Added: 1 year ago
From: koberko
Views: 9,473
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (29)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I wonder how fast this will go on my I7 @5,6 Ghz. Anyway i got render farm with 4x I7 cpu :) so this could be rly nice look :)

  • Euclideon can do it in less than a second!

  • @DeathScytheBR Nope; they can do "infinitely" more polygons in less then a second! :)

  • @koberko Actually, they search algorythm search for the objects and send the information to the software, that renders only 1 atom per pixel, instead of 21 trillions and something something something atoms. But some people are too dumb to understand how it works :c

  • @DeathScytheBR Yup. But in general, I'm a bit skeptical about all of that... Main problem that I see is fact that you still have to store all of that data, that will algorithm "search" and display only data needed to be seen at given moment... I have seen interview with Bruce Dell, and I'm not sure that he has mentioned any solid solution to that problem... But, if they have found solution to that, it could be nice tech in couple years ;)

  • @koberko Yea, he did mention it on the 41 minute version. He sayd they have a pretty neat compression system going on. And anyways, storage shouldn't be a problem when you can buy a 2TB HD for 120 dollars.

  • @DeathScytheBR Yeah, with good compression, it shouldn't be a problem. And it's not like that technology will be out tomorrow; they still need to work on it to make it competitive to current polygon tech. Pure geometry details are not enough; they still need to work out different types of materials, lighting, effects, dynamics, motion and similar stuff... And it will take time for that. By then, storage won't be a problem.

  • @DeathScytheBR There are mathematical limits to the amount of compression you can apply to something. It's simply not feasible to store that much unique geometry. That's why their videos feature so many tiling and duplicate objects. Animating and manipulating geometry in real time will also prove to be unfeasible. Don't expect polygons to disappear anytime soon.

  • C'moon! give nasa its computer back!

  • i can render 100000 billion polygons, in 15 seconds.. if they are very far away from the camera

  • thanks for sharing this video . i realy like it as its gives me hope to finish my short movie that contains huge amount of polygons on my workstation im going to build soon as my old pc cant render anymore... you mention its not rendered in your farm so if u have i want to know how did u set them up ? (can we use different computers to set a farm render or should be the same ?) . and about the forest is it plugins or u just use max trees ? finally the grace is it like real or just a texture ?

  • @soufianesk Yes, you can use different computers in farm; you just have to make sure that you have same version of 3ds max and other plugins (like Vray) on each PC.

    Regarding trees, they are custom 3D models (no texture faking; each leaf is 3d model), but thing I did was that I prerender GI to texture (so actually, trees ware not calculated in GI calculations), then converted models to Vray proxy, and used GroundWiz plugin for planting trees and color variation.

  • i have i7 2600 / 8gb ddr3 1600 / sabertooth mobo / 2 N560 GTX ti-hawks in SLI

    they do have CUDA but is this all on CPU / memory ?

    I had an OPENGL error today.. almost finished rendering 2 mill polygones ( 2 vray lights ) in Vray

  • can i render the same using my Nvidia GTX560Ti SLi? and how much improvement would that be over a processor like yours?

  • @karancyberdemon2385 Currently, Vray (render used for rendering) doesn't support GPU rendering, so only CPU power matters.

  • @koberko there is a plugin called "VrayRT" which supports GPU rendering, can u do the same test using your graphic card with that plugin?

  • RIP koberko's PC

  • within 5 minutes, your system graphical performance rates up to...

    1,262,876 polygons per second?

    as for ram, after 4-8 gb the memory operations cease to be a difference plus your processor is only good in aiding the a small amount of the graphics operations, but big time in memory management operations so it also may be a small part of the difference. now whats your graphics card?

  • if you had the best graphics card out, which i think the best, could draw up to 500 million+ polygons per second, u would be set

  • @GhostXoP that would be a nvidia tesla very very expensive

  • @crimson177 or an xbox 360,last i checked its gpu can perform 500 million pps

    putting it at 60 frames per second on games,where as ps3 has i think 270 million per second, drawing out at 30 avg frames persecond, but stilll after 27 frames per second, unless your watching a bullet fire at slow motion, you dont notice the difference. well,rarely

    google: xbox 360 polygons per second

    its the first search item. if this is good performance, i wonder about the tesla's ;)

  • @GhostXoP consoles are about as powerfull as a 80w bulb

  • @GhostXoP are you really comparing raytracing with rastering render?

    please, go away.

  • @GraveUypo How about no, Go fuck yourself :)

  • what workstation you render it? how much ram?

  • @64pipeline

    this was rendered on Intel i7 920 with 12 GB Ram. But application it self was using just some 2GB.

  • wow.... that's a lot of poly's lol, but it looks really good, good job on this

  • damn that vray proxy....

    excellent vid!

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more