• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

nVidia's realtime fluid physics

boxleitnerb said:
These demos are always nice, but we never see that tech in games 🙁
Click to expand...

That's not entirely true. It just takes several years before they start to get added. In their demos, they can focus entirely on one effect, in a game, it takes too much power from other things that are going on. As hardware and tech improves, we start to see it a few years later.
 
I'd seen this demo reported on another site (don't remember which right now). The strange thing is that they are using a GTX-580, not a Kepler card for the sim.
 
Best looking simulation of water I've seen yet, but yeah it will take a few years before that can run at 60fps in a game with other stuff happening on screen.
 
What makes this water demo differnt from all the other water demos,
we've seen? Visually it doesnt strike me as impressive (seen other water ones looking as good).

What from a technical standpoint makes this one differnt? or worthy of notice?
 
3DVagabond said:
I'd seen this demo reported on another site (don't remember which right now). The strange thing is that they are using a GTX-580, not a Kepler card for the sim.
Click to expand...

Isn't the 580 faster at these type of computational workloads than Kepler, bar Titan? Maybe that's why.
 
If that is CUDA, then I'm not so sure it is faster on a 580, as every core on either card can due CUDA. If it is OpenCL, then the 580 would definitely be faster.
 
thilanliyan said:
Isn't the 580 faster at these type of computational workloads than Kepler, bar Titan? Maybe that's why.
Click to expand...

Why does this keep getting perpetuated? Show me one game that the gtx580 is faster in. More specifically, show me one game that uses GPU physx and is faster on gtx580 than gtx680. I will save you the trouble and tell you there isn't any. GPU physx is heavily reliant on shader power and gtx680 scales normally on performance in gpu physx with respect to gtx580.
 
tviceman said:
Why does this keep getting perpetuated? Show me one game that the gtx580 is faster in. More specifically, show me one game that uses GPU physx and is faster on gtx580 than gtx680. I will save you the trouble and tell you there isn't any. GPU physx is heavily reliant on shader power and gtx680 scales normally on performance in gpu physx with respect to gtx580.
Click to expand...

He wasn't talking about games. There are compute functions that the 580 is faster in. This might be one of them, is all that's being considered.

Nobody is perpetuating anything. It's a curiosity as to why they would have used a 580 and that's just a possibility. Do you know any reason they would have used a 580? If so, that's what's being considered here.
 
3DVagabond said:
He wasn't talking about games. There are compute functions that the 580 is faster in. This might be one of them, is all that's being considered.

Nobody is perpetuating anything. It's a curiosity as to why they would have used a 580 and that's just a possibility. Do you know any reason they would have used a 580? If so, that's what's being considered here.
Click to expand...


The Fermi series card's weak compute performance is a bit of a touchy subject it seems....:\
 
Since these are PhysX demos, I don't think Kepler's compute performance matters. PhysX uses the normal CUDA cores as far as I'm aware.
 
Ibra said:
Lol, noob. Takes movies rendering programs and compare with Pysx SDK.

Best Game of the Year 2013, Best Graphics winner is Pixar Studios.
Click to expand...

Bullet Physics, built-in Blender physics engine.

This tech demo is nothing special. In fact it's a lame attempt to stay relevant.
 
I really hope nVidia's PhysX (and other solutions) find a way to make water look and behave better while not being too taxing. And I love that they are researching variants to make that happen.
And even though I'm not a big fan in proprietary solutions they will hopefully put pressure on the open solutions to make better water simulations.
 
Imouto said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3acQ5dDKEs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IiRzmfs5aw

Nvidia sure knows how to turn you on.
Click to expand...

Both of these renders are way better than the nVidia demo. Difference is, and it's a huge difference, these weren't done in real time. If you look at the second link, at the end of the playback it states file sizes (Fluid cache was 6.4GB and the scene file was 57.2GB) and render time of 220+ hours! That was for ~31seconds of playback. Let me repeat that, 57GB file size, 6.4GB cache, 220+ hours to render ~31sec playback.
 
3DVagabond said:
Both of these renders are way better than the nVidia demo. Difference is, and it's a huge difference, these weren't done in real time. If you look at the second link, at the end of the playback it states file sizes (Fluid cache was 6.4GB and the scene file was 57.2GB) and render time of 220+ hours! That was for ~31seconds of playback. Let me repeat that, 57GB file size, 6.4GB cache, 220+ hours to render ~31sec playback.
Click to expand...

If you think that rendering realtime is rendering a bucket of water at 15 fps with a GTX 580 it's cool.

Again, just rendering a bucket of water, nothing else.
 
Imouto said:
If you think that rendering realtime is rendering a bucket of water at 15 fps with a GTX 580 it's cool.
Click to expand...

yeah well that's still 15 frames per second compared to your Bullet/Blender:

"One frame out of 710 took about 22 minutes to render"

Quite a progress I would say 🙂
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top