Go Back   nV News Forums > Graphics Card Forums > NVIDIA GeForce 400/500 Series

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-23-10, 09:32 PM   #61
shadow001
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,526
Default Re: I have seen the future....

Quote:
Originally Posted by XMAN52373 View Post
That largely depends on what resolution your are playing at and with what GPU you are using. Alot of people still have 17", 19" and 19" wide screen LCDs. Most of what is sold at WallyWorld and BB either have standard 19s or 19WS.

Those that are using such small displays also aren't using the latest GPU's since the low resolutions those displays support don't require such powerfull cards to begin with,and there's been plenty of users out there with a single GTX 260/275/280/285 that has complained about having to seriously lower the graphics quality/resolutions,while keeping GPU physics enabled and running smoothly enough to play the game.


Only those with SLI setups get to use high quality graphics and GPU physics with good performance overall.
shadow001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-10, 09:42 PM   #62
Xion X2
Registered User
 
Xion X2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: U.S.
Posts: 6,701
Default Re: I have seen the future....

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptNKILL View Post
I still don't understand why people are calling the destruction in Bad Company 2 "physics".
I don't understand why you wouldn't. There are plenty of good physics effects in that game.

The walls are blown apart at different angles and locations depending on where the impact is and what is shooting at them. When tanks aim at you, the walls are blown apart exactly where you're standing. And debris flies off the walls at different angles depending on where you shoot them at.

I don't know what you consider "physics," but to me that resembles it.

And have you seen the car chase in the single player campaign? When you're being chased by cars and you shoot at them, they respond realistically depending on where the impact is. If the impact is at the back wheels, for example, the back end of the car will spin out. Whereas if the impact is at the front, it will flip over, etc.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hE1t6n46Fc

Heck, when the jeep hits a tree in that video the snow even dumps all over you.

More good car action. Look at all the snow particles that fly up every time a bullet hits the ground.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMMh2ICGtO4&NR=1

Guess everyone sees things in their own way.
__________________

i7-2700k @ 5.0 GHz
Nvidia GeForce 570 2.5GB Tri-SLI
Asus P67 WS Revolution (Tri-SLI)
OCZ Vertex SSD x 4 (Raid 5)
G.Skill 8GB DDR3 @ 1600MHz
PC Power & Cooling 950W PSU
Xion X2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-10, 09:46 PM   #63
CaptNKILL
CUBE
 
CaptNKILL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: PA, USA
Posts: 18,844
Default Re: I have seen the future....

Quote:
Originally Posted by XMAN52373 View Post
I have my doubts, but for 2001, I guess scripted is as good as you can get.
I don't really see anything scripted about it. The pieces fall and interact with surfaces. If it was just a canned animation they would lay flat out in mid air the same way every time, regardless of the surroundings.
__________________
---- Primary Rig ---- CoolerMaster 690 II Advance - Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3P - Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 @ 4.0Ghz + Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme
6GB DDR2 @ 942Mhz 5-5-5-20 1.9v (2x1Gb Wintec AMPX PC2-8500 & 2x2Gb G.Skill PC2-6400) - EVGA Geforce GTX 470 @ 750/1500/1850 (1.050v)
Sparkle Geforce GTS 250 1Gb Low-Profile (Physx) - Crucial RealSSD C300 64Gb SSD - Seagate 7200.12 500Gb SATA - Seagate 7200.10 320Gb SATA
ASUS VW266H 25.5" LCD - OCZ GameXStream 700W PSU - ASUS Xonar DX - Logitech Z-5500 5.1 Surround - Windows 7 Professional x64
---- HTPC ---- Asus M3A78-EM 780G - AMD Athlon X2 5050e 45W @ 2.6Ghz - 2x2GB Kingston PC2-6400 DDR2 - Sparkle 350W PSU
Seagate 7200.10 320Gb SATA - Seagate 7200.10 250Gb SATA - Athenatech A100BB.350 MicroATX Desktop - Creative X-Fi XtremeMusic
CaptNKILL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-10, 09:56 PM   #64
CaptNKILL
CUBE
 
CaptNKILL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: PA, USA
Posts: 18,844
Default Re: I have seen the future....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xion X2 View Post
I don't understand why you wouldn't.

They're not "preset"; the walls are blown apart at different angles and locations depending on where the impact is and what is shooting at them. When tanks aim at you, the walls are blown apart exactly where you're standing. And debris flies off the walls at different angles depending on where you shoot them at.

I don't know what you consider "physics," but to me that resembles it.

And have you seen the car chase in the single player campaign? When you're being chased by cars and you shoot at them, they respond realistically depending on where the impact is. If the impact is at the back wheels, for example, the back end of the car will spin out. Whereas if the impact is at the front, it will flip over, etc.

There are plenty of good physics effects in that game. I haven't seen anything in Crysis that's any better, honestly.

Guess everyone sees things in their own way.
The game is full of physics, obviously. I'm just saying that the "destruction" contains very little in the way of physics calculations.

When you say this:
Quote:
They're not "preset"; the walls are blown apart at different angles and locations depending on where the impact is and what is shooting at them. When tanks aim at you, the walls are blown apart exactly where you're standing. And debris flies off the walls at different angles depending on where you shoot them at.
Its flat out wrong. I'd love to see an example of the walls actually breaking apart from an impact and not just vanishing in chunks while smoke and moving debris are spawned in. It looks pretty good but from a physics stand point it isn't doing anything new.

Compare what is happening to the actual surfaces in this video:


To this:


Bad Company 2 looks better because of the smoke and excellent graphics all around, but its extremely obvious that things are just deleted and replaced with moving debris that vanishes almost instantly.

I love BC2, I just don't think it makes sense to say the physics are anything ground breaking.
__________________
---- Primary Rig ---- CoolerMaster 690 II Advance - Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3P - Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 @ 4.0Ghz + Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme
6GB DDR2 @ 942Mhz 5-5-5-20 1.9v (2x1Gb Wintec AMPX PC2-8500 & 2x2Gb G.Skill PC2-6400) - EVGA Geforce GTX 470 @ 750/1500/1850 (1.050v)
Sparkle Geforce GTS 250 1Gb Low-Profile (Physx) - Crucial RealSSD C300 64Gb SSD - Seagate 7200.12 500Gb SATA - Seagate 7200.10 320Gb SATA
ASUS VW266H 25.5" LCD - OCZ GameXStream 700W PSU - ASUS Xonar DX - Logitech Z-5500 5.1 Surround - Windows 7 Professional x64
---- HTPC ---- Asus M3A78-EM 780G - AMD Athlon X2 5050e 45W @ 2.6Ghz - 2x2GB Kingston PC2-6400 DDR2 - Sparkle 350W PSU
Seagate 7200.10 320Gb SATA - Seagate 7200.10 250Gb SATA - Athenatech A100BB.350 MicroATX Desktop - Creative X-Fi XtremeMusic
CaptNKILL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-10, 10:20 PM   #65
Iruwen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 186
Default Re: I have seen the future....

Quote:
Originally Posted by shadow001 View Post
Only those with SLI setups get to use high quality graphics and GPU physics with good performance overall.
That's another point where Fermi comes into play. It's not like Nvidia didn't do their homework in some points, they spent a lot of work on parallelization. That's why it's such a huge monster. AMD will surely go the same way with their next generation hardware (in 28nm if possible though).

This is not strictly Nvidia/ATI related: I think what we currently see in games is just the tip of the iceberg. GPU physics are used to blow things up, tesselation is used to make things round. And because it has to be noticable, it doesn't look realistic at all. It's not impressive because it's been done over and over before. It's more of a design problem.
The next generations of games will use those advanced technologies to actually make the virtual world more realistic. GPU physics won't be used for debris, but smoke, cloth and fluid simulations. This is also the point where CPU based physics simply won't be able to keep up since they are what they are, general purpose hardware with a very limited number of cores and simultaneous processing.
It's up to the extremely parallelized hundreds or even thousands of cores of GPUs to efficiently render real time particle physics. The same is true for tesselation, developers are just playing around with it in current implementations, the real power of displacement mapped subdivision surfaces will show in future generations of games and hardware. It allows extreme levels of detail while providing real LOD, it saves huge amounts of memory and bandwidth, it allows blending and morphing and perfectly integrates with physics.
This won't happen with the current generation of hardware and games, but that's why I hope ATI will actually come up with their open GPU physics solution and real DX11 cards (which means they need a programmable tesselator) soon. I don't think so because their hardware isn't capable of it yet, but maybe next year.
Iruwen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-10, 11:24 PM   #66
shadow001
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,526
Default Re: I have seen the future....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iruwen View Post
That's another point where Fermi comes into play. It's not like Nvidia didn't do their homework in some points, they spent a lot of work on parallelization. That's why it's such a huge monster. AMD will surely go the same way with their next generation hardware (in 28nm if possible though).

This is not strictly Nvidia/ATI related: I think what we currently see in games is just the tip of the iceberg. GPU physics are used to blow things up, tesselation is used to make things round. And because it has to be noticable, it doesn't look realistic at all. It's not impressive because it's been done over and over before. It's more of a design problem.
The next generations of games will use those advanced technologies to actually make the virtual world more realistic. GPU physics won't be used for debris, but smoke, cloth and fluid simulations. This is also the point where CPU based physics simply won't be able to keep up since they are what they are, general purpose hardware with a very limited number of cores and simultaneous processing.
It's up to the extremely parallelized hundreds or even thousands of cores of GPUs to efficiently render real time particle physics. The same is true for tesselation, developers are just playing around with it in current implementations, the real power of displacement mapped subdivision surfaces will show in future generations of games and hardware. It allows extreme levels of detail while providing real LOD, it saves huge amounts of memory and bandwidth, it allows blending and morphing and perfectly integrates with physics.
This won't happen with the current generation of hardware and games, but that's why I hope ATI will actually come up with their open GPU physics solution and real DX11 cards (which means they need a programmable tesselator) soon. I don't think so because their hardware isn't capable of it yet, but maybe next year.

It's possible i guess,but i believe it's something to strive for within the next 10+ years,not right now,and for several reasons:

1:As it is,not everyone will own the latest cards as soon as they're released,with most users out there trying to use their hardware as long as possible...Only hardware enthusiats change hardware every year,simply because something much faster is being released,not because the games demand that kind of power....I only did it because these latest cards support 3 displays,as other than that,my old setup was handling things fine using 1 display....It wasn't for DX11 support in the least,as that will take time to become popular.


2:Games are taking ever longer to develop,sometimes as much as 4~5 years if they're developing their own graphics engine along with the game itself,and it's only shorter than that if they're licencing an existing game engine and building their game on top of that(think source engine,UT3 engine,ID tech 4 engine,etc).


3:Given that long time span for game development,it's easy to imagine that the overall situation for developers isn't easy,when in that period of time,there could be as many as 3~4 generations of new hardware releases,each one supporting more features and overall performance than the previous,so try being in developers shoes and deciding what to support and what not to,isn't easy in the least....I don't envy that aspect of having to chose between something they'd like to have in their game,but it'll take longer to implement,or having to lower their vision to cater towards the reality of the market and/or development budget constraints.


4:Most games are multiplatform these days,with the baseline being consoles,which the latest ones are still stuck with DX9 level GPU's in them,while we're already at DX11 on PC's,so there's already a huge gap right there in both raw speed and feature support,and only recently has there been a developer with the guts to release a game with no fallback to DX9 whatsoever and needs DX10 as the minimum,so it's basically restricted to PC's....It's from futuremark(makers of 3Dmark vantage) and it's called shattered horizon.


5:I think it was someone at Nvidia that stated at a conference last year,that the objective is to have on the market,by 2015 so just 5 years from now,GPU's with 20 terraflops of single precision power....The current Fermi chip has only 1.4 terraflops right now,so as crazy as it sounds,GPU's might get about 15 times faster in some aspects within the next 5 years if they hit that objective.....My setup has 10 terraflops right now in that area,but that's split between 4 GPU's,and they're talking about a single one packing twice that amount by 2015,so it's a crazy increase in performance to say the least.


The basic idea is that the hardware will get to the needed performance level a lot faster than the actual software to exploit that power and features,and that's been the case for years now,so i don't think that based on what we've seen in the past 10+ years,that that's going to change.
shadow001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-10, 11:54 PM   #67
nekrosoft13
I'm Geralt
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Chicagoland, once a year in Poland
Posts: 24,366
Default Re: I have seen the future....

wow, all the trolls jumped out from their hiding spots.
__________________
Windows 8 the next big failure, right after Windows ME
nekrosoft13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-10, 12:07 AM   #68
Xion X2
Registered User
 
Xion X2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: U.S.
Posts: 6,701
Default Re: I have seen the future....

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptNKILL View Post

Compare what is happening to the actual surfaces in this video:


To this:


Bad Company 2 looks better because of the smoke and excellent graphics all around, but its extremely obvious that things are just deleted and replaced with moving debris that vanishes almost instantly.

I love BC2, I just don't think it makes sense to say the physics are anything ground breaking.
Well, for one here you need to consider what material it is that you're shooting at. Bricks from your PhysX video react differently than wood in the BF BC video when being shot at. When you shoot grenades at wood, it blows apart like it's supposed to.

But I get where you're trying to go. Honestly, I think that BF BC damage looks more realistic, and in the end that's what matters to me because we're talking about making a game more immersive. When you shoot at bricks with a grenade launcher, they blow apart violently. They don't topple over like a deck of cards like in the PhysX video. Perhaps a few of them may after impact, but not as drastic as the PhysX video makes it out to be. And if you look at the PhysX video, almost every time the guy shoots the bricks fly in the same direction, so I really don't get what's so special about it.
__________________

i7-2700k @ 5.0 GHz
Nvidia GeForce 570 2.5GB Tri-SLI
Asus P67 WS Revolution (Tri-SLI)
OCZ Vertex SSD x 4 (Raid 5)
G.Skill 8GB DDR3 @ 1600MHz
PC Power & Cooling 950W PSU
Xion X2 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 03-24-10, 12:26 AM   #69
CaptNKILL
CUBE
 
CaptNKILL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: PA, USA
Posts: 18,844
Default Re: I have seen the future....

That's fine, its obviously all opinion on what looks better. I was just trying to differentiate between a wall being dynamically broken apart piece by piece and a wall disappearing and being covered up by smoke and newly-spawned debris chunks.

BC2 does a great job for what it does.
__________________
---- Primary Rig ---- CoolerMaster 690 II Advance - Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3P - Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 @ 4.0Ghz + Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme
6GB DDR2 @ 942Mhz 5-5-5-20 1.9v (2x1Gb Wintec AMPX PC2-8500 & 2x2Gb G.Skill PC2-6400) - EVGA Geforce GTX 470 @ 750/1500/1850 (1.050v)
Sparkle Geforce GTS 250 1Gb Low-Profile (Physx) - Crucial RealSSD C300 64Gb SSD - Seagate 7200.12 500Gb SATA - Seagate 7200.10 320Gb SATA
ASUS VW266H 25.5" LCD - OCZ GameXStream 700W PSU - ASUS Xonar DX - Logitech Z-5500 5.1 Surround - Windows 7 Professional x64
---- HTPC ---- Asus M3A78-EM 780G - AMD Athlon X2 5050e 45W @ 2.6Ghz - 2x2GB Kingston PC2-6400 DDR2 - Sparkle 350W PSU
Seagate 7200.10 320Gb SATA - Seagate 7200.10 250Gb SATA - Athenatech A100BB.350 MicroATX Desktop - Creative X-Fi XtremeMusic
CaptNKILL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-10, 12:31 AM   #70
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default Re: I have seen the future....

So, does anyone know if there are any vendors coming out with cards with red heat-sinks with black accents?

Sazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-10, 12:38 AM   #71
Xion X2
Registered User
 
Xion X2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: U.S.
Posts: 6,701
Default Re: I have seen the future....

You made some good points, Cap'n. I do understand the distinction that you're making. I guess my stance is that I just don't see a big enough difference in PhysX yet to make such a big deal about it. I think that it has potential--just comes up short at the moment.

It's definitely a key component of immersion that needs to be better explored. I just don't know if that can happen as fast as we'd like it to as long as Nvidia keeps it proprietary. Developers aren't going to invest nearly as much time in it as they would if everyone would be able to benefit from it.

Frankly, I'm surprised by the graphs that razor showed in that there are that many titles that support it. But again, we don't know how many of those are GPU-based and how many are CPU-based.
__________________

i7-2700k @ 5.0 GHz
Nvidia GeForce 570 2.5GB Tri-SLI
Asus P67 WS Revolution (Tri-SLI)
OCZ Vertex SSD x 4 (Raid 5)
G.Skill 8GB DDR3 @ 1600MHz
PC Power & Cooling 950W PSU
Xion X2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-10, 12:45 AM   #72
CaptNKILL
CUBE
 
CaptNKILL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: PA, USA
Posts: 18,844
Default Re: I have seen the future....

For me, GPU Physx is one of those things that isn't incredible, but is cool enough for me to want a card that supports it.

I absolutely hate the fact that nvidia has possibly (most likely...) limited CPU physx to single-threaded usage to make GPU physx look more appealing, but it doesn't really change the fact that some games make good use of it, and I have a weak spot for getting the most features possible out of good games.

The list of actual GPU-Physx accelerated games is incredibly short:
http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_physxgames_home.html

But Cryostasis, Batman and Mirrors Edge alone make it worth it to me. I really like what I've seen of the effects in these games, and the games are good enough for it to matter.

I'd prefer there was an open standard that didn't use any lame tactics to manipulate the market, but for now, there aren't any alternatives and I'm going to keep buying the products that have the features that appeal to me.
__________________
---- Primary Rig ---- CoolerMaster 690 II Advance - Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3P - Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 @ 4.0Ghz + Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme
6GB DDR2 @ 942Mhz 5-5-5-20 1.9v (2x1Gb Wintec AMPX PC2-8500 & 2x2Gb G.Skill PC2-6400) - EVGA Geforce GTX 470 @ 750/1500/1850 (1.050v)
Sparkle Geforce GTS 250 1Gb Low-Profile (Physx) - Crucial RealSSD C300 64Gb SSD - Seagate 7200.12 500Gb SATA - Seagate 7200.10 320Gb SATA
ASUS VW266H 25.5" LCD - OCZ GameXStream 700W PSU - ASUS Xonar DX - Logitech Z-5500 5.1 Surround - Windows 7 Professional x64
---- HTPC ---- Asus M3A78-EM 780G - AMD Athlon X2 5050e 45W @ 2.6Ghz - 2x2GB Kingston PC2-6400 DDR2 - Sparkle 350W PSU
Seagate 7200.10 320Gb SATA - Seagate 7200.10 250Gb SATA - Athenatech A100BB.350 MicroATX Desktop - Creative X-Fi XtremeMusic
CaptNKILL is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.