@3kliksphilip hey dude I'm looking to buy a new nvidia card but I'm clueless to what kind I would need. What do you recommend as a good card under 400$?
From what I've seen, fluid physics isn't so reliant on having the highest amount of particle as it is merging the topology of the particles together and giving it a good texture, which seems more of a burden on rendering tan the physics engine.
@Wecanstopnwo1 hey man instead of locking yourself in your room with candlelights because you refuse to give your credit card information to big corporations, have you ever even thought to yourself "Hmm, maybe an eye is a good portrait for visual imagery? Seriously I see some people freak out because they're seeing eyes all over the place, I wouldn't be surprised if you think everyone belongs to the Illuminati because they have eyes, grow a brain dude, nobody is out to get you.
@Skonkw0rks There's a slight problem. If they both make individual solutions, game designers won't include any of them in a meaningful way since it reduces the number of people able to play their games. Creating an open-source version would be great, since then everybody could benefit. But if ATI does that and Nvidia tags along but keeps PhysX as well, they're still at an advantage. It would be best for the consumer if they both shared technologies and made them main-stream.
Loved the green goo. Still physx eye candy isn't enough just to throw aways ati extra 1gb.. i've played many games that has same visual effects even without physx so i don't see why i should get a dedicated physx card.
On particle render at 0:18 you can see how incompressibility will be an issue when dynamics become more present. I think there should be a bit more effort putting this concept into atmospheric effects as well, clouds dust and fog that isn't determined by distance could be dramatically improved.
@colouredbills you dont know the size of this object so you cant really tell if the physics are slow or yea... im just thinking that your are calling this horrible because the movement of the fluids is slow. but you can never tell because the size isnt stated.
@colouredbills I'm assuming that it will be scaleable depending on the computer's power. At lower settings the liquid may seem like an angry ball-pool cascading towards you. It's still early days for things like this, but at least we can now do it to some extent on middling hardware. Not seen any recent examples, I'm assuming that a fast Geforce 500 or AMD 6000 will be about 4-8 times better than this.
@Urstupidumbass As far as I know size doesn't matter for performance, except possibly in depth based volumetric shaders or something, it's the amount of detail that matters.
@3kliksphilip I was replying to Urstupiddumbass saying that size of the particles effects the performance. Which as far as I know it cannot.
Obviously size can inadvertently effect the performance by having more particles on screen/having more in the same space as the computer would have to do more calculations, that is assuming my understanding that volumetric shaders calculate other objects/volumetric shaders behind the shaded particle is correct.
@sttate I know that, But im thinking more as the reality. Im sure this isnt true but really, that object could be much bigger and the force of gravity is still in scale. If you dont get it. ex. Does the water from a dam just fall like as if the gravity was not to scale? asking that does the water fall like pouring a cup of water onto the ground.
@Urstupidumbass Not accounting for air resistance, things accelerate at 9.81 m/s. The dam bursting in LOTR for example was obviously a small model, slowed down to give the impression of EPIC SCALE!
Beautiful, to think that this is the result of the work of people who developed some sort of chip (just electrical currents) and programmed it to do this...
@nzigen31 It won't be, if Nvidia refuses to give ATI the code for this. Game designers aim for lowest common denominators, ATI hardware is capable of running it, they just don't have the legal permission to do so. Nvidia is doing the gaming industry no favours by not sharing.
@nzigen31 I don't honestly understand how people can be nvidia or amd fanboys. Don't you realise that competition is good, and by siding with just 'one side' you're only really hurting yourself?
@3kliksphilip Yeah of course that's true, but how do you do it? You certainly arent buying BOTH a Nvidia and a ATI card every 2 years are you?? You gotta pick a side. But after all it's good that both sides exist.
@hardstyle905 You pick a card, it doesn't mean you then have to rant about how terrible the other ones are. The cards I've bought for my PC so far have been...
Ati Radeon 64 mb
Geforce 4200
Ati 9600 xt
Geforce 8800 GTS
ATI 4850
I'd consider myself fairly neutral when it comes to graphics cards, but the one thing that makes me play devils advocate is when some ignorant fanboy expresses totally biased opinions on things they clearly know nothing about.
@3kliksphilip wtf? i have a ATI card and my water physics are even better then your and runs even more smoother and you say this water physics doesn't work on ATI card
@cutieprincess161 ATI cards are definitely CAPABLE of it, but since Nvidia holds the PhysX license and won't give it to ATI, they aren't officially allowed to support these sorts of demos, so the chances are that your CPU is doing the processing.
What are your PCs specs, and which demos are you running exactly? I didn't even know that you could run this demo without physx enabled.
@roshawn1111 I remember something like this in the distant past, though the closest I've found to it recently has just been cross-gpu support where you can use one nvidia and one ati card, and use the nvidia card as a physics processor.
@flightsimx65 Should've looked before posting but yes, the G86 in on your 8400gs only has 16 stream processors and PhysX requires a minimum of 32 (which is still pretty low and not recommended to run the graphics and PhysX on simultaneously)
From the 9.09.0814 drivers (and still continued till now)
"Supports NVIDIA PhysX acceleration on all GeForce 8-series, 9-series, 100-series and 200-series GPUs with a minimum of 256MB dedicated graphics memory and 32 processor cores (stream processors)."
@flightsimx65 That won't do it. You wouldn't be able to get anywhere near the performance of 32sp (which is still pretty low) out of the g86 you have. It's pretty much like trying to get the same multi-threaded performance from a dual core as a quad core by overclocking...when overclocking is quite limited.
For full hardware physx hardware acceleration you need an 8600gt/9500gt minimum. A gt220 would be as low as you can go for the next step up but quite frankly you'd want more for gaming.
@flightsimx65 Hey man...check out geeks (dot) com. They've got a GT220 which has 48sp and would be enough for some hardware decoded physx (still kinda low) but it's only $35.
There's also a GT240 (twice as powerful!) that's $70 on newegg and you get a $30 card for a mail in rebate.
@94XJ I have to say, I don't feel it's worth getting an nvidia card just for Physx. They're screwing up PC gaming by not allowing others to use Physx (so no game wants to support it properly), and at the moment they kind of suck compared to ATI / AMD.
@3kliksphilip PhysX was developed by Agea and bought buy NVIDIA...why would they make it run on ATI cards? And right now the GTX480 is the fastest single gpu card out there and the GTX460 is the best bang for your buck for gaming. ATI has nothing in the $200 price range to compete with the GTX460.
The only gripe about the 480 is power consumption. As far as heat goes, mine never goes above 75C which is ice cold compared to what my old GX2 did.
@94XJ The problem with PhysX is that it will never become a staple component in modern games, because by doing so, developers would be preventing over half the PC gamers out there from playing their games. The 480 is very power hungry and hot, and although it may be the fastest single GPU out there, you can get a faster ATI 5970 for the same price. The 460 seems to be much better than ATI's equivilent. And it had better be, with ATI's 6000 series just around the corner...
@94XJ is it pci or pciE cuz i have pci and my dad insnt gonna spend any money on this pice of crap unless its my money i have a credit card i cant actavaite it i cant use it so i guess ill have to get it on my own
@flightsimx65 I doubt your GPU slot is PCI, PCI is ancient. AGP is newer than that and even that was outdated 5 years ago. If you have a 8400 GS then it will be a PCI-E card. I'm sure it will be fine, to make sure, take the side of your PC off and take the graphics card out, just to prove you can. Then insert the new one. Don't forget to plug the extra power connectors in, if you get a more powerful card!
@Eldoctor888 I doubt it retains mass and stuff, and it simply turns into a sprite when it hits a surface. But while it's in the air it seems to act a bit like a fluid. In my opinion it doesn't count as proper real-time water.
@iWanTtoPlay100 Good for you. Though it's an old game, and integrated graphics have become powerful enough to run a game like that. A dedicated graphics card will still run it a lot better.
@3kliksphilip i think just the up layer is from particals buth under water is just a ... ye ... on san andreas (GTA) if you swim under a script wil start your screen is blue ... and on GTA 4 its the same buth there he not swim if it all was particals it would be a bilion : D and thats to much
@rollhunter GTA 4 doesn't have this sort of thing, it simply has a moving surface to the water, much like crysis. I can't remember if you can alter the ripples in GTA 4, but if you could, then it would only be the surface of the water that changes.
That's because it's not water, it"s some kind of slime. You can see the slim trail, check out the part when it's green. there are other Nvidia demos with water and it's well done. no reason it wouldn't be the case here as well.
i dont like reading the comments in these videos coz people are complaining about their computers that are a hell of lot better than my 10 year old computer
@EliaForce1984ita There aren't many games with physx in any way, and it certainly won't affect the gameplay at all. Most games will be built for the lowest common denominator, so the 8800 should do. But the best one to get at the moment is probably the Geforce 260. In my opinion it's not a good time to buy a graphics card, you should see some major drops in prices soon, provided that Nvidia's 400 series is able to be that competitive.
@ijakz the reason why no game in the world has water physics is because there is toooo much sruff,its like puttting 100000000 props in a game infront of u.10000000 because the water physics has to be separated into the tiniest piece posssible.
@ijakz It could try if it was using mesh-surface water but otherwise I think the card(s) trying to simulate it would turn into a black-hole and suck up the earth. xD
As much as I love nvidia, their fluid physics need work a little bit. The water spews in little balls, which I've never seen liquid do before besides drops, which when there's a fixated amount of water at that amount, it shouldn't do that
Real life isn't made out of polygons and skin isn't just a bumpmapped texture. Computers do things differently to real life. And they'll only improve with time.
@halo3jocky That's just the level of detail. You can't render and animate every water molecule like it is in real life. More smaller "water balls" would decrease performance.
I have an ATI 4850 1GB DDR3 and a 9800 GTX runs better in almost all games. I wish I had an NVidia, because almost all games are (sadly) optimised for the green giant's cards. At least we have the 59xx series, which are almost half as powerful again as Nvidia's new 470 and 480 GTX cards, but NVidia's new-ish and new cards that support DirectX 11 natively make tesselation MUCH lighter on the framerate than ATI cards that support Directx 11 natively too. Oh well, I know what I want for xmas :D
@3kliksphilip hey dude I'm looking to buy a new nvidia card but I'm clueless to what kind I would need. What do you recommend as a good card under 400$?
Trialtrex21 2 months ago
what program did you used? :3
DanTapperful 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
damn, now i must search what @myrandomnoob writed..
RyanFreeman96 6 months ago
From what I've seen, fluid physics isn't so reliant on having the highest amount of particle as it is merging the topology of the particles together and giving it a good texture, which seems more of a burden on rendering tan the physics engine.
Ultermarto 6 months ago
ALL SEEING EYE .... EVERYWHERE SYMBOLISM MASONIC ILLUMINATI SATANIST ..¬¬
Wecanstopnwo1 7 months ago
@Wecanstopnwo1 hey man instead of locking yourself in your room with candlelights because you refuse to give your credit card information to big corporations, have you ever even thought to yourself "Hmm, maybe an eye is a good portrait for visual imagery? Seriously I see some people freak out because they're seeing eyes all over the place, I wouldn't be surprised if you think everyone belongs to the Illuminati because they have eyes, grow a brain dude, nobody is out to get you.
DaVeeKo 6 months ago
I don't see why should nvidia share anything with ATI. ATI should work and make its own solutions.
Skonkw0rks 8 months ago
@Skonkw0rks There's a slight problem. If they both make individual solutions, game designers won't include any of them in a meaningful way since it reduces the number of people able to play their games. Creating an open-source version would be great, since then everybody could benefit. But if ATI does that and Nvidia tags along but keeps PhysX as well, they're still at an advantage. It would be best for the consumer if they both shared technologies and made them main-stream.
3kliksphilip 8 months ago 14
@3kliksphilip so i cant use this demo with a AMD card? ._.
hopefullyApro 1 month ago
Loved the green goo. Still physx eye candy isn't enough just to throw aways ati extra 1gb.. i've played many games that has same visual effects even without physx so i don't see why i should get a dedicated physx card.
tulp35000 8 months ago
On particle render at 0:18 you can see how incompressibility will be an issue when dynamics become more present. I think there should be a bit more effort putting this concept into atmospheric effects as well, clouds dust and fog that isn't determined by distance could be dramatically improved.
SelfEsteemFund11 8 months ago
It's so....so wiggly...so.........*guhh*
bonana99 8 months ago
I wanna try this, I have an ATI Radeon Duel 5870 Crossfire (Laptop of course)
Urstupidumbass 9 months ago
@MrDinoJess I've seen videos of girls playing with shit for hours.
3kliksphilip 9 months ago 19
@3kliksphilip 2 girls one cup?
Bradley12595 8 months ago
these physics suck
colouredbills 9 months ago
@colouredbills You're right! They're too... physicy.
3kliksphilip 9 months ago
@colouredbills you dont know the size of this object so you cant really tell if the physics are slow or yea... im just thinking that your are calling this horrible because the movement of the fluids is slow. but you can never tell because the size isnt stated.
Urstupidumbass 9 months ago
@Urstupidumbass thats a good point
colouredbills 9 months ago
@colouredbills I'm assuming that it will be scaleable depending on the computer's power. At lower settings the liquid may seem like an angry ball-pool cascading towards you. It's still early days for things like this, but at least we can now do it to some extent on middling hardware. Not seen any recent examples, I'm assuming that a fast Geforce 500 or AMD 6000 will be about 4-8 times better than this.
3kliksphilip 9 months ago
@3kliksphilip Im running a 6870 right now the physics are pretty good
colouredbills 9 months ago
@colouredbills Which physics demos are you using?
3kliksphilip 9 months ago
@3kliksphilip No demos, just physic heavy games, like splinter cell conviction BFBC2 , crysis 2 etc
colouredbills 9 months ago
@Urstupidumbass As far as I know size doesn't matter for performance, except possibly in depth based volumetric shaders or something, it's the amount of detail that matters.
sttate 8 months ago
@sttate If this video was 5 times faster I reckon people would think it looked better.
3kliksphilip 8 months ago
@3kliksphilip I was replying to Urstupiddumbass saying that size of the particles effects the performance. Which as far as I know it cannot.
Obviously size can inadvertently effect the performance by having more particles on screen/having more in the same space as the computer would have to do more calculations, that is assuming my understanding that volumetric shaders calculate other objects/volumetric shaders behind the shaded particle is correct.
sttate 8 months ago
@sttate I know that, But im thinking more as the reality. Im sure this isnt true but really, that object could be much bigger and the force of gravity is still in scale. If you dont get it. ex. Does the water from a dam just fall like as if the gravity was not to scale? asking that does the water fall like pouring a cup of water onto the ground.
Urstupidumbass 8 months ago
@Urstupidumbass Not accounting for air resistance, things accelerate at 9.81 m/s. The dam bursting in LOTR for example was obviously a small model, slowed down to give the impression of EPIC SCALE!
3kliksphilip 8 months ago
@Urstupidumbass You mean the actual movement of the particles? Fair enough.
sttate 8 months ago
Thump up if you don't know how you end here..
88Dyret 9 months ago
Beautiful, to think that this is the result of the work of people who developed some sort of chip (just electrical currents) and programmed it to do this...
ryder187mac 10 months ago
They are just thousands of balls runned using the gpu:P
ILFZ2 11 months ago
Lmao needs more fluidly particles!
sermerlin1 11 months ago
ATI pwns nvidia .. no wait nvidia pwns ati ..
Oh right i forgot .. they are just the same -.-
ImHiDef 1 year ago
very realistic graphics american scum!
uratoko 1 year ago
Really good physics modeling- I would love to see the reaction comparison to a real life model with viscous fluid in it...
HybridWaterMan2 1 year ago
Now if it only were implemented in Source Engine...
FrozenHaxor2 1 year ago
no one need physX. wow now u know i own a ATI card lol...
schwalbstar 1 year ago
@schwalbstar Heretic! Burn him at the stake! ; )
AEigner 1 year ago
suck it ATI faggots
thats the next gen of ingame liquids and clothing
nzigen31 1 year ago
@nzigen31 It won't be, if Nvidia refuses to give ATI the code for this. Game designers aim for lowest common denominators, ATI hardware is capable of running it, they just don't have the legal permission to do so. Nvidia is doing the gaming industry no favours by not sharing.
3kliksphilip 1 year ago 35
@3kliksphilip That's up to them, but such tech must not be ignored. Not this kind of tech.
Also,
inb4 atifags mad.
nzigen31 1 year ago
@nzigen31 I don't honestly understand how people can be nvidia or amd fanboys. Don't you realise that competition is good, and by siding with just 'one side' you're only really hurting yourself?
3kliksphilip 1 year ago 5
@3kliksphilip Not if it's with the best side! HEYOOOO!!
WankstaWOW 1 year ago 5
@WankstaWOW Keep telling yourself that. Ignorance is bliss, after all.
3kliksphilip 1 year ago 3
@3kliksphilip Yeah of course that's true, but how do you do it? You certainly arent buying BOTH a Nvidia and a ATI card every 2 years are you?? You gotta pick a side. But after all it's good that both sides exist.
hardstyle905 11 months ago
@hardstyle905 You pick a card, it doesn't mean you then have to rant about how terrible the other ones are. The cards I've bought for my PC so far have been...
Ati Radeon 64 mb
Geforce 4200
Ati 9600 xt
Geforce 8800 GTS
ATI 4850
I'd consider myself fairly neutral when it comes to graphics cards, but the one thing that makes me play devils advocate is when some ignorant fanboy expresses totally biased opinions on things they clearly know nothing about.
3kliksphilip 11 months ago
@3kliksphilip agree.
4Orange2Bud0 8 months ago
What be this witchcraft?
meztli432 1 year ago 8
GTX 580: Seriously? THIS is what Grandpa 8800 could handle?
GeekingForJesus 1 year ago
@GeekingForJesus This is physx dude, it has nothing to do with a GTX 580. You could run this on an 8800GT
mhaneline 1 year ago
@mhaneline I know. But I'm just joking about how the GTX 580 could probably run 35-40 times that amount of particles.
GeekingForJesus 1 year ago
can you use this in unity?
vlamer12 1 year ago
@vlamer12
I Wish...But It''s Possible just get Unity Technologies to waste acouple of Thousand Bucks on the system....But If they did I'd be over the moon.
MrSoapJet 1 year ago
Would this work on an ATI card?
vegasx9 1 year ago
@vegasx9 No
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
@3kliksphilip wtf? i have a ATI card and my water physics are even better then your and runs even more smoother and you say this water physics doesn't work on ATI card
cutieprincess161 1 year ago
@cutieprincess161 ATI cards are definitely CAPABLE of it, but since Nvidia holds the PhysX license and won't give it to ATI, they aren't officially allowed to support these sorts of demos, so the chances are that your CPU is doing the processing.
What are your PCs specs, and which demos are you running exactly? I didn't even know that you could run this demo without physx enabled.
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
@3kliksphilip he might have a 4000 sires card as the made a hade to enable it on these cards a while ago
roshawn1111 1 year ago
@roshawn1111 I remember something like this in the distant past, though the closest I've found to it recently has just been cross-gpu support where you can use one nvidia and one ati card, and use the nvidia card as a physics processor.
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
@3kliksphilip yeah i think they banned it with 1 of the drivers but you still can run it off a 4000 card.
roshawn1111 1 year ago
@roshawn1111 How? I'm on a 4850 right now and can't.
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
that is not water. that is goo.. water flows fatster.
hvglaser 1 year ago
this looks more like sand physics
Remasik96 1 year ago 2
@Remasik96 ...or a oil, pearls and slimes demo.
Clavera 1 year ago
Why do people ask for the song name?
Its right there under the description:
Various Artists - The Dark Empire (Short Edit)
Download This Song: eMusic AmazonMP3 iTunes
wildfire9012 1 year ago 2
I heard this same song in a 2012 video.
EasterGhost 1 year ago
looks like slime
ianf183 1 year ago
where do you get this game?
myrandomnoob 1 year ago
@myrandomnoob Sigh
3kliksphilip 1 year ago 113
@myrandomnoob lol you must be the most retarded person i have ever seen
theone7789 1 year ago
@myrandomnoob facepalm
SakoresDark 1 year ago
@myrandomnoob YOU FAILED !
GabMesIRT 1 year ago
@myrandomnoob Good job. You made me facepalm so hard I broke my nose.
DrunkenWaffle 7 months ago
song name ?
watch955 1 year ago
I WAITED 1:30 MINUTES TO WATER DROP DOWN FROM THAT THING AND THEN U SHOW ME IT DOESNT HAVE HOLE IN IT??? ARGGGG
Voiveikkuli 1 year ago
why dont u show your fps? xd
TakerVC 1 year ago
@TakerVC Why don't I show the polygons? Or my desktop? Or my face in this video? Because it isn't relevant.
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
@3kliksphilip I said that cause we want to see fluid physics... not a lagged test U_U
TakerVC 1 year ago
@TakerVC Back then, the geforce 8's were the most powerful there were. If you don't like it then tough.
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
@3kliksphilip try updating the drivers of ur graphic card..
TakerVC 1 year ago
@TakerVC Yes! Thank you SOOO much, updating the drivers updated my Geforce 8800 to the new Geforce 580 and now I can run it smoothly! THANKS!!!
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
@3kliksphilip ¬¬
TakerVC 1 year ago
@3kliksphilip you mean 480 ;) - 580 still ain't released
xXEnermaXx 1 year ago
@xXEnermaXx Wait, you ACTUALLY think that my graphics card became a 580 / 480 because of a driver update? The internet doesn't understand sarcasm...
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
@3kliksphilip
ah now i understand :P ^^ *rofl* sry didn't say anything ;)
xXEnermaXx 1 year ago
@grantamiles ha, you watch husky videos too =]
deepwaterDW 1 year ago
is that a very new version of phun?
supahpietah 1 year ago
i like ati more :D
predatortheme 1 year ago
looks liek tis going in slomo
XDjohanmystXD 1 year ago
I fucking love playing with this.
Germanboy567 1 year ago
how do u change it to HW i have SW
flightsimx65 1 year ago
@flightsimx65 Hardware? I guess you'll need a supported Nvidia graphics card and the right drivers installed.
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
@3kliksphilip i have 8400gs 512 mb i installed physx and the wright driver
flightsimx65 1 year ago
@flightsimx65 In that case, I don't know why it isn't working
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
@flightsimx65 I think the PhysX code has been revised so that it requires more than 32sp to run HW accelerated PhysX where that 8400gs only has 16.
94XJ 1 year ago
@flightsimx65 Should've looked before posting but yes, the G86 in on your 8400gs only has 16 stream processors and PhysX requires a minimum of 32 (which is still pretty low and not recommended to run the graphics and PhysX on simultaneously)
From the 9.09.0814 drivers (and still continued till now)
"Supports NVIDIA PhysX acceleration on all GeForce 8-series, 9-series, 100-series and 200-series GPUs with a minimum of 256MB dedicated graphics memory and 32 processor cores (stream processors)."
94XJ 1 year ago
@94XJ wat if i overcolckit
flightsimx65 1 year ago
@flightsimx65 What, by like... 5%?
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
@flightsimx65 That won't do it. You wouldn't be able to get anywhere near the performance of 32sp (which is still pretty low) out of the g86 you have. It's pretty much like trying to get the same multi-threaded performance from a dual core as a quad core by overclocking...when overclocking is quite limited.
For full hardware physx hardware acceleration you need an 8600gt/9500gt minimum. A gt220 would be as low as you can go for the next step up but quite frankly you'd want more for gaming.
94XJ 1 year ago
@flightsimx65 Hey man...check out geeks (dot) com. They've got a GT220 which has 48sp and would be enough for some hardware decoded physx (still kinda low) but it's only $35.
There's also a GT240 (twice as powerful!) that's $70 on newegg and you get a $30 card for a mail in rebate.
94XJ 1 year ago
@94XJ I have to say, I don't feel it's worth getting an nvidia card just for Physx. They're screwing up PC gaming by not allowing others to use Physx (so no game wants to support it properly), and at the moment they kind of suck compared to ATI / AMD.
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
@3kliksphilip PhysX was developed by Agea and bought buy NVIDIA...why would they make it run on ATI cards? And right now the GTX480 is the fastest single gpu card out there and the GTX460 is the best bang for your buck for gaming. ATI has nothing in the $200 price range to compete with the GTX460.
The only gripe about the 480 is power consumption. As far as heat goes, mine never goes above 75C which is ice cold compared to what my old GX2 did.
94XJ 1 year ago
@94XJ The problem with PhysX is that it will never become a staple component in modern games, because by doing so, developers would be preventing over half the PC gamers out there from playing their games. The 480 is very power hungry and hot, and although it may be the fastest single GPU out there, you can get a faster ATI 5970 for the same price. The 460 seems to be much better than ATI's equivilent. And it had better be, with ATI's 6000 series just around the corner...
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
@94XJ is it pci or pciE cuz i have pci and my dad insnt gonna spend any money on this pice of crap unless its my money i have a credit card i cant actavaite it i cant use it so i guess ill have to get it on my own
flightsimx65 1 year ago
@flightsimx65 I doubt your GPU slot is PCI, PCI is ancient. AGP is newer than that and even that was outdated 5 years ago. If you have a 8400 GS then it will be a PCI-E card. I'm sure it will be fine, to make sure, take the side of your PC off and take the graphics card out, just to prove you can. Then insert the new one. Don't forget to plug the extra power connectors in, if you get a more powerful card!
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
@3kliksphilip yes it is and this pice of crap is 80 bucks 9200 is my goal
flightsimx65 1 year ago
THE ALL SEEING EYE! :o
compound32 1 year ago
do you think portal 2 has dynamic fluid stuff? cause it sure looks like it with the goo in the excursion funnel
Eldoctor888 1 year ago
@Eldoctor888 I doubt it retains mass and stuff, and it simply turns into a sprite when it hits a surface. But while it's in the air it seems to act a bit like a fluid. In my opinion it doesn't count as proper real-time water.
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
@3kliksphilip i agree but im suprised that the source engine can hold under all that stress, valves been working hard making it look real
Eldoctor888 1 year ago
@3kliksphilip well it really is just a prop with bones that uses an animation like a combine door but more bones and more complex
gmodwirehelp 1 year ago
@gmodwirehelp Right, so the water's a door but with more bones.
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
@3kliksphilip basicly yes
gmodwirehelp 1 year ago
GTA San Andreas is play and withOUT Nvidia i have Intel Graphics and its play very good i realy enjoy it
iWanTtoPlay100 1 year ago
@iWanTtoPlay100 Good for you. Though it's an old game, and integrated graphics have become powerful enough to run a game like that. A dedicated graphics card will still run it a lot better.
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
Whit alitle more speed to the water that should look realistic enough.
steamempire 1 year ago
Damn it i want PhysX but i have an ATI GPU
ReeLineStudios 1 year ago
Nice screensaver, oh...your pc burnt down including the room it was in.
silenceyouidiot 1 year ago
doesnt look so fluid with so few particles. still look like solid particles even when in "liquid mode"
GraveUypo 1 year ago
of beautiful but they never use it in games
ARIELSHTERN 1 year ago
That's not liquid. That's a lot of particles with a gloss effect.
Vexe 1 year ago
@Vexe You see levels in computer games? They're not proper places. They're just a load of polygons and textures.
3kliksphilip 1 year ago 2
@Vexe 3kliksphilip, +10000 and vexe, you saw oceans in 3d movie??? they are not oceans, they are PaRtIcLeS! lawl
mat967 1 year ago
@mat967 Exactly. Also, you see those oceans in real life? They're made of billions of tiny particles too.
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
@3kliksphilip i think just the up layer is from particals buth under water is just a ... ye ... on san andreas (GTA) if you swim under a script wil start your screen is blue ... and on GTA 4 its the same buth there he not swim if it all was particals it would be a bilion : D and thats to much
rollhunter 1 year ago
@rollhunter GTA 4 doesn't have this sort of thing, it simply has a moving surface to the water, much like crysis. I can't remember if you can alter the ripples in GTA 4, but if you could, then it would only be the surface of the water that changes.
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
@3kliksphilip
hahaha nice man
Zacq768 1 year ago
how about 9600 gt 1 gb ? will it lag ?
MegaStreetjumper 1 year ago
@MegaStreetjumper 3-5 fps?? yes, i belive so.
FailBox360pwns 1 year ago
@CTAT98 Turn off your sound, then
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
Those physics aren't realistic at all, the water looks like PVA glue lol.
filippo333 1 year ago
@filippo333 You're missing the point of the video
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
@3kliksphilip Yer sorry I misread the title :L lol
filippo333 1 year ago
@filippo333 hence "fluid" physics
NikoPDR 1 year ago
@filippo333
That's because it's not water, it"s some kind of slime. You can see the slim trail, check out the part when it's green. there are other Nvidia demos with water and it's well done. no reason it wouldn't be the case here as well.
Slashouts 1 year ago
how bout my gts 250?? would it lagz
quangluu96 1 year ago
@quangluu96 It would be the same as my PC, since it's the same.
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
Cool
Klespyrio 1 year ago
well, I would not like to programm this
loveSc7 1 year ago
Looks good but does it works?
Stalkerdim 1 year ago
you could just sit at home with a water bottle and do this... lol and save a few hundred dollars.
GrantAmileS 1 year ago
@GrantAmileS You could just go out into the streets and shoot people with a gun instead of buying a computer game.
3kliksphilip 1 year ago 39
@3kliksphilip Water physics gun? lol
GrantAmileS 1 year ago
@3kliksphilip Yeah... but a gun is more expensive than a computer game :/
WEKS87 1 year ago
@WEKS87 Depends who you know ;)
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
@3kliksphilip your comments are ridiculous.
johnnymokmok 1 year ago
@johnnymokmok Watch out yo or I'll cap yer ass innit BIATCH
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
@3kliksphilip whole point of a game is that you can do it over and over and over
ColacX 1 year ago
WATH IS THIS SONG???? WATh the songs name????
TMCsyforceHUN 1 year ago
@TMCsyforceHUN It gives you the download link on itunes, just below this video
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
i dont like reading the comments in these videos coz people are complaining about their computers that are a hell of lot better than my 10 year old computer
stickyle 1 year ago
28-31 FPS with 9800 GT overclocked ;)
MrHaxx1 1 year ago
Does a (crappy) nVidia GeForce 8600GT have the PhysX gpu too??? (because I have one somewhere...)
EliaForce1984ita 1 year ago
@EliaForce1984ita I think that it does. But it's a lot slower than the 8800.
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
@3kliksphilip I'm using the 8600 GT right now... same demo as you used in the video. Result: LAG LIKE 5 or 10 FPS!!!
Which card do you suggest me to have PERFECT, and I mean PERFECT PhysX and games? The 8800, the 9800 or the new GTX 480 ??? :P
EliaForce1984ita 1 year ago
@EliaForce1984ita There aren't many games with physx in any way, and it certainly won't affect the gameplay at all. Most games will be built for the lowest common denominator, so the 8800 should do. But the best one to get at the moment is probably the Geforce 260. In my opinion it's not a good time to buy a graphics card, you should see some major drops in prices soon, provided that Nvidia's 400 series is able to be that competitive.
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
now lets see it process an entire ocean ;)
its cool though
ijakz 1 year ago 26
@ijakz the reason why no game in the world has water physics is because there is toooo much sruff,its like puttting 100000000 props in a game infront of u.10000000 because the water physics has to be separated into the tiniest piece posssible.
ronaldli5 1 year ago 4
@ronaldli5 Look up Hydrophobia
3kliksphilip 1 year ago 2
@ronaldli5 Ever heard of hydrophobia?
supersoulllama 1 year ago
@ronaldli5
Not really
GMod news: (old) The dynamic water!
It does the same as normal water and it aint laggy at all!
It's an effect with physics not props like most would code it to be
patrickQ9 1 year ago
@ijakz It could try if it was using mesh-surface water but otherwise I think the card(s) trying to simulate it would turn into a black-hole and suck up the earth. xD
Trampboy931 1 year ago
@ijakz Iagine the lag on online games if it had an entire ocean with like 20 people shooting it and changing it O.O
blingdog15 1 year ago
combine this with havoks engine and euphoria and you got 1 awesome game in the making
darthjaiz 1 year ago 9
As much as I love nvidia, their fluid physics need work a little bit. The water spews in little balls, which I've never seen liquid do before besides drops, which when there's a fixated amount of water at that amount, it shouldn't do that
But other than that, it looks great!
halo3jocky 1 year ago
Real life isn't made out of polygons and skin isn't just a bumpmapped texture. Computers do things differently to real life. And they'll only improve with time.
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
@halo3jocky That's just the level of detail. You can't render and animate every water molecule like it is in real life. More smaller "water balls" would decrease performance.
This is animated and rendered in Real Time.
Kadda67 1 year ago
meh I like ati because it seems like the graphics are the same for a cheaper price...but then again cheaper normally implies made in china
elronman 1 year ago 2
The two different brands take in turns to be the best. ATI is ahead at the moment.
3kliksphilip 1 year ago
I have an ATI 4850 1GB DDR3 and a 9800 GTX runs better in almost all games. I wish I had an NVidia, because almost all games are (sadly) optimised for the green giant's cards. At least we have the 59xx series, which are almost half as powerful again as Nvidia's new 470 and 480 GTX cards, but NVidia's new-ish and new cards that support DirectX 11 natively make tesselation MUCH lighter on the framerate than ATI cards that support Directx 11 natively too. Oh well, I know what I want for xmas :D
MrEvilSkittles 1 year ago