Quote:
Originally Posted by Baron
Come on, ok lets make it simple. Run Heaven benchmark without tesselation, then with tesselation.
Notice any differance in, oh i dont know, fps maby?
P.S. As for your explanation, i dont know what i has to do with tesselation perse. Why would tesselation be usefull rendering boxes (bombers) from 4 km away? Thats not what tesselation is all about.
Its not like u get all those thousands of extra polygons for free u know. Tesselation isnt used for extra performance boost, its used to get extra eyecandy with less performance hit than with traditional tecniques, however u WILL have a performance hit no matter how u slice it compared to not running tesselation.
|
... Ok no you dont but you need to think through your posts. Oleg can make beutiful and high polygon count models of aircraft, smoot rounded hulls and all. Without tessalation or distance mapping the aircraft is renderd in all its full glory even at 10 miles away where you can even make out what type of plane it is. So 1000 planes in the distance (lets say far enough that you can see there basic outline) are being renderd in full detail (high polygon count). Dont you think this will kill frame rate?
With tessalation, those aircraft in the distance would be low polygon count models, but you would not be able to see that because they are far from you on the screen, this gives a big boost in performance as it has far far far less rendering/polygons the gpu has to work with. As you get closer the tessalation kicks in and increases the polygon count gradually, you never notice the difference but at close range the plane is just as detailed if not far more detailed then it would be without tesselation. You get the quality without the performance hit that the quality would bring otherwise.
And yes I do have the unigine benchmark and have used it extensivly to setup my gpu/overclock. The reason I responded as I did before was because your question was silly, think about it...
Of course it takes a fps hit creating each cobblestone vs flat bump mapped ground. BUT without tesselation you would have the flat ground, or the ENTIRE image would be tesselated, even distant objects you cannot visually see clear enough to see any change. Therefor tessalation improves performance as it phases in geometry when you can actually get close enough to see it.
I have done some graphics work in the past with Maya 7.0 (mostly), including models, texture mapping (photoshop) and alittle animation. As far as I can tell from the Oleg quote I think he misunderstands and or isnt updated on the newest info (from what I have heard). I will look for it but I believe Nvidia advertised multi level tesselation for models with the 500 series release. Therefor the models would not have to be modeled (which they arent) as tesselation extrapolates from the base models (sure its alittle more complicated then that, but thats the jist of what I heard).
Not an amazing video but this demonstrates the difference, pay attention to the geometry mesh (I know its not a great video). As a recap tesselation allows huge polygon counts with minimal performance loss due to it being based on distance.
12-28-2010, 03:23 AM
Threaded Mode