Those results are bearing in mind also the drop in fps or 'Physx hit' so are doubly impressive.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
NVIDIA DirectX 11 Questionnaire – A Response to AMD’s Views
- Thread starter Final8y
- Start date
Those results are bearing in mind also the drop in fps or 'Physx hit' so are doubly impressive.
Nope as it moves around on the way up then moves straight down even tho there are fans behind.
If your gonna be picky
they aren't exactly fast moving fans - they wouldn't alone be producing enough airflow to move the steam at all unless it was very close to the vanes (which makes them kinda useless).
Soldato
I doubt they had physx enabled, noway you would get anywhere near them kind of framerates with physx on.
If your gonna be picky
Put it this way i have never seen steam fall like under any conditions.
It is a bit odd... to skip a lot of science the steam would have to have a higher density/lower temperature than the surrounding environment to sink like that, so it wouldn't kick up so much when disturbed...
Its still much nicer tho than any smoke/steam I've seen to date.
Its still much nicer tho than any smoke/steam I've seen to date.
Soldato
What a joke.
Those smoke effects are better than what I've seen previously, I'll give them at least that, though it isn't imo anything that special but not bad at all nonetheless. I haven't had the pleasure of viewing Clear Sky in DX10, another title we could use as an example; I think that has realistic (as possible) smoke effects coming out of vents, fans etc. Remember seeing a video once about those effects, wet surfaces etc.
Last edited:
so thats what it all 'boils' down to huh?
I will not be dedicating a GPU for it.
Associate
- Joined
- 8 Oct 2008
- Posts
- 1,272
PhysX Destruction Demo - fermi
Real time partical simulation
nvidia now own mental ray. - so maya 3dsmax users etc rejoice.
The new versions of the renderer shall support cuda gpu's.
http://www.mentalimages.com/products/iray
Imo no cards are yet powerful enough to do physics well enough for real time gaming. Nor do any decent shader library's exist.
Real time partical simulation
nvidia now own mental ray. - so maya 3dsmax users etc rejoice.
The new versions of the renderer shall support cuda gpu's.
http://www.mentalimages.com/products/iray
Imo no cards are yet powerful enough to do physics well enough for real time gaming. Nor do any decent shader library's exist.
Last edited:
Soldato
Yeah we have all seen impressive " physx demos " many moons a go, have we yet seen a game that represents the quality of the demos, no, nowhere near.
PhysX Destruction Demo - fermi
Far too many small fragments & it blows out like explosives & not a body hitting it.
Far too many small fragments & it blows out like explosives & not a body hitting it.
For a (human) body to do that kinda damage to that kinda wall it would have to have massive amounts of kinetic energy*... the demo isn't supposed to be taken literal the ragdolls are just representative of objects hitting a wall.
* It would probably lose integrity anyhow and distintigrate against the wall... or if it was going really really fast pass through like lots of small particles.
* It would probably lose integrity anyhow and distintigrate against the wall... or if it was going really really fast pass through like lots of small particles.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 8 Oct 2008
- Posts
- 1,272
I agree It looks a bit naff.
Hardware just isn't yet powerful enough to do the calculations required. Its the same with dx11's tessellation, then use of displacement mapping instead of parallax/bump. It's all good in theory, however It's just too demanding for it to work well with this new release of cards both red or green.
