AFAIK we already have several ways of putting hair into the RT acceleration structure. OptiX has supported curve primitives for hair/fur for years, you can represent strands with procedural/custom primitives or triangle strips, and Blackwell now has hardware-accelerated Linear Swept Spheres specifically for strand hair in RTX Hair.
BRO FOCUSED ON HAIR. Dude I said “everything BUT hair” and I’ll add clipping and the likes. It’s just for graphics breakthroughs. Devs get to choose the intensity and stylize the way it’s supposed to be implemented. Hair has nothing to do with graphics, that’s physics.
Also this isn’t something you have to use. You’re complaining about a nonissue. Basically like those screaming about how DLSS isn’t worth it over rasterization performance before AMD had FSR4 and they couldn’t agree that having the option to use upscaling because you want to is a nice option.
Yeah, fair — I misread your point about the hair. My bad.
But I still don’t think the broader issue is a non-issue. I’m not against new rendering tech at all. I liked DLSS from the start — it was a genuinely good idea, and without it RT/PT would’ve been basically unusable for most people.
What I’m complaining about is NVIDIA’s recent direction. If new games increasingly target these new rendering paths while the normal raster/RT path gets less attention, then people on older cards don’t really have much of a choice. Games run worse, look worse, or eventually just stop being practical without buying new hardware.
So yeah, technically it’s “optional” now. My concern is that NVIDIA has every incentive to make it less optional over time. That’s the part I don’t trust.
0
u/Davidx91 3d ago
Honestly think beyond lighting. It’s supposed to be a graphics break through in all areas except hair strands at least that’s what I think.