Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / RPU - Will it replace GPUs?

Author
Message
Diggsey
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Apr 2006
Location: On this web page.
Posted: 9th Jun 2007 12:05
I don\'t know how many people have seen this, but there is a company who have made a prototype RPU (Raytracing processing unit). It is just like a GPU, but uses raytracing rather than rasterization to render objects. This means that all effects such as transparency, shadows, reflection, refraction, etc. are rendered correctly with no loss of FPS. Also, raytracing can be done in parralel, so there is virtually no limit to the speed if you have enough cores.

Here is the link to a page about it.

If you think it\'s slow in the video, keep in mind that the prototype card actually is a slower card than any modern GPUs, so already there is a speed increase to be gained.

What do you think of it, and do you think it will replace GPUs in the future?

indi
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: Earth, Brisbane, Australia
Posted: 9th Jun 2007 12:25
very interesting find mate.

Code Dragon
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2006
Location: Everywhere
Posted: 9th Jun 2007 15:02
There's no reason they won't replace GPUs in the near future, rasterization linearly needs more computing power, raytracing only logarithmic. For simple scenes like the ones in games today rasterization is faster but for photorealism raytracing is faster.

I've decided that I'm not going to learn shaders, in 10 years RPUs will do all the cool effects natively.

You never really know a person until you look at their google autocomplete entries.
Benjamin
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 9th Jun 2007 15:12 Edited at: 9th Jun 2007 15:13
Looks interesting, but I'll bet it'd require a lot of power to render a complex scene at a decent framerate on a decent resolution.

Tempest (DBP/DBCe)
Multisync V1 (DBP/DBCe)
Diggsey
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Apr 2006
Location: On this web page.
Posted: 9th Jun 2007 15:29
@Benjamin
Resolution should make virtually no difference, as there are the same number of rays. Secondly, raytracing is better at complex scenes than rasterization is (Raytracing still uses the same number of rays, but rasterization uses many more polygons!). Thirdly, raytracing cards can work in parralel, whereas rasterization is a linear process, so the more cores, the faster it goes!

Benjamin
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 9th Jun 2007 15:31 Edited at: 9th Jun 2007 15:34
Quote: "Resolution should make virtually no difference"

The time it takes to draw the scene changes completely depending on the amount of pixels drawn, that's the whole point of that example using two cards (as drawing half the screen takes half the time). How else could the cards work in parallel?

Quote: "Thirdly, raytracing cards can work in parralel"

True, but that sounds rather expensive to me, at least with current technology.

Tempest (DBP/DBCe)
Multisync V1 (DBP/DBCe)
dark coder
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Oct 2002
Location: Japan
Posted: 9th Jun 2007 15:37
Quote: "Resolution should make virtually no difference, as there are the same number of rays."


This is not the case, in raytracing without AA you will send out one ray for each pixel and multiple with offsets if you have AA / multisampling.

Quote: "raytracing is better at complex scenes than rasterization is (Raytracing still uses the same number of rays, but rasterization uses many more polygons!)."


No, when calculating the scene both rasterization and raytracing read from the same amount of polygons in the scene, however raytracing doesn't render triangles so with very highpoly scenes you can get the edge in speed.

Quote: "raytracing cards can work in parralel, whereas rasterization is a linear process, so the more cores, the faster it goes!"


Modern GPUs can also work in parallel, have you not heard of SLI / Crossfire? these work by spreading the load across multiple(usually two) cards, however in the case of crossfire there are many rendering methods, most of which share the rendering load equally.

Benjamin
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 9th Jun 2007 15:39
Someone reads Wikipedia too much.

Tempest (DBP/DBCe)
Multisync V1 (DBP/DBCe)
dark coder
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Oct 2002
Location: Japan
Posted: 9th Jun 2007 15:46
At least I don't base my life on Uncyclopedia.

Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 9th Jun 2007 16:31
Quote: "I don\'t know how many people have seen this, but there is a company who have made a prototype RPU (Raytracing processing unit). It is just like a GPU, but uses raytracing rather than rasterization to render objects. This means that all effects such as transparency, shadows, reflection, refraction, etc. are rendered correctly with no loss of FPS. Also, raytracing can be done in parralel, so there is virtually no limit to the speed if you have enough cores."


Could then watch them full-circle back to GPU in about 10years.
Current programmable pipeline (GPU) were born from the Shader system in Maya Renderman.

Provides more direct access to graphics power. Right now given the resolution they're rendering to, it's actually faster to raytrace through the GPU than this RPU. The more likely scenario that would happen is that it becomes part of GPU for accelerating stencil operations.

John Y
Synergy Editor Developer
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posted: 9th Jun 2007 16:42
The document is 2 years old, so it looks like it didn't take off. Unless they are still perfecting the process and/or getting financial backing.

David R
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Sep 2003
Location: 3.14
Posted: 9th Jun 2007 23:11 Edited at: 9th Jun 2007 23:17
Quote: "Current programmable pipeline (GPU) were born from the Shader system in Maya Renderman."


That'd be Renderman, not Maya Renderman, seeing as though it's a completely different piece of technology, and only recently meshed with Maya in the form of a plugin (although, yeah it has been available much prior to this)

And the shader system in Renderman is RSL


09-f9-11-02-9d-74-e3-5b-d8-41-56-c5-63-56-88-c0
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 9th Jun 2007 23:26
Or Pixar Renderman if you REALLY wanna be fussy But yes, a cool and speedy renderer. I suppose another limitation by switching to an RPU will require a lot of work for developers to learn how to integrate a new type of hardware into their programs...But it would be a cool bit of technology to have up and running, assuming it does a better and more efficient job than GPU's.

Support the return of Cow-Fishing! Hook up Paris Hilton and die!
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 9th Jun 2007 23:42
Quote: "That'd be Renderman, not Maya Renderman, seeing as though it's a completely different piece of technology, and only recently meshed with Maya in the form of a plugin (although, yeah it has been available much prior to this)

And the shader system in Renderman is RSL"


I'd suggest you do your homework properly before you correct me, particularly about matter that consern Alias (Maya) .. especially as I've been using Renderman since it became available outside of Pixar. While yes there is a stand-alone render server, you have ALWAYS required the Maya plug-in in order to use it.

Yes, HyperShader is a fairly recent addition; and Renderman Shader Language is what it's based on (in-fact the technology IS Renderman) but this has been part of Maya prior to GPUs have been in circulation.

Pixar have always used Alias Maya; Renderman has never been a stand-alone product. There is no such thing as "Maya Renderman" as a solo product, I joined the words together because Renderman is not a stand-alone; and it also is not Maya's Hypershader that was the basis for Shaders but Renderman.

Rather than butting in with "I know better cause I read Wikipedia" trying to constantly trying to show you might have an inkling of what people are talking about .. try actually understand what is being said.

Ask, don't respond. That's how you learn.

Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 9th Jun 2007 23:54
I don't know anything about Renderman, except for I'm good friends with the guy who did the major work of creating the plug-in for Maya. That's all I know.

dab
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2004
Location: Your Temp Folder!
Posted: 10th Jun 2007 02:23
I say we skip to the brain processed graphics.
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 10th Jun 2007 02:27
pfft. that would suck unless someone created a good brain indexing system.. cause my memory sucks

hessiess
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Mar 2007
Location: pc!
Posted: 10th Jun 2007 03:03
i would gess that it can render in realtime by reducing the qualaty. a decent scene takes 2 howers+ to render. if you use a unbysed raytracer it can take days or weeks. i dont see this being posable in realtime to the avarage compuer user for atlest 5 years

learn blender, you will never regret it.
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 10th Jun 2007 03:06
jesus what hardware are you running on?
mine can real-time raytrace @ 512x512 with <100,000 polygons per scene that they were using.. that's without shaders

ionstream
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2004
Location: Overweb
Posted: 10th Jun 2007 03:25
I don't think that a raytracing chip will replace current ones (I think they're called scanline rendering), because from what I've seen modern shader models, like 3.0 and 4.0, can do raytracing. There's a PDF by nVidia that describes how to do pixel-perfect displacement map by using distance functions, so we're pretty much there already unless I'm missing something.


Here's the PDF, if anyone's interested: http://http.download.nvidia.com/developer/GPU_Gems_2/GPU_Gems2_ch08.pdf

That's not as bad as you think you said.
David R
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Sep 2003
Location: 3.14
Posted: 10th Jun 2007 19:07 Edited at: 10th Jun 2007 19:07
Quote: "Yes, HyperShader is a fairly recent addition; and Renderman Shader Language is what it's based on (in-fact the technology IS Renderman) but this has been part of Maya prior to GPUs have been in circulation.

Pixar have always used Alias Maya; Renderman has never been a stand-alone product. There is no such thing as "Maya Renderman" as a solo product, I joined the words together because Renderman is not a stand-alone; and it also is not Maya's Hypershader that was the basis for Shaders but Renderman.

Rather than butting in with "I know better cause I read Wikipedia" trying to constantly trying to show you might have an inkling of what people are talking about .. try actually understand what is being said.

Ask, don't respond. That's how you learn.
"


No where in my post did I imply that Renderman is used without Maya as per se - but it only recently got full integration with Maya in the form of a plugin.

I was picking up on the fact that you called it "Maya Renderman", because, OK, it's used as a rendering engine etc. by Maya, but it is a separate product as such. Just because a product is mainly designed for or requires another, does not automatically require the conjoining of their names. I don't call Microsoft Word "Windows Word", or Dark Basic "Windows Dark Basic"; but both of these products are effectively 'zilch' without what they depend on in (in this case Windows) in the same way as Renderman is to Maya.

Quote: "is not Maya's Hypershader that was the basis for Shaders but Renderman."

If that's the case, which it is of course, then why mention Maya at all? It's completely irrelevant.

Quote: "Rather than butting in with "I know better cause I read Wikipedia" trying to constantly trying to show you might have an inkling of what people are talking about .. try actually understand what is being said."


While we're playing the 'advice game', here's one for you; Don't talk complete and utter trash the majority of the time, and expect anyone to trust anything you say later. I picked up on what you said, because you often fabricate things out of nothing, and I was ensuring for crystal-clarity that you weren't implying a load of bull, because your statement could of definitely been read as being so - entirely based on what you have said/done in the past of course.

Quote: "Ask, don't respond. That's how you learn."

A question would be a form of response, so either way I win. QED


09-f9-11-02-9d-74-e3-5b-d8-41-56-c5-63-56-88-c0
Xarshi
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Dec 2005
Location: Ohio
Posted: 11th Jun 2007 09:03
@dabip - If they woudl do that,why not just release upgrades for our bodies? I'd sure love myself some ultra hearing and eye sight,mixed in with some super memory. Maybe even super strength.

Hello

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-11-18 17:19:26
Your offset time is: 2024-11-18 17:19:26