New Fluid Simulation Algorithm Allows Realistic Water Physics

Status
Not open for further replies.

solomaniac85

Honorable
Jun 12, 2012
127
0
10,680
0
Looks amazing, I wonder when it will come to games. Hopfully in the next few years or even less considering how powerful gpus and cpus are.
 

eodeo

Distinguished
May 29, 2007
717
0
19,010
22
Looking good. I cant wait until they enable it in 3ds Max.
With ps4 coming out soon, I'm sure we'll see it in games as fast.
 

chicofehr

Distinguished
Jan 29, 2012
538
0
18,990
2
Nvidia makes water physics and AMD makes hair physics. Only problem is that the water physics requires an Nvidia card while the TressFX will work on any computer with DX11 Compute. I hope AMD counters with some water physics soon. I hate it when some features require you to buy a certain brand.
 

SirGCal

Distinguished
Apr 2, 2010
310
0
18,780
0
From the site that had this news a few weeks ago, the rendering card was a simple gtx 500 series... Peanuts compared to todays best. I'd love to see it go live in games but it has a way to go for full realism.
 

eodeo

Distinguished
May 29, 2007
717
0
19,010
22
the rendering card was a simple gtx 500 series.
Actually for compute, gtx 580 is faster than gtx 680.

there's still the uncanny valley of the simulation
There's no such thing for phenomenon simulation. It applies only to faces. Water simulation isnt and cant be creepy, human face simulation - can be.
 


So... you want every brand to be identical, with no reason to even make a choice?
 

lp231

Splendid
Looks cool, but it will be some time when it will look like the real thing. The demo doesn't look that realistic because there is no way water will create a perfect wave every time it's being pushed like show from 0:16-0:25. Anyone have with a clear container like a fish tank can try that out and see if it does the same thing as that demo.
 

salgado18

Distinguished
Feb 12, 2007
634
63
19,070
4


Actually, Geforces and Radeons are very different. Each one works in their way, like multi-monitor support, multi-card system, antialiasing methods, performance in specific scenarios, etc.
But pure technology like this should never be restricted to one vendor. If I were making a game to sell millions, why would I make it need a technology that won't work on half the market? For this reason, no game will depend on Physx, no matter how cool it is. And, for this reason, so many games now are coming in DX11, because everyone supports it now.
Note that I said 'depend', not 'use', many games use Physx, but none of them need it to run, otherwise they wouldn't work properly on AMD cards. And, because of that, the effect is mediocre, with many particles jumping around and that's it.
 

englandr753

Distinguished
Sep 4, 2007
2,634
0
20,960
78
I think this is awesome but will be a while before we see it in games. Check this out if you haven't already. I wonder how much it will cost you to get your face scanned so you can talk to your kids after you're dead and gone? It will be like Harry Potter with the picture on the walls literally looking at you and creating conversation.
http://www.geeks3d.com/20130324/nvidia-realistic-human-face-tech-demo-gtx-titan-video/
 

guvnaguy

Honorable
Oct 27, 2012
74
0
10,630
0
wow, that is incredibly realistic. Rivals Hollywood's CGI. All it really needs are some more detailed textures and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference!
Considering today's dual-GPU solutions like the 690 and 7990 can max out any game at all but the highest multi-monitor resolutions, I don't see why this couldn't be implemented within the next year or two. There seems to be a fair amount of hardware headroom at the moment
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY