Real Time Rendering of Final Fantasy on a GF4?

[GNEP]

The original Tron?

[Gurm]

Actually, I doubt that even Luxo Jr. could, properly, 100%, at 24fps.

Tron, on the other hand... also couldn't, mainly because it didn't use any conventional "3D Graphics" as we know them, so it would have to be completely custom coded.

- Gurm

[VJ]

Yes, the 100% is a good point... But suppose in 1024x768 ? It just seems strange that this could not be done realtime, although if you render stuff in 3Dmax, it is still clear that true rendering (esp. ray-tracing) requires a lot of power.


Jörg

[Gurm]

Bingo! Rendering REAL curved surfaces takes for-friggin-ever. Your example of 3DS Max is perfect. To get everything right, even for a relatively simple scene like in Luxo... takes HOURS of processing time.

- Gurm

[slipknot]

Nuno, how do you know those picturese were rendered on a GF4 and not a GF3. The Directory of that image is :

http://www.pcrave.com/images/reviews/gf3ti500/

There is a total of 10 images there. I have to admit the wire frame redering views seem to be missing a TON of polys for that to be movie class work. I just got done playing my Final Fantasy DVD movie while pausing at some of those scences, and they are very very close.

[Wombat]

It doesn't matter much which of the two cards it was. nVidia made the exact same claims about both cards. We've seen the results of their claim about the GF3, that pretty much discredits their claims of the GF4.

[MadScot]

Now, how about we add some displacement mapping...

MadScot

[Nuno]

GF4=GF3 on steroids. It has another vertex shader unit, higher core/mem speeds and some tweaks in order to support ps 1.3, but AFAIK, there´s nothing that a GF4 can render that a GF3 can´t. Speed is the issue, and you can´t see it on the screenshot.

Now for the short answer, the links were shamefully taken from a similar thread on B3D forums

[Indiana]

As said I fail to see how this NVidia rendering should be superior to e.g. ATIs Rachel demo.
The Rachel demo is indeed quite nice for a consumer-level gfx-card, but nowhere near the quality of FF - and not even the marketing buttheads of ATI dared to call this "CG gfx rendered in realtime".
The same goes for the GF3/4 rendering: quite nice for consumer-cards and surely everyone would appreciate if any real game had Fx that good. But to compare this to real rendered film graphics is just stupid and shows a major reality-loss of the persons making those claims.

(For reference you can see some screenshots of the RachelDemo here:

http://www.indiana.claranet.de/Rachel00.jpg

http://www.indiana.claranet.de/Rachel01.jpg

http://www.indiana.claranet.de/Rachel02.jpg

[Nuno]

Just to clarify, I linked to those pictures to show how far Nvidia´s claims are from reality, and not the oposite.
Rachel´s and this FF demo are both good coding but nowhere nears prerendered quality, of course.