The Witcher 3's Fur Tech Will Most Probably Bring Your GPUs To Their Knees

DSOGaming writes: "During this year’s PAX Prime, Nvidia showcased its Fur Tech that will be used in The Witcher 3. In this demo, Nvidia showcased what its latest tech looks like, however it seems that this particular technique will require a really high-end graphics card in order to be enjoyed."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Agent Smith1507d ago

"Without Nvidia’s Fur Tech, the demo (with one wolf) was running at 410fps. When Nvidia enabled its Fur tech, the framerate dropped to 140fps. Yeap, we’re talking about a 170fps performance hit."

Might want to redo your math there slick.

True_Samurai1506d ago

Here's an intelligent bubble

ShinMaster1506d ago (Edited 1506d ago )

I'd prefer it if devs fixed the basics first. At least on the main characters and not random wolves.
Issues like hair going through clothes. Too many female characters with short hair.

I don't know. Just rambling now.

Koyes1506d ago

May have been a typo but still very funny :L

NastyDaddeh1506d ago

Call me stupid but isnt going from 410 to 140 a difference of 270??????

windblowsagain1506d ago

I gave you the agree.

Above is incorrect. 170+140 = 310.

Correct answer is 270.

ajax171506d ago

There must've been a glitch in the Matrix.

Mystogan1506d ago

This is the kind of thing that the Xbox One can handle perfectly fine through their cloud technology. This doesn't depend on latency.

I hope the devs take advantage of it. Maybe not now but certainly in 1 or 2 years.

Aggesan1506d ago

This is VERY dependent on latency. How do you think the hair will look when it's lagging behind with a full second or more? Retarded, that's how it would look.

medman1505d ago

Sure Mystogan, I wonder why pc developers hadn't thought of that. Oh, now I remember, because it's bullshot.

AgentSmithPS41506d ago

Agent Smith: Me... me... me...

Agent Smith Clone: Me too.

The best thing about being me... There are so many "me"s.

I can't wait for The Witcher 3!

ATi_Elite1506d ago (Edited 1506d ago )

wow still running at 140 fps which is 80 fps higher than 60 fps.

wake me up when the "Fur Tech" drops the fps down to under 30.

I'm sure this was ALL done without "Optimization" because Nvidia will optimize the Wither 3 after release.

also my GTX660ti SLI setup bows down to NO GAME!

ShinMaster1506d ago

140fps from 410fps... If you can handle a 270fps drop, then enjoy.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1505d ago
Mariusmssj1507d ago

I don't think CDPR is going to use the most extreme settings of the fur tech as it would just make the game unplayable. BUT then again they got almost a year to optimise it

Hassassin1506d ago

remember uber?
I'm ok with them using incredibly demanding settings, as long as they have some sliders to choose the quality/performance you want.

bumnut1506d ago

Uber sampling made Witcher 2 unplayable except for ultra high end computers.

Prcko1506d ago (Edited 1506d ago )

IS gtx 770 gaming edition enough?
omg,1024x768 and 65fps with 2 wolves?
optimisation required!

Software_Lover1506d ago

Not worth the FPS drop right now. Great tech, but sacrifices too much. My question is what does this mean for us who use AMD GPU's?

john21506d ago

No GPU Fur effects obviously. This new Fur is running via GPU PhysX (and I seriously doubt that developers will offer a CPU PhysX path for such features).

Raf1k11506d ago

I guess it means we have no option to play with the fur tech enabled. Just like it is with PhysX effects.

Bolts1506d ago

AMD is a no thrills brand, they lack all the fancy pants proprietary effects that Nvidia have.

But if you're on the consoles then fur rendering is the least of your worries when the nextgen console struggles to render games in 1080p native.

Software_Lover1506d ago

Fair enough. No fur effects are fine by me.

I still dont understand why Nvidia does not allow Physx to be used with an AMD GPU? It just sounds like a bad business decision IMHO. They would garner more sales of their lower tier cards, by those people who own AMD GPU's.

I'm not tied to Nvidia or AMD. I switch brands every 2 generations depending on how I feel. I went from 9800gx2 to the 460. From the 460 to the HD6950 and now I'm on the 7950 (both MSI Twin Frozr). I would purchase an Nvidia card to go with the 7950 for physx. Their has to be some way to program for that, and maybe there is not.

Somebody1506d ago

Exclusivity. That's it all really about.

If game publishers are allowed to use exclusivity (game titles) to sell their consoles then hardware makers should be allowed to have their own exclusive features for their products. AMD has TressFX a couple of months back and now Nvidia has Fur Tech. AMD has the potential of producing a lot of exclusive graphical features since practically every game makers will be using its AMD hardware on the PS4 and XB1 so it's only natural for Nvidia to develop their own features. It's an arms race, sitting idly by the side would be very bad.

Sucks for us with different cards and yet beneficial in the long run since game makers usually will find a way to balance it out.

Mystogan1506d ago

This is the kind of thing that that Xbox one can handle perfectly fine through their cloud technology. This doesn't depend on latency.

MonkeyNinja1506d ago

"... doesn't depend on latency."

Please, explain how all those calculations make it from the Xbone, to the servers, and back again with no latency @ at least 30fps.

Even if the servers processed all the required data at .0001 milliseconds, the data would still have to make it to your Xbone, through your ISP. Then the fur data for the next frame would be sent up to the servers again from your Xbone, which depends on your upload speeds.

ShinMaster1506d ago

I'd ask if you were being sarcastic, but I know better from your past comments.

You sure take things to another level dude.

kingduqc1505d ago

Yes it's worth it...

It's not about the amount you pay, it's about the experience you get. People seems to forget that gaming is a hobby and spending 600$ Or what ever the cost is isn't really expensive compare to buying skies/hockey gear or a racing car or skydiving every now and then or mountain Climbing/scuba diving.

I Personally play in 2560*1440 resolution and upgrade pretty often to keep up with max settings + 60 fps in that resolution(shocker) and to me it's worth every penny I've spends into it. Gaming to me is all about visceral gameplay and spending a few bucks to get the best out of games isn't really big of a deal and I don't get why people always bring up cost. I don't even have a real job, I'm a student that pay the rent and the bills to eat and have internet/electricity + school and I don't get how spending a few hundreds on GPUs every year (selling older one) is such a big deal.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1505d ago
Show all comments (51)
The story is too old to be commented.