LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksGood point
Good point
You've got to be kidding me!Originally Posted by Stoo
That screenshot is not from an ATI demo -- the two are identical, pixel-for-pixel, except that the one that's ostensibly from the ATI demo has been stretched, cropped, and desaturated!
Take a look again:
Here, I'll even make a direct comparison for you:
Even if ATI somehow managed to get all the physics *exactly* the same, why would they go to all the trouble of modeling the same pipe down to exacting detail, or replicating the exact same pattern on the floor?
Use your brain.
The difference is just b&w vs. color.
Lose the attitude chap or your stay here will be *very* short.
It's still a simulation, if they're using the same geometry and textures and getting the R600 to run it then there's a very high likelihood of it looking very similar.
Granted the screengrab is almost pixel perfect, but that doesn't mean that the story isn't accurate, just that the particular image used may be in question.
I'll get Steve to clarify.
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
Interesting point !
However (assuming that this story is accurate), then your earlier pinpoint reference may well hold the key
All of the ultra-clever-uber-bods whose names appear on the original paper are listed as being 'Stanford Super Smarties'
With 'drive' from guys like Mike Houston, Stanford seems to have led the way with a lot of the hardcore GPGPU stuff that is beginning to revolutionise the world
Having heard him speak - I would not pretend to understand the nature of the work that they do...
...but he did say (Sep 2005) a lot of things that sounded like "ATI's latest technology means that cross compilation of massively parallel tasks is easier than it has ever been" etc
If any of you ever feel alert/superior - then you can give yourself a swift dose of soporiphic inferiority with a visit down these threads...
http://forum.beyond3d.com/forumdisplay.php?f=42
I must confess that I regularly lose sleep worrying about bringing "...together researchers and practitioners working on feedback-directed optimization and back-end compilation techniques..."
Bottom line is that replicating 'previously ~impossible tasks that had to be rendered off line' in an online, realtime way would be exactly the kind of demo you would want to run if you had something clever
That's why you'd go to the trouble...
Last edited by Andrzej; 20-03-2007 at 10:59 PM. Reason: Missed bits off and made a ton of smelling pistakes :)
The Bania has spoken... and, to be honest, what he says makes perfect sense.
Take something that's well known, within certain circles, and then do it in real time rather than the pre-rendered stuff that was all that was possible earlier.
Originally, only 'paintings' looked 'real'
e.g. cartoons
Over time, animators tried to get closer and closer to reality...
...whilst, at the same time, the gamer-writer's craft moved from pure machine code to assembler to peeking and poking
I remember seeing 'Einstein's face' and 'Marylin Monroe' on a Victor 'PC' with an Amber screen and thinking 'Wow! Graphics is finally here'
But, of course, that was still a 'painting'
For ages, computer games would have amazing 'paintings' on their packaging, that bore no resemblence whatsoever to the game inside
Gradually, however, game designers have made the 'offer' match closer and closer to the 'advert'
Physics and simulations are the next of these
Instead of a team of uber-gurus at NASA, Stanford or Oxford sitting around running non-graphical simulations of how a microcosm of the world would look if 'Rock 176565' were to bound on top of 'Rock 987678' from a height of 3.2 metres with a tailwind...
...we can now see that kind of stuff on the screen
In fact, we can see tens of thousands of these impacts
Same goes for water, smoke and a host of other pyrotechnic effects
Traditionally, these guys have been looking at CPU emulation
At some point, using an ultra-threaded, ultra-parallel graphics core (or four) makes sense
Add in procedural game development etc and you have the stuff of next-gen-games...
...where the 'content' looks way better than the 'advert'
BTW Nick: Just to confirm - ALL the best people are Geminis
I just want the cards to be available to buy, who cares about simulations. Its a games card, pure and simple.
Rediffusion's shareholders - at a guess
In reality, all of this stuff is very important
Yesterday's uber-geek demo rapidly becomes a physics-engine company's inspiration/IP, which leads to the next generation of tools/SDKs for developers
You need constant drive from the R&D guys at Stanford etc to really push the gaming experience forward
Wonder if anyone would care to hazard a guess on how long it takes the 'leading/bleeding edge' stuff to come to market ?
The Final Fantasy film came out around 6 years ago and - compared to the Ti500/Radeon 8500 cards of the day - it seemed to be a monster of real-world-simulation
Crysis and Alan Wake look like they will be batting around the same level of realism - in real time - when they are played on the R600/G81 cards that are available this summer
Today's question for the HEXUS.massive is...
What is the 'Final Fantasy' of today that will be played out at 60fps in 2013 ?
Kiera Knightley, a bottle of baby oil and a bumper pack of Viagra?
DAAMIT!
I need new pants
rofl, genius
you forgot the chocolate body paint
man that looks brilliant, so cant the 8800gtx do the same thing?
GTX is a whole different architecture, R600 is made for thsi sort of thing (as well as Graphics)... just wait until we see folding@home results! Boy are we in for a surprise
Core 2 Duo E6600 @ 3.2Ghz (400Mhzx8) 1.52V (set in bios, 1.47v real) | 4GB GeIL PC6400 4-4-4-12 | Gigabyte DQ6 @ 1600Mhz | HD2900XT 1GB | Enermax Infiniti 720W | Silverstone TJ07-B with custom watercooling | BenQ FP241WZ
3dmark05 - 13140 | 3dmark06 - 6698 | SuperPi 1M - 15s
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
