Cascades - NVIDIA's first DX10 demo available

russo121 said:
Do you need to be an expert to comment pictures that looks like sh*t? :cry:
Click to expand...
Good thing the demo isn't really 100% about pure visual goodies, then, but also procedural generation and particle simulation (both on the GPU)...
 
russo121 said:
Do you need to be an expert to comment pictures that looks like sh*t? :cry:
Click to expand...
The point was that your commenting on a screenshot... which totally isn't needed,
If you dont have a G80 please dont comment on the screenshot unless you're well educated, which you clearly are not.
And to answer you question, yes you do.
Unless you know how the hardware made that happen then your in no position to talk crap about it.
 
radeonic2 said:
If you dont have a G80 please dont comment on the screenshot unless you're well educated, which you clearly are not..
Click to expand...
Wow! Mr. Freud... calm down a little bit. I just commented the pics I saw from the demo.
radeonic2 said:
And to answer you question, yes you do.
Unless you know how the hardware made that happen then your in no position to talk crap about it.
Click to expand...
I'm not an expert, not even close, but, I don't need to know how a card works to say what I'm seeing is good or not, and from the pics I can tell you it looks like sh+t.
Knowing how the card works will indeed improve image quality and will give more fps! 8(

Edit: If it makes you happy, yes, the pics are "ok".
 
russo121 said:
I'm not an expert, not even close, but, I don't need to know how a card works to say what I'm seeing is good or not, and from the pics I can tell you it looks like sh+t.
Click to expand...

I think the point he's making is that you don't even know what the demo is demonstrating so exactly what criteria are you using to critique it? I agree that visually it's not that impressive, but maybe aesthetics isn't the point. Look at the smoke demo for example - technically impressive, visually not so much. The pic is of a geometry shader demo so obviously the focus is on procedurally generated geometry. Not saying that technical demos preclude good visuals but IMO Nvidia hasn't really pushed the envelope in general in their entire demo suite this time around.
 
radeonic2 said:
The point was that your commenting on a screenshot... which totally isn't needed,
If you dont have a G80 please dont comment on the screenshot unless you're well educated, which you clearly are not.
And to answer you question, yes you do.
Unless you know how the hardware made that happen then your in no position to talk crap about it.
Click to expand...

You have a superiority complex don't you.

Opinions are like assholes, everyone has them.
 
trinibwoy said:
I think the point he's making is that you don't even know what the demo is demonstrating so exactly what criteria are you using to critique it? I agree that visually it's not that impressive, but maybe aesthetics isn't the point. Look at the smoke demo for example - technically impressive, visually not so much. The pic is of a geometry shader demo so obviously the focus is on procedurally generated geometry. Not saying that technical demos preclude good visuals but IMO Nvidia hasn't really pushed the envelope in general in their entire demo suite this time around.
Click to expand...
Nailed it ;)
ANova said:
You have a superiority complex don't you.


Opinions are like assholes, everyone has them.
Click to expand...
I just dont see the point of him letting us know it's "nothing special" by viewing a screenshot.
I dont know what is going on behind the scenes of the demo, but I dont tell people it's nothing special since I have no idea how it works ;)
 
trinibwoy said:
I think the point he's making is that you don't even know what the demo is demonstrating so exactly what criteria are you using to critique it? I agree that visually it's not that impressive, but maybe aesthetics isn't the point. Look at the smoke demo for example - technically impressive, visually not so much. The pic is of a geometry shader demo so obviously the focus is on procedurally generated geometry. Not saying that technical demos preclude good visuals but IMO Nvidia hasn't really pushed the envelope in general in their entire demo suite this time around.
Click to expand...

I know what the demo is demonstrating. Take for example toyshop demo from ATI - technically impressive and visually impressive.
I think you should demonstrate new tech and demonstrate it the best you can. If you want just the inner workings, it's best to put a bunch of numbers into the screen. I'm not saying what's behind the scenes is awfull or not good tech, I admit exactly the opposite.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Agreed, but there are some people who can appreciate the technology behind the pretty pictures. But obviously you'll get more WoW factor from a scene like in Toy Shop from the folk who just want to see how the new tech can make our games look better instead of just isolated demos. I think the catch with this geometry shader demo is that a lof of stuff is happening on the GPU that the CPU used to do which is exciting to some...but obviously if the output "looks" the same then the end-user won't be particularly impressed.

Nvidia's approach to demos seems to be quite different from ATI's - they usually have a smattering of isolated demos (apparently written by a single person at times) showing specific capabilities whereas ATI goes for the wholistic experience. The latter IMO will always be more impressive to the majority of people.
 
trinibwoy said:
I think the point he's making is that you don't even know what the demo is demonstrating so exactly what criteria are you using to critique it? I agree that visually it's not that impressive, but maybe aesthetics isn't the point. Look at the smoke demo for example - technically impressive, visually not so much. The pic is of a geometry shader demo so obviously the focus is on procedurally generated geometry. Not saying that technical demos preclude good visuals but IMO Nvidia hasn't really pushed the envelope in general in their entire demo suite this time around.
Click to expand...

We have to bear in mind that when the vast majority of users see a demo, just expect IQ candy stuff..
Nevertheless it is wise to know the purpose of making a demo before you comment on it, no doubt about that ;)
 
This demo is not meant to be visually awesome, but is it even technically special?

Instancing and vertex shaders is not something new with DX10.
I have the impression that this could have been written in DX9 as well...

Can someone explain what is so special about this, that it needs DX10?
 
Under DX9 the GPU cannot create or destroy polygons or do collision detection. Honestly, it's pretty well spelled out so I'm not sure why you're missing it.

The polygons for the rock are actually *created* (and streamed out to a vertex buffer) all on the GPU, using marching cubes. In the particle system for the water, particles are emitted, propagated, and destroyed on the GPU using a geometry shader. Collision with the rock (and sliding along it) all happens on the GPU, and particles can even spawn other particles (mist) when they hit the rock.
Click to expand...
 
mjtdevries said:
Not sure if your reply was aimed at me,...
But yes, I did read those links. And those links were the reason why I wondered if this couldn't have been done with DX9 as well.

I see no mention at all of any unique DX10 features being used.
Click to expand...

*knock-knock*
It's techdemo ;)

Cascades runs on Vista using DirectX 10. The cool thing about this demo is that the CPU is virtually idle. Everything happens on the GPU. The polygons for the rock are actually *created* (and streamed out to a vertex buffer) all on the GPU, using marching cubes. In the particle system for the water, particles are emitted, propagated, and destroyed on the GPU using a geometry shader. Collision with the rock (and sliding along it) all happens on the GPU, and particles can even spawn other particles (mist) when they hit the rock.
Click to expand...

Away from the CPU to the GPU ;)
 
pjbliverpool said:
For the record, the demo can actually look pretty damn impressive when you play around with the textures, lighting and detail textures.

Here are a few shots I took, you need to picture this with the moving water.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v68/pjbliverpool/Cascades1.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v68/pjbliverpool/Cascades1.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v68/pjbliverpool/Cascades2.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v68/pjbliverpool/Cascades3.jpg
Click to expand...

Ok, those pictures actually do look spiffy. The previous ones (irrespective of what was going on in the background) looked pretty old school. I'm sure it looked better in motion, and I'm sure it was more impressive knowing the GPU was doing everything. They still looked kinda lame.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
GeForce 8800 Human Head demo available
2
Replies
39
Views
22K
Obakan
O
Back
Top