GGTharos Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 Fluid dynamics and raycasting sounds -very- interesting from a sim perspective ... raycasting can be used for radar and ir simulation for example [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dmut Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 well, you can do raycasting by CPU, by VGA, by some audio cards, even by memory controller if you skilled and crazy enough :D The question is how effective you do raycasting? ;) who said PhysX will do it faster then audio card? ;) as for me, I prefere to invest 200-300$ to VGA, CPU, memory or another one why-they're-so-incapacious HDD :) "There are five dangerous faults which may affect a general: recklessness, which leads to destruction; cowardice, which leads to capture; a hasty temper, which can be provoked by insults; a delicacy of honor which is sensitive to shame; over-solicitude for his men, which exposes him to worry and trouble." Sun Tzu [sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic2354_5.gif[/sigpic] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth_HR Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 well, you can do raycasting by CPU, by VGA, by some audio cards, even by memory controller if you skilled and crazy enough :D By that analogy one'd expect LockOn to be written in x86 assembly - we do not want to be that demanding. :smilewink: [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Real men fly ground attack :pilotfly: where EVERYTHING wants a piece of you :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martillo1 Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 By that analogy one'd expect LockOn to be written in x86 assembly - we do not want to be that demanding. :smilewink: Just OpenGL and compile it to play it in my Linux box :D Vista, Suerte y al Toro! [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUBS17 Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 well, you can do raycasting by CPU, by VGA, by some audio cards, even by memory controller if you skilled and crazy enough :D The question is how effective you do raycasting? ;) who said PhysX will do it faster then audio card? ;) as for me, I prefere to invest 200-300$ to VGA, CPU, memory or another one why-they're-so-incapacious HDD :) Its interesting as perhaps a similar piece of hardware could expand a flightsims campaign density making it possible to have more objects interacting in the players area. [sIGPIC] [/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britgliderpilot Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 Its interesting as perhaps a similar piece of hardware could expand a flightsims campaign density making it possible to have more objects interacting in the players area. Well yes - but all it really is is another processor. We've got used to games splitting processing power between graphics (graphics card) and other stuff lately . . . . . but with dual-core processors becoming the in-thing, do we really need an additional hardware processor when we've got another chip on the motherboard? It turns into an exercise in parallel programming - where you want to offload the work to, and how efficiently you can do it. We could use physics cards to offload additional CPU load to, or we could use a dual-core processor . . . . . either way, I understand it's a rather tricky thing to program. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v121/britgliderpilot/BS2Britgliderpilot-1.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUBS17 Posted May 12, 2006 Share Posted May 12, 2006 Yeah I'm waiting until those dual cores are a bit faster before I'll buy one in which case it would be a worthwhile choice to go 64bit and get the benefits of DX10. A far better investment at the moment anyway. [sIGPIC] [/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilotasso Posted May 12, 2006 Share Posted May 12, 2006 I will probably wait another year before getting any new hardware because of these late minute changes. [sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic] My PC specs below:Case: Corsair 400C PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T) RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4 GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prophet_169th Posted May 12, 2006 Share Posted May 12, 2006 Just an FYI, the second core of a dual core CPU is not even close to as capable of processing physics as fast as a GPU/PPU, and at less than half the clock. There is just not enough pipes in a CPU. If the trend continues the way it has been regarding pipelines and ATI/nVidia, I see ATI really having a superior product with DX10 if the physics is supported. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ARM505 Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 Like I said earlier in this thread, adding the physics cards with their support DROPS fps in the current uses - all the cans etc bouncing around still need to be RENDERED by the gfx card to actually be displayed, hence the drop - it's yet more polygons for the GPU to push... Basically all GRAW uses the physics for is better 'eye candy' (more cans/debris bouncing around) - they know they can't make it an integral part of the game yet (unlike modern gfx cards) because nobody has them. Therefore they had to make having one a 'bonus'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts