I wanna go back to buying $200 gaming oriented cpus instead of +$350 workstation ones)
ryzen 4000 later on
this is gonna be a good year
I wait for 4000 Ryzen. I wanted to go 3000 series but decided to wait for the new one.You make it sound like it needs some special architecture stuff (like NV RT cores to actually make ray tracing possible which is a ruse BTW) to make RT work on a graphics card. As a matter of fact RT is a technique that requires driver supporting and enough graphics card's processing power to make the real time ray tracing work fast enough (especially for gaming purposes).
look what a 11tflops gpu with no dedicated rt hardware (1080Ti) does agaist a 6.5tflops rtx 2060 with rt asic
www.purepc.pl/karty_graficzne/test_wydajnosci_quake_ii_path_tracing_na_api_vulkan_wstrzasa?page=0,6
you'd need 2.5x 1080Ti's power to match a rtx 2060
imo RT will stay an optional technology for at least a decade.but I can't see any gpu manfufacturer not supporting it starting from mid range cards.
the alternative to buying a $400 card and enjoying ray traced shadows/reflections in a few games is paying the same for the same performance and not having it.really.
Do you know why I know this ?
Because www.cryengine.com/news/view/crytek-releases-neon-noir-a-real-time-ray-tracing-demonstration-for-cryengine
doesn't need RT cores to get this one done and works with sufficient performance and it is ray tracing just as in Quake 2. (Actually it looks even better than in quake) They have added RTX to make it believable that the RT core are actually necessary and also a great marketing for NVidia cards with Ray Tracing. Cripple the driver for 1080 TI so that it doesn't work properly and here you have a great evidence.
Did you expect that NV will release RTX cards with RT cores without giving any rational reason and justification for the price even if NV has to forge that reason which is Quake2 RTX?