AMD has announced TressFX Hair, developed with Crystal Dynamics to allow gamers the ability to render extremely realistic ponytails.
AMD has announced a partnership with Square Enix studio Crystal Dynamics under the Gaming Evolved programme that promises to bring gamers unprecedented realism in a hitherto neglected aspect of gaming: hair simulation.
No, really.
Announced this week, AMD's deal with Crystal Dynamics sees the company working to increase the realism of hair rendering in games to a level previously only possible with pre-rendered footage, by offloading the heavy lifting to the graphics processor using the DirectCompute offload language. The result is undeniably impressive: compared to the often solid-block hair of most game characters, hair rendered using the TressFX Hair engine - for that is the technology's name - is considerably more complex and dangles in an alarmingly realistic manner.
While we'd possibly question AMD's claim that the result is something previously only available to renderfarms creating pre-rendered video footage for cinema and cutscenes, there's no denying it's pretty. Sample shots posted to
AMD's blog showcase the technology being used in the new Tomb Raider reboot to great effect, with the underlying promise being that hair fans are going to need AMD graphics hardware to experience the game to its full potential.
Of course, DirectCompute - part of Microsoft's DirectX package - isn't an AMD exclusive, but while Nvidia's latest graphics boards support the offload language in addition to the company's own CUDA early indications are that TressFX Hair is to be exclusive to AMD's Radeon boards. The reason, AMD claims, is utilisation of AMD-specific technologies, including order-independent transparency using per-pixel linked-list data structures to reduce the memory required for the simulation - an important aspect to allowing the rendering to be performed in real-time.
The DirectCompute portion of the TressFX system, meanwhile, performs the real-time physics calculations, treating each hair as a chain of links that allows the hair to move in a reasonably realistic manner - curving to fall over Lara Croft's shoulder, for example, or impacting on other strands rather than passing straight through. The engine also supports custom hairstyles, deforming the hair back to its original shape when the external force - a surface, gravity or wind - is removed.
Neither of those things, however, should prevent TressFX Hair from being compatible with rival Nvidia's graphics boards - and the company's PR-heavy unveil is notable in its lack of clarity. We've reached out to AMD in search of a simple answer to the question "is TressFX Hair exclusive to AMD Radeon hardware" and will keep you updated.
One thing, however, is clear: AMD is massively keen to push TressFX Hair as a big thing, and while we'd question how important realistic hair is to the overall gameplay experience - even in a third-person game, which by its very nature has you spending the majority of your experience staring at the lead character's ponytail - there's little doubt that extra realism is always welcomed.
UPDATE
As we suspected, AMD's press release has been very carefully worded. '
TressFX is not exclusive to AMD,' a spokesperson for the company has told us. '
It works on any DirectX11 card, similar to some other AMD-built technologies - for example Order-Independent Transparency (OIT) or High Definition Ambient Occlusion (HDAO).' Thus is the truth revealed: any DirectX11-capable graphics hardware, including those from rival Nvidia, will be able to make use of AMD's hair-rendering know-how.
Devon Nekechuck, product manager for high-end discrete desktop graphics at AMD, offers a bit more detail - and a sneaky plug for his company's GCN-based Radeon HD products: '
TressFX will definitely work on any DirectCompute-enabled device. This has roots in the core of Gaming Evolved, where we want to enable technology for all gamers, and not create proprietary features that lock out gamers that use our competitor's products. That said, TressFX is very computationally intensive, and hence games that use TressFX will really be able to benefit from high DirectCompute performance. Because of that, you will see Graphics Core Next-based GPUs excel when it's enabled.'
25 Comments
Discuss in the forums ReplyThere is a cost to developing these technologies and they recoup by shifting boxes.
On a more serious note, i would have expected a video showing it off not just stills.
In general: old news is old.
This is actually something I think could potentially be really good (if it's well implemented and widely used) since hair is something that normally really does remind you you're playing a game.
That is great news to be honest, it would be beneficial to consumers if both NVidia and AMD shared software tech more.
It's old because nVidia is showcasing this technology for over a year now.
AMD must have paid alot of money to get this implemented into Tomb Raider, or it's because of the new consoles using AMD-hardware.
Now, what Nvidia *did* release a couple of years back - and the release that, I believe, has you confused - was a demo of a hair-rendering engine. This engine was not available to developers as a plug-in they could add to their games, and nor was it new even then: Nvidia has been working on realistic hair rendering for years. Heck, here's a SIGGRAPH paper from 2008 all about the subject.
Compare and contrast with AMD, which has released a working hair rendering engine that is compatible with all DirectCompute-enabled graphics cards and can be licensed right damn now for inclusion into a game - hence its appearance in Tomb Raider.
That is what we in the business call 'news.'
Yeah they really need to release a video of it in "action".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_with_hardware-accelerated_PhysX_support
Can you buy TressFX at Boots? I could do with one.
The more to improve imagery the better and as for:
True how ever, there is no reason that CUDA couldn't run on AMD cards other than marketing reasons if I recall correctly Nvidia said as much in an interview with bit-tech a while ago.
And I seem to remember running a hacked driver yonks ago on a 4000 series AMD card when they were just out that enabled Physx perfectly on AMDs GPU's, it's possible I had an older secondary Nvidia card though, I can't honestly recall.
That said, fair play to AMD for making this technology open and availble to all, it's a great stance for them to take.
Err...40+? Right, thank god "Stoked Rider: Alaska Alien" has it...sorry, but that list goes back 7 years. Not exactly a hugely ringing endorsement of PhysX. I'm not saying there's no good games on there, but it's not exactly a list that would have me running to get an Nvidia card so I could have PhysX (to be fair, though, I only get Nvidia cards because my experience with AMD has been...not good.) The few mentions I remember of people have PhysX cards, it seems most often they're resurrecting a 9800GTX or the like back from the dead only because they have it around and they can (a mentality I fully support.)
But, not to bag on you or PhysX. I'd go along with the idea that hair is one of those things that seems to stand out as fake in games, so this is a good thing. It just seems a little silly to have a press release/conference/whatever about it - it's video game hair! Are you serious?
They have to make it known, so good, I guess, just seems a little goofy.