Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post Reply
Direlight
Binocular Vision CONFIRMED!
Posts: 337
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 12:30 pm

Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by Direlight »

I think this settles the debate. Note, according to the video AMD only has partial support.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gehwBlqjq6Q[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcJlTUgZTT8[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wmJHwiGWQM[/youtube]
User avatar
jaybug
Binocular Vision CONFIRMED!
Posts: 302
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 4:55 pm

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by jaybug »

So i get some fancy particle effects that I'm likely to turn off anyway for performance gains?

Doesn't really seem like a dealbreaker to me..
Direlight
Binocular Vision CONFIRMED!
Posts: 337
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 12:30 pm

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by Direlight »

so i get some fancy particle effects that I'm likely to turn off anyway for performance gains
Yep, and if you're on AMD you only get
Off/Kind of ON

Nvidia
Off/On

I've tried both types of graphics cards. AMD seems to be better for videos, and NVIDIA for gaming. VR right now is mostly for games. I highly recommend AMD cpu's though. Nvidia is objectively the better option now if AMD doesn't support the latest enhancements.
User avatar
omeDev
One Eyed Hopeful
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 1:16 pm
Location: from the Shadows

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by omeDev »

I've just bought a 7950.. anything else that I'll be missing out here?
Image
Lurking in the shadows.
indiegogo has a gaming section:
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects?filte ... ory=Gaming
User avatar
Diorama
Binocular Vision CONFIRMED!
Posts: 273
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Brighton, UK (Sometimes London)

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by Diorama »

^^^^ The general consensus in the PC building community is that the 7950 is the card to buy at the moment. Have just spent 3 months on forums, tech sites, and reading PC magazines.
Direlight wrote:
I highly recommend AMD cpu's though. Nvidia is objectively the better option now if AMD doesn't support the latest enhancements.
Not if they charge $60 more than AMD for the same performance, because then you have to make the choice to explicitly spend $60 on PhysX.

For the record, I have had AMD GPUs since 2006, but am probably getting an nVidia next, even though it will mean I am spending slightly more for (on average) slightly lower fps in games (on paper at least). Doing so because I want CUDA and PhysX, and partly because of the frame rate consistency issue that has come up recently.
Direlight
Binocular Vision CONFIRMED!
Posts: 337
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 12:30 pm

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by Direlight »

Not if they charge $60 more than AMD for the same performance, because then you have to make the choice to explicitly spend $60 on PhysX.

Depends on the game according to this:


http://www.techspot.com/review/603-best ... page1.html

Price comparison is currently in a "price war" they claim. Prices depend on where you buy it too.
User avatar
omeDev
One Eyed Hopeful
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 1:16 pm
Location: from the Shadows

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by omeDev »

@Diorama..

lol at your avatar pic. ~cross eyed!
Image
Lurking in the shadows.
indiegogo has a gaming section:
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects?filte ... ory=Gaming
User avatar
Dakor
Binocular Vision CONFIRMED!
Posts: 213
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 8:58 am
Location: Dortmund, Germany
Contact:

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by Dakor »

Those comparison Clips are mostly made by Nvidia or are sponsored by Nvidia.

For example the new Batman series:
Nvidia PC: Dynamic Smoke that behaves realistic when you walk through
PS3 (No PhysX off course): Static Smoke
AMD PC: No Smoke at all

Obviously it's not because an AMD card could not render static Smoke, it's because they don't want you to have a nice game experience if you are not using a graphic-card made by Nvidia. (okay that's an hyperbole)
Beside that there are only like 20 Games that actually Use PhysX and in most of them i am not interested.
German blogger, enthusiast and developer.
Image
Pingles
Certif-Eyed!
Posts: 555
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2013 6:15 pm

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by Pingles »

This is all premature.

We don't KNOW which system will work better for what the Rift will be displaying.

The Rift is going to be giving us a new perspective into our virtual worlds.

We probably won't truly find out until we start seeing full-blown games taking advantage of the Rift and seeing what users are looking for with the view the Rift gives them.
User avatar
Neil
3D Angel Eyes (Moderator)
Posts: 6882
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by Neil »

In all honesty, PhysX was never a deciding factor for me when choosing which computer to play my games on (and I have it all, baby!). I primarily go for the computer that has the better S-3D rendering. If I was in a double-blind test, I don't think I would be able to spot the differences in physics support without really looking for it. I do use a second GPU to support PhysX on my Nvidia machine, but only because I didn't want my extra GPU to go to waste.

When it comes to GPU choice, go for price and performance.

Regards,
Neil
geekmaster
Petrif-Eyed
Posts: 2708
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:47 pm

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by geekmaster »

The PhysX-ON portions of the videos in the first post show more particles, reacting with the ground longer. But IMHO the increased "realism" makes their eventual fade-out even more annoying than the PhysX-OFF demos where objects fade into the ground immediately. Increased realism begets increased expectations, long before you approach the "uncanny valley" (as evidenced in these videos). Those videos really need historical tracking and maintaining of particle debris on the ground. The fade-out is anti-immersive.

Sure, the extra "eye candy" has great appeal, but in practice I may end up turning off such distractions when playing a game.
Last edited by geekmaster on Fri Feb 15, 2013 11:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
Fluke
One Eyed Hopeful
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 10:07 pm

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by Fluke »

Just one thing to keep in mind - I'm guessing there will be quite a lot of Unity created content for the Rift since it's been listed as an engine they're supporting, and considering it uses PhysX for its physics system, you might want to consider that if making a new graphics card purchase for your Rift.
Hicks100
One Eyed Hopeful
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2012 12:06 pm

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by Hicks100 »

as usual with physx effects, it just looks like bolt on after thoughts that add nothing to the game. And thats how it always will be until there is universal support across NVIDIA AND AMD. Its like "oh look at this cool effect we can do with physx, lets bolt it in there... err because we can"

As for the samaritan UE4 demo, it looks awesome. If i remember rightly, that was running on a high end PC with a GTX 680, which means it is probably already beyond what the next gen consoles will be capable of? which means PC games will be held back yet again and it will be a loooong time before we see gfx of that level in most games. pretty sad really.

PS: i have a GTX 580 and prefer NVIDIA after plenty of experience with both. But its sure not because of physx.
STRZ
Certif-Eyed!
Posts: 559
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2011 3:02 am
Location: Geekenhausen

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by STRZ »

My preference is Nvidia due to better stabilty/usability with their drivers, better openGL/Linux support and in my opinion better anti aliasing. My impression is that Nvidia cares more about the quality and i don't mind spending a few bucks more to have less headaches.
User avatar
Dakor
Binocular Vision CONFIRMED!
Posts: 213
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 8:58 am
Location: Dortmund, Germany
Contact:

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by Dakor »

Hicks100 wrote: As for the samaritan UE4 demo, it looks awesome. If i remember rightly, that was running on a high end PC with a GTX 680, which means it is probably already beyond what the next gen consoles will be capable of?
if you refer to this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elKx4ABj_eU it's wrong titled. The Engine is a heavy modified UE3 Engine mostly referred as UE 3.9.
[EDIT] hm didn't notice this was posted in the first post as well..

The real UE4 Demo "Elements" was running on "the latest Kepler card" (sorry no source for that quote, but I read it on a news page)
Last edited by Dakor on Fri Feb 15, 2013 6:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
German blogger, enthusiast and developer.
Image
User avatar
jis
Two Eyed Hopeful
Posts: 68
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 10:17 am

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by jis »

PhysX is just a physics library. They distribute it like a "driver" but it's nothing more than a middleware like Bullet, ODE, or Havok. Bullet and Havok also have hardware acceleration but NVidia is doing some heavy marketing and some R&D to push some proprietary acceleration capabilities in front of other middlewares. The PhysX that people talk about, is just the massive PhysX acceleration parts (particles, etc...). The big part of PhysX is still rigid bodies, ragdolls and character controllers (and now clothes).
Now with OpenCL and CUDA, everyone can accelerate their physics on hardware "easily".

The fact that advanced physics are just seen as a secondary tech for game devs is that it's generally a very time-consuming task. The problem is that tuning physics is complicated, hard to educate scripters to it, and not predictible. If it's incorporated into gameplay, it makes everything more complicated. You can multiply this "complicated" by the usual up and down state of a game during the production: when you have a mess everywhere in a level, you do not want random physics happening in the middle.

This is why I think, physics for big studios will most of the time be put "after" everything else is stabilized. For smaller teams and projects, innovation could occur.
Direlight
Binocular Vision CONFIRMED!
Posts: 337
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 12:30 pm

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by Direlight »

That's really how it appears in-game. I think physics will be even more noticeable on a Stereo 3d display. Generally, the more crazy "magical" effects stand out the most. Holograms, energy particles, fire, and things flying at the camera gave me the biggest "wow" factor when using shutter glasses.
User avatar
cybereality
3D Angel Eyes (Moderator)
Posts: 11406
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 8:18 pm

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by cybereality »

I really like the PhysX effects, I even bought a second GPU (SLI) specifically to help with PhysX. That said, there is nothing special about Nvidia cards that makes this happen. Game developers could produce the same effects on AMD cards using OpenCL, or using different physics engines. Its just that PhysX makes it a little easier, and obviously has a marketing budget from Nvidia.

I know that I have a project I've been planning for a while that is going to use physics heavily. Right now I am looking at PhysX, only because I wanted to dedicate a high-end GPU just for the physics. But if there were competing solutions I would be open to those too. I really think the improved physics are necessary for better VR, so I am watching this space carefully.
STRZ
Certif-Eyed!
Posts: 559
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2011 3:02 am
Location: Geekenhausen

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by STRZ »

The best Physics i've ever seen in a "game" was in Rigs of Rods, they have a very interesting way of modeling and calculating to get there. http://www.rigsofrods.com/content/?s=4d ... 51ee7f1031

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQZLvl0f7DE[/youtube]

Ugh, beware, the music is terrible :x
Pyry
Two Eyed Hopeful
Posts: 85
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 5:55 pm

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by Pyry »

Bullet's been working on OpenCL accelerated physics as well: [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jGZv1YYe2c[/youtube]
Direlight
Binocular Vision CONFIRMED!
Posts: 337
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 12:30 pm

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by Direlight »

Lol @ Rigs of Rods, also

:shock: That really happens. :(
User avatar
jis
Two Eyed Hopeful
Posts: 68
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 10:17 am

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by jis »

For me, GTA 4 had the most complex physics behavior :
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkcW8gi3Ohs[/youtube]

This video is not complete, different aspects of the behaviors are also present in other videos.

It's a complex combination of animation, ragdoll physics and neural networks. It seems glitchy, but it is still a great advancement in this field.
I didn't play Max Payne 3 to see if they improved it or simplified it (Euphoria which is a part of this tech has been deprecated since, too complicated to integrate). Also I didn't play new Fifas that might feature stuff like this, but I believe it's not as advanced (however less glitchy for sure).
User avatar
GeraldT
Certif-Eyable!
Posts: 1057
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:10 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by GeraldT »

Euphoria has been deprecated? Too bad, I loved the tech demos!
want to demo the Rift or check it out? click here
geekmaster
Petrif-Eyed
Posts: 2708
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:47 pm

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by geekmaster »

I love the Virtual Parkour in that GTA 4 demo. Here is a bit of the RL version:

[youtube-hd]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAhPaiajwDY[/youtube-hd]

It would be nice to see a VR mashup combining VR and RL segments. I would think that Parkour mocap data could be used to tune the ragdoll physics.
Dycus wrote:If you actually do parkour, with rolls and stuff, you learn to close your eyes while you roll. I'd imagine you'd naturally want to close your eyes when doing rolls, so it wouldn't be that bad.
But your Rift would need to be wireless to do those rolls. Of course, if you close your eyes during a roll, the Rift could detect and turn off during a roll to preserve the battery... :D

More about Parkour (PK):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkour
User avatar
jis
Two Eyed Hopeful
Posts: 68
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 10:17 am

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by jis »

Mmm according to the official website, Euphoria is still a proposed product: http://www.naturalmotion.com/products/euphoria/.

However during evaluations, they used to say that they really want to move away from this tech because:
- really difficult to tweak (they are using genetics or neural networks or both).
- creating new behaviors requires them to send their own engineers to the client to work with them. It seems very both awkard and costly.

I think that their goal is to replicate the same kind of behaviors using other algorithms and tools.

Also geekmaster, your video is not about Parkour. Parkour is about efficiency and does not lead you to use inefficient moves. It is more "freerunning", "l'art du mouvement" or whatever other names were given to these heretics.
User avatar
Libertine
Binocular Vision CONFIRMED!
Posts: 204
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 1:06 pm

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by Libertine »

Which ever card can do the super detailed and defined thick smoke of the controversial Killzone 2 trailer has got my eternal vote.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CxMmXmb0QI
User avatar
PasticheDonkey
Sharp Eyed Eagle!
Posts: 450
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2013 4:54 am

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by PasticheDonkey »

closest PS3 got to that was raycasted clouds in war hawk i think. all thanks to cell. the more programmable GPUs now may be able to do the same.
geekmaster
Petrif-Eyed
Posts: 2708
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:47 pm

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by geekmaster »

jis wrote:Also geekmaster, your video is not about Parkour. Parkour is about efficiency and does not lead you to use inefficient moves. It is more "freerunning", "l'art du mouvement" or whatever other names were given to these heretics.
It depends on whether you are referring to the martial arts version, or the "extreme sports" version (sponsored by Red Bull). In both the GTA 4 video and the various youtube "Parkour" videos, I was referring to the "sport". In fact, the title of the video I posted was "Assassin's Creed Meets Parkour in Real Life".

Perhaps Dycus was referring to the "art", so thanks for clearing up that distinction.

Once a term gets hijacked (to the angst of old-schoolers such as yourself and perhaps Dycus), the old definition is no longer the only definition, and the new version may actually become more popular.
User avatar
cybereality
3D Angel Eyes (Moderator)
Posts: 11406
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 8:18 pm

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by cybereality »

Love that Assassin's Creed video.
spire8989
Cross Eyed!
Posts: 173
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 11:51 am

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by spire8989 »

geekmaster wrote:It depends on whether you are referring to the martial arts version, or the "extreme sports" version (sponsored by Red Bull). In both the GTA 4 video and the various youtube "Parkour" videos, I was referring to the "sport". In fact, the title of the video I posted was "Assassin's Creed Meets Parkour in Real Life".

Perhaps Dycus was referring to the "art", so thanks for clearing up that distinction.

Once a term gets hijacked (to the angst of old-schoolers such as yourself and perhaps Dycus), the old definition is no longer the only definition, and the new version may actually become more popular.
As a traceur, we definitely do call it freerunning when you throw in extraneous movements. Most people I know consider themselves freerunners and not traceurs. It's not a big deal, some people care more than others...
User avatar
jis
Two Eyed Hopeful
Posts: 68
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 10:17 am

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by jis »

Absolutely, Parkour is well defined and has no ambiguity in its meaning. The fact that the mass didn't understand the simple definition, or the fact that the word Parkour was better suited for marketing does not change what it means. It would be like showing american wrestling and saying that it's the same as free fighting.
geekmaster
Petrif-Eyed
Posts: 2708
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:47 pm

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by geekmaster »

jis wrote:Absolutely, Parkour is well defined and has no ambiguity in its meaning. The fact that the mass didn't understand the simple definition, or the fact that the word Parkour was better suited for marketing does not change what it means. It would be like showing american wrestling and saying that it's the same as free fighting.
Oh God! You aren't from that country that made us Americans stop calling our salad dressing "Roquefort Dressing" and change it to "Blue Cheese Dressing", now are you? And what's up with trying to make us rename our French-style domestic wines now too?

Are you going to petition Red Bull to refrain from using the name "Parkour" in their sporting events?

Red Bull sponsors this famous and popular "Parkour" guy:

Image

Absolutely?
“By belief in absolutes you deny all movement, evolutionary or otherwise. When change occurs, your universe collapses” - unknown
Words are defined by their USAGE, not by some book. Word definitions evolve. The meaning of "Parkour" may not be changing (yet) but it is certainly expanding to encompass the "unessential movement" showmanship of Ryan Doyle and others.
"Analogy, custom, and habit form a better rule to guide men in the use of words than any tribunal of men." - Noah Webster, father of the American dictionary
And are you suggesting that "american wrestling" is rehearsed and staged? Gasp! Say it isn't so! :o :lol:
Actually, Jesse Ventura (former "american wrestler", and former Governer of Minnesota USA) said that even with all their rehearsals, they still got serious injuries during the "wrestling matches" (performances)...

Back on topic:
I only posted the "Parkour" video as a Real Life comparison to the previously posted GTA 4 video showing similar "Parkour-style" moves. I did not intend to start a religious debate over specific word definitions and whether or not popular usage violates original meaning.
Last edited by geekmaster on Sun Feb 17, 2013 6:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
jis
Two Eyed Hopeful
Posts: 68
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 10:17 am

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by jis »

Well I don't want to continue trolling, but I sure understand that the word could evolve for any reason. However I can't stop myself advocating for the right use when the change is led by ignorance, marketing and disrespect. I don't say this about yourself or your idea about it, I know that this word is now popular and the context has changed. I just remember by who these changes appeared (way before RedBull which I was not aware of) and that was not particularly glorious.
And I still don't understand why using the word freerunning is not to be considered because this name was created exactly for that purpose.

(and I did not say that american wrestling was harmless, I just implied that this was not related to "fighting").
Last edited by jis on Sun Feb 17, 2013 6:42 pm, edited 2 times in total.
geekmaster
Petrif-Eyed
Posts: 2708
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:47 pm

Re: Why you want Nvidia for VR & Physics discussion

Post by geekmaster »

jis wrote:... And I still don't understand why using the word freerunning is not to be considered because this name was created exactly for that purpose.
Because "Parkour" sounds sexy and "free running" doesn't, which is all important as a marketing gimmick. Sexy sells. Marketing campaigns will continue to hijack sexy sounding words.
Post Reply

Return to “Oculus VR”