Nvidia's Random-Access Neural compression just changed the texture compression world

Not even just that, it's a small, small minority of people who will ever be able to even notice, either by;

a) having the knowledge of what that raw uncompressed texture looks like.

Or

b) stops to inspect the textures closely enough.

Vast majority will just enjoy the game, and tech will continue to get better as compressed textures in 2033 will look better than raw textures today.
I mean, we are in an enthusiast forum, we most probably are that small minority :lollipop_grinning_sweat:

Checking how detailed textures are by zooming in (you don't even have to do that in first person games) is kinda one of the pleasures of us graphic whores, it's the same as checking how accurate reflections, lights and shadows are.

I hope the loss in quality is gonna be extremely small because i'm a texture dude and i love my textures to be as pristine and detailed as humanly possible.
 
Last edited:
Brought up (and not the first person) in the past that our current method of displaying images is due for an overhaul of sorts. The focus on "3d" seems to have lost connection or insufficient power to display images thst look like real life. Perhaps this will change that.
 
Last edited:
I mean, we are in an enthusiast forum, we most probably are that small minority :lollipop_grinning_sweat:

Checking how detailed textures are by zooming in (you don't even have to do that in first person games) is kinda one of the pleasures of us graphic whores, it's the same as checking how accurate reflections, lights and shadows are.

I hope the loss in quality is gonna be extremely small because i'm a texture dude and i love my textures to be as pristine and detailed as humanly possible.

This is entirely about getting better quality in the same/slightly less space.

You are going from the left picture at highest settings to the middle. Games don't ever have uncompressed textures.
 
Hopefully the uptake will be more common than my name. YCoCg DXT offered better quality DXT compression at the cost of a larger size, which would be an issue now but back when it was made it was the era where VRAM was much higher than consoles.
 
This is another technique that will benefit Nvidia so they can sell even less powerful GPUs for even more money.

Just like how they used DLSS3 to help the performance of the 4xxx gen so they can sell lesser tier cards for higher tier money.

All the cool tech Nvidia creates is so they can sell less powerful hardware for the same money and balance out the lost performance with powerful software tricks.

It's not made for you to have better performance per $ from your brand new Nvidia card.
 
Last edited:
I mean, we are in an enthusiast forum, we most probably are that small minority :lollipop_grinning_sweat:

Checking how detailed textures are by zooming in (you don't even have to do that in first person games) is kinda one of the pleasures of us graphic whores, it's the same as checking how accurate reflections, lights and shadows are.

I hope the loss in quality is gonna be extremely small because i'm a texture dude and i love my textures to be as pristine and detailed as humanly possible.
I think the better way to look at this tech is the opposite way of what people are thinking. They're trying to improve the lower end of things, so that certain lower end textures don't keep looking like this(on the left) post-compression:

332H.jpg


The higher end stuff we normally look at will still be fine.
 
This is another technique that will benefit Nvidia so they can sell even less powerful GPUs for even more money.

Just like how they used DLSS3 to help the performance of the 4xxx gen so they can sell lesser tier cards for higher tier money.

All the cool tech Nvidia creates is so they can sell less powerful hardware for the same money and balance out the lost performance with powerful software tricks.

It's not made for you to have better performance per $ from your brand new Nvidia card.
Hit the nail on the head, Nvidia is a great company for developers but literally the worst for consumers and everyone hates AMD for literally nothing
 
Hit the nail on the head, Nvidia is a great company for developers but literally the worst for consumers and everyone hates AMD for literally nothing

If only AMD even had a jump into AI tech for once, we're all waiting.

Where would graphics tech even be without Nvidia though? Closed source and whatnot, they are always ahead, then the copycat makes a kirkland version of it.
 
But if you were to meet the quality of the BCx, you definitely save on space too. I doubt this is as low as they can go, nor as high as they can, they just took a point of reference for same footprint, it can go either way.

If you me 5mb to fit a texture............i fill fit that texture in that 5mb.
And dont let any texture artist lie to you about that.

The budget is the budget.........we arent gonna see games get smaller if the textures take that much space cus..........we we(texture artists) will just keep using it.
No such thing as wasted space................well
 
If only AMD even had a jump into AI tech for once, we're all waiting.

Where would graphics tech even be without Nvidia though? Closed source and whatnot, they are always ahead, then the copycat makes a kirkland version of it.
true but they are ahead because they are the apple of rigs if something is expensive it must mean its great
 
true but they are ahead because they are the apple of rigs if something is expensive it must mean its great

But AMD followed the same fleecing on price (roughly). Not sure what is expected of the market in this situation. Future of it heavily relies on Intel being massively disruptive at mid range. A fool's hope but that's what it feels like.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom