• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

PhysX Carwash hardware fluids demo

mashie said:
Allright, I tested the demo here.
Click to expand...
Me to.
It look rubbish tbh.
Click to expand...
Yes it doesn't look realistic like in reallife.
But rubbish compaired to what. Reallife? Yes. Or what's done before?
I don't know all games and I missed a lot. But never seen this feature in game, exept CF.
Yes there much room for improvement. May take attemps of effect specialist and or next gen Physics & Render hardware to get the most out of it. Because The Physics is just half the effect. the other part is rendering effect. A good mix is needed and enough Computation power to pull it off.
thinkin of Geometry shaders of DX10 could help a lot, for the good lookin part.
It simply doesn't have high enough physical sampling resolution to even look remotely realistic (as in too big blobs of material).
Click to expand...
Well this is the first step of a long road of making Physics effect evolve in detail interaction and realism. By pumping up the detail to act more life like. The more Real the more PU power is needed. And PPU has it's limits. PPU2 and 3 and 4 generation will go beyond. More Computational power gives the option of finer detail and more complex or more variables in the computation. It will React more realistic but the other department of render specialist must make it look good with some complex shader code. What can be done is limited by the PPU computing power. somewhere the must draw the line. And each nextgen would put the line of what's possible higher.

Well I don't except Voodoo1 Glide Grahpic level now. But in it's glory day it was a big step up. it was the best way then. Well the first Physics hardware generation gives a big step up, but it's still a long road to trafel.
As for the interactive part, sure you can zoom in/out as well as move the camera. However you can't actually control the foam/lava/liquid to spray it where you want.
Click to expand...
You can fire a ball through the flow and it's interacting. Nice.
BOS used flame thowers alltho they look different. This is just a restricted tech demo. But like I say befor, Physics is just half the effect. it must be renderd to, there are some option to handle that.
I'm not going to waste time taking screenshots, but if you have seen the liquid in Cellfector, this is a lot worse.
Click to expand...
I find it better then Cell factor.
It's not Physx alone its also light refraction shader routines wich may let it look shiny and wet. but still unrealistic.
Cellfactors blood look what matt.
But what the comparison. Blood gore vs a wet sports car. What have non Hardware accelerted Physics games to offer now.

Well maybe a GPU can do more finer detail if they are more powerfull. There will be a difference. How much is still in the open. And if Dev's would make it interactive to.

But in short is this what to expect.
i think yes. So it looks good because a PPU pull it of to make it better compared to decal solution. A PPU is not a Startrek Holodeck Computer core. But it enhance games. Of course there is a limit. So give it a realistic expectation.
 
I dont have a physx card, and this gave me an error saying "failed to load physx cooking library."

How do you guys without physx cards run it?


-Brandon
 
Install the latest PhysX drivers and disable HW acceleration from the game. I got a couple of error messages when I start the prog but it still works.
 
SuperGee said:
Yes it doesn't look realistic like in reallife.
But rubbish compaired to what. Reallife? Yes. Or what's done before?
Click to expand...

It looks rubbish compared to what's been done before, too. Fact is, it looks like ass, and that's why nobody's attempted it before; they *knew* it would look like ass. Technology got better, and it still looks like ass. Showcase this to me when it looks reasonably like fluid, not a bunch of squishy blobs bouncing around.
 
Well in my demo it hides behind the Car. it look nice but not realistic. But it's the first step. Better something then nothing.
Software 8 to 9 fps
PPU 42 to 46 fps.
Foam
 
In some respects it looks pretty nifty, but the main problem is that it looks like an extra layer added in photoshop rather than being a part of the scene. Everything except the foam looks pretty old (worse than the R300 demos), but I'm guessing it looks better in motion.
 
rincewind said:
In some respects it looks pretty nifty, but the main problem is that it looks like an extra layer added in photoshop rather than being a part of the scene. Everything except the foam looks pretty old (worse than the R300 demos), but I'm guessing it looks better in motion.
Click to expand...
I don't see Shadow by the foam transision to car. Which give it a PSP jobish look. but that's a render thing not Phsyics.
But in motion then Phsyics come around.
 
It looks disgusting. The foam is extremely fake looking. Blobby, doesnt look like its actually even on the car.
 
If you look at any of ageia's fluid-related demos/videos - they all have the same problem. Handling large enough amounts of particles to make fluid actually look like fluid, rather than globby cottage cheese, is just not something that's going to be available for a long long time.
 
Astrogiblet said:
It looks disgusting. The foam is extremely fake looking. Blobby, doesnt look like its actually even on the car.
Click to expand...

It isn't. As the poster said, it is supposed to be behind the car, but there are some programming bugs.

What I don't undertsand is why they can't increase the sample rate and make it look more realistic. Supposedly the PPU can handle 30,000 objects. I can see the individual balls that make up that foam, and there are nowhere near 30,000 of them.
 
Having not seen the demo in actions (outside a low resolution video), I don't think it is possible to make a good judgement on how many "objects" are being used to run this scene. It would be interesting to see some actual numbers posted if someone has that information available.

From what I've read on the topic, realistic real time fluid simulation is a long way off.
 
HOCP4ME said:
It isn't. As the poster said, it is supposed to be behind the car, but there are some programming bugs.
Click to expand...
On my side it renders correct. Behind the Car.
In fornt it looks like it is in the paint?
What I don't undertsand is why they can't increase the sample rate and make it look more realistic. Supposedly the PPU can handle 30,000 objects. I can see the individual balls that make up that foam, and there are nowhere near 30,000 of them.
Click to expand...
Well 30.000 object colliding. If it's the only Physics effect. fluid is a different one. Fluid particles need a Different computational power load then the boxes thing. cloth to.
Plus Physics game needs a couple of those Physics features. Then only fluids.

CF Fluids is just one of the 4 or more physics features wich are hardware accelerated.
Tech demo's are mostly pure one feature. Wich have the whole PPU to use for it

Well Nice that there is a "SLI" option comming. Wich means better Physics effect due to finer detail possible alltho it a small step by doubling the computation power.
i hope PPU2 would be a bigger step in raw power.
 
Not very impressive stuff, yes...

This is a good example of AGEIA's problem at the moment. They need a tech-demo group capable of making high quality real-time PhysX demos. You know... same level of quality that NVIDIA and ATI put out with their graphics demos. The "wow" effect is quite totally missing with PhysX right now.

Of course it would be much better to see HQ implementations of HW PhysX in GAMES, rather than tech-demos...
 
The purpose of the physics engine is to make movement look better, not the graphics. That's what the graphics card is for. Nobody seems to understand that. All the goraud shading, T&L, displacement mapping - whatever happens later. The purpose of the card is to unify the physics coding and possibly accelerate it.

This is the kind of thing that you should be looking for:
http://www.hardocp.com/news.html?news=MjE4NDcsLCxobmV3cywsLDE=

You don't see that now, because devs would have to recode that for every game and it's not worth the effort. If it's already hardcoded on one card, you don't have to rewrite it.

None of the fluids work for me, so I guess that is PhysX only?
 
How does this compare to the Havok 3.0 hardware demos that have been released?
 
They have had videos of this tech demo up on the Ageia site since well before PhysX was even launched. I think this is another case of us getting ahold of older demos and I don't think it will be representative of the final product.

Talking to the Ageia guys at qcon, the liquid in cellfactor was added at the last minute as a "hey we got liquids kinda working" thing, and is far from what it will look like in the release product.
 
Well let just wait what Cellfactor Revolution will do with all that PhysX.
There where a lot of driver releases in time. And with each the posiblities or limits are broken to be able to use it more to it's full potentional.
Like the posibility of give Cloth feature a option to behave more like sheet metal.
Like Cloth with high dempening. And large resistance.
 
jimmyb said:
Having not seen the demo in actions (outside a low resolution video), I don't think it is possible to make a good judgement on how many "objects" are being used to run this scene. It would be interesting to see some actual numbers posted if someone has that information available.

From what I've read on the topic, realistic real time fluid simulation is a long way off.
Click to expand...
well they better get fuckin cracking on it, because that is what people are expecting from these cards.
 
sleepeeg3 said:
The purpose of the physics engine is to make movement look better, not the graphics. That's what the graphics card is for. Nobody seems to understand that.
Click to expand...
Yes. I meant exactly that with this line "same level of quality that NVIDIA and ATI put out with their graphics demos". I was not talking about graphics quality although I mentioned the NV and ATI demos as examples.


This is the kind of thing that you should be looking for:
http://www.hardocp.com/news.html?news=MjE4NDcsLCxobmV3cywsLDE=
Click to expand...
Real time non scripted deformable meshes are already in current games, well at least in one that I know of. I have mentioned the game in my previous posts...
 
It honestly makes no difference at all what shaders were applied to the fluids. The fact is; they're ugly. I don't care why they're ugly, I don't care whose fault it is they're ugly, and I don't care how much better you could make them look. They're ugly NOW, so I don't like them NOW. If I see fluid that isn't ugly, I'll say "Hey, that looks cool.", but if something's ugly, what's wrong with saying "Hey, that looks like crap."?
 
Spewn said:
It honestly makes no difference at all what shaders were applied to the fluids. The fact is; they're ugly. I don't care why they're ugly, I don't care whose fault it is they're ugly, and I don't care how much better you could make them look. They're ugly NOW, so I don't like them NOW. If I see fluid that isn't ugly, I'll say "Hey, that looks cool.", but if something's ugly, what's wrong with saying "Hey, that looks like crap."?
Click to expand...

You're right it does look ugly. And I don't think better graphics will help it much. The problem is that you can see the individual "balls" making up the fluid. That makes it unrealistic.

Oh well, I guess realistic fluids just aren't possible today, PPU or not. Maybe the second PPU will be able to handle them better. But it just isn't going to be that revolutionary - it's not like its a quantum processor.

That doesn't meant that PPU1 doesn't have potential, though. There are several things it could be utillized for other than fluids (i.e. cloth) that look quite nice.

BTW, anyone who has SimCity 4, start it up and do the volcano disaster. You will see the lava realistically pour down the sides of the volcano. This type of physics doesn't use particles at all, so the lava looks like a liquid should. Why can't games use that kind of physics?
 
Again, they are possible. You are making a judgment based on a tech demo that is at least 6 moths old.
 
sleepeeg3 said:
None of the fluids work for me, so I guess that is PhysX only?
Click to expand...

I would assume that, but with a Physx card, you can enable/disable the hardware acceleration at will. HW on I was getting framerates in the 40s-50s, HW off it was in the low 10s.
 
SlamDunk said:
Not very impressive stuff, yes...

This is a good example of AGEIA's problem at the moment. They need a tech-demo group capable of making high quality real-time PhysX demos. You know... same level of quality that NVIDIA and ATI put out with their graphics demos. The "wow" effect is quite totally missing with PhysX right now.

Of course it would be much better to see HQ implementations of HW PhysX in GAMES, rather than tech-demos...
Click to expand...

This is not the sort of tech-demo you're thinking of. It seems to be more of a demonstration of concept demo, not "Look how awesome our card is!" demo. Literally, it is a demonstration of a technology, not the final iteration of it. If you want to see the latter type check out Ageia's page:

http://ageia.com/physx/videos.html

Those are propaganda Videos, and those "same level of quality that NVIDIA and ATI put out" are also propaganda "Tech-Demos."

http://ageia.com/physx/tech_demos.html

^^ Those are even better, especially check out the fluid demo on the bottom done with the Unreal 3 engine. Hell, the water is even pushing objects around. The shards of the tank float along with the force of the water, can anyone say boats in rivers or enemies getting drowned by floods? That looks sweet! :)
 
Hvatum said:
http://ageia.com/physx/tech_demos.html

^^ Those are even better, especially check out the fluid demo on the bottom done with the Unreal 3 engine.
Click to expand...
Well, those tech videos are well over a year old and I have kind of always had my doubts whether those are real-time or not.

NVIDIA & ATI always release real-time versions of their tech demo videos...
 
SlamDunk said:
Well, those tech videos are well over a year old and I have kind of always had my doubts whether those are real-time or not.

NVIDIA & ATI always release real-time versions of their tech demo videos...
Click to expand...

Well, did you bother to read the three sentences to the side which explains the source of this "tech demo?" Hint, it isn't a techdemo, they've done one better - it's an actual game!

Ageia said:
Hardware-driven fluid effects provide an unprecedented level of realism. This effect is illustrated completely in this technology demo provided by Airtight Games.

This demo is constructed in Unreal Engine 3.
Click to expand...

I think it's probably up to the publishers of Unreal 2007 when their game will be released, not Ageia. And if they did release a UT3 based techdemo we would hear even more whining about how the techdemo (which would be built upon an engine essentially in alpha stage) is unstable and "Doesn't run on my custom computer built out of totally strange non-standard components and three year old depracated graphics drivers. Ageia sucks!"

Honestly, some people just don't get it. Everyone these days expects beta (or even alpha) products and concept demonstration tech-demos to be completely stable and perfectly polished.
 
Hvatum said:
Well, did you bother to read the three sentences to the side which explains the source of this "tech demo?" Hint, it isn't a techdemo, they've done one better - it's an actual game!
Click to expand...
Yes, I've read it all... and yet have my doubts :)

...and, according to this site those are only tech demos done by Airtight Games for AGEIA. Note: I'm only doubting the fluid simulation here; is it real-time and completely playable and interactive or just a proof of concept video that has been rendered in-engine and with a fixed frame-rate?.
 
Realistic (physics based) fluid simulation is a ways off. Graphics Ph.D Students are still writing their papers on the topic. The game industry is 5 years behind what they see at siggraph so we will not be seeing really nice, near-realistic fluid for a while. HOWEVER, I think they'll be able to fudge something that looks pretty darned good within the next year or three.
 
SlamDunk said:
Yes, I've read it all... and yet have my doubts :)

...and, according to this site those are only tech demos done by Airtight Games for AGEIA. Note: I'm only doubting the fluid simulation here; is it real-time and completely playable and interactive or just a proof of concept video that has been rendered in-engine and with a fixed frame-rate?.
Click to expand...

Well, there would really only be one way to know that for sure: If we had the code in our hands so we could run it ourselves. But as I said above they're not going to release a tech-demo built upon a game engine in alpha stage. At this point you can choose to believe whatever you like, but the fact that we don't have a UT3 based techdemo we can run on our computers is hardly Ageia's fault.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top