Nvidia Demo Engineer explains Fermi architecture using Rocket Sled Demo

[Black Panther]

Alex Sakhartchouk, Demo Engineer at NVIDIA, explains the technologies behind NVIDIAs new Rocket Sled demo running on the new Fermi architecture:

View the video here.

 

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

demos parts of benchmarks, meh i want product

 

[ToTTenTranz]

This is the Fermi demo they showed at CES. The live demo youtube clip of this actually crashes in the end.

According to what the guy says, 3 Fermis are being used to run this demo in real time (probably 2 for rendering and 1 for physics).


A single Fermi won't be able to run this.

 

[Mussels]

fermi better kick ass when it comes out, seems to have more problems than a prescott without a heatsink.

 

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

fermi better kick ass when it comes out, seems to have more problems than a prescott without a heatsink.

 

[Black Panther]

I found the original video (where the system crashed).

Why did they show it off in Tri-SLI? It gives the impression that they were afraid a single card would not be up to expectations....

Potential customers want to see how a single card performs. Certainly not everyone will be buying three of these...

 

[Binge]

This is the Fermi demo they showed at CES. The live demo youtube clip of this actually crashes in the end.

According to what the guy says, 3 Fermis are being used to run this demo in real time (probably 2 for rendering and 1 for physics).


A single Fermi won't be able to run this.

In the original video they say there are 3 fermis in the case but only one is being used to render the scene with physX.

Original Fermi Rocket Sled Video-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RdIrY6NYrM

 

[ToTTenTranz]

In the original video they say there are 3 fermis in the case but only one is being used to render the scene with physX.

Original Fermi Rocket Sled Video-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RdIrY6NYrM

Yeah.. but why do they have 3 cards in there, then?

In case one burns or explodes, they have two more?

 

[Binge]

Yeah.. but why do they have 3 cards in there, then?

In case one burns or explodes, they have two more?

If you had a watercooled tri-SLI machine would you take the two cards out, or would you just disable extra GPUs? :shadedshu

 

[pantherx12]

I'm pretty sure I've seen 100s of thousands of things fall and have physics 2 years ago, last generations cards can do that level of computing : /

 

[shevanel]

these things are going to cost a fortune I can see it now....

the fluidity of that exploding wood bridge in the video pantherx2 posted is impressive but its hard to believe there is only one card doing the work with that amount of physics going on or this is one hell of a machine.

this segment is so far beyond anything ive ever seen in any game.. I remember back trying to figure out why 1 single gtx 275 could barely handle the physics on the ageia maps on ut3 or the tiles breaking in batman:aa

but this card here is processing so much and on that third loop on the bridge explosion the framerate drops but wow that thing shreds into sawdust and its not just blocky textures breaking apart its actually breaking down into splinters and various shapes too and @ 1,000,000 particles... whoooooo! sick this is probably the hi-end card.. probably cost as much this for a single gpu

 

[ToTTenTranz]

If you had a watercooled tri-SLI machine would you take the two cards out, or would you just disable extra GPUs? :shadedshu

lol, aren't you just evading the main question?

Why are there 3 cards in the first place? Why build a computer with 3 cards to show off a demo that uses only one?

I'm pretty sure I've seen 100s of thousands of things fall and have physics 2 years ago, last generations cards can do that level of computing : /

Yap, I don't think the demo is that impressive, either. Maybe it's because of the aesthetics, but we've seen that kind of lighting and models since the DX9.0c cards are out.

 

[a_ump]

true dat, i failed to see the big "awesome" in that vid.

 

[shevanel]

i dont mean to offend but i dont think you guys could tell a chicken from a turkey if you cannot see the advances in technology that this demo portrays

 

[pantherx12]

Tessellation is good.

Individual items with physics on character models/objects is good.

Realistic smoke is good.



100000s of things falling, not impressive though.

You can find cryengine demos from a few years ago that show examples of shit tons of things falling.

 

[TVman]

cuda and physx is the only 2 thing i hear from Nvidia these days!What about pushing the visual limits,trying to make games even more like real life!!! what has happened to you nvidia you used to be pushing the limits not making cards that can simulate smoke:shadedshu

 

[DaedalusHelios]

The architecture is much better with physx now. GPU physx is even more of an asset to AMD systems because they have no i7 level CPU to fall back on to do the advanced CPU physics via havok. Its almost like Nvidia is trying to nip at the heels of AMD/ATi like its the underdog.

The demo showed that the triangulation (DX11) features are working fine. So the major thing to learn in that video is that DX11 is fully functioning on the fermi no matter what they end up calling it. I figure they have the chip in its final form and in production by now but I am not sure if the card makers are getting chips yet. I am thinking early March we will start to see the cards in online stores at inflated prices. And by late March selling at MSRP.

 

[pantherx12]

You don't need a i7 level CPU for physics is the thing, it actually doesn't take that much power to process.

 

[shevanel]

hey show me one game that has a physics scene with 1M particles and i don't mean fluidmark which looks like it was made in the 60's compared to the bridge in that video.

 

[Fourstaff]

+1, even if we have the power enough to make all those pieces, not many game developers will implement it.

 

[ToTTenTranz]

i dont mean to offend but i dont think you guys could tell a chicken from a turkey if you cannot see the advances in technology that this demo portrays

That or you're obviously too sensible to the power of marketing's suggestion.

Hmm.. which one?

 

[Kantastic]

lol, aren't you just evading the main question?

Why are there 3 cards in the first place? Why build a computer with 3 cards to show off a demo that uses only one?






Yap, I don't think the demo is that impressive, either. Maybe it's because of the aesthetics, but we've seen that kind of lighting and models since the DX9.0c cards are out.

Maybe that's the only 3 working prototypes they have and want to keep it in a safe place.

 

[DaedalusHelios]

You don't need a i7 level CPU for physics is the thing, it actually doesn't take that much power to process.

Basic Havok CPU functions that are always the same don't take much CPU power. But when it gets more complicated like yesterday's physx found in titles like Batman: AA and UT3, no CPU in the consumer market can do that yet. That is why Havok tech moves slowly because CPU tech doesn't advance as quickly respectively. When doing alot of destruction in Ghostbusters on PC it slows down waiting on the CPU while using Havok.

 

[shevanel]

That or you're obviously too sensible to the power of marketing's suggestion.

Hmm.. which one?

Some people still look at a blue ray on a 1080 screen and say "looks like dvd!"

some are the same people that think there is no audible difference between 128kbps and 320kbps music files.

 

[TVman]

Some people still look at a blue ray on a 1080 screen and say "looks like dvd!"

some are the same people that think there is no audible difference between 128kbps and 320kbps music files.

1.they look the same on a certain distance
2.there is no differents