Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

high-end graphics engine


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
6 replies to this topic

#1 faculaganymede   Members   -  Reputation: 145

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 03 January 2012 - 06:38 PM

Does anyone know of a computer system/graphics card that can process a million polygons and produce DVI output at 1024x1024 pixels at 200Hz frame rate? Posted ImagePosted Image


Thanks!

Sponsor:

#2 Crowley99   Members   -  Reputation: 178

Like
1Likes
Like

Posted 03 January 2012 - 08:01 PM

The exact answer largely depends on the number of attributes per triangle, the average size of the triangles and your pixel complexity (and a gaziliion other things). 200hz at 1M triangles is 200million triangles/sec, which is easy for any high end card today. The rates for geometry are in the 1+Billion/s range (up to 2+Billion/s if you include Tesselation) on something like a GTX580.

#3 faculaganymede   Members   -  Reputation: 145

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 03 January 2012 - 10:02 PM

Thanks for your reply, Crowley99! The attributes that will be of main concern are polygon color, material, textures (per pixel processing); may need to update all 1million polygons + several texture images at each frame. Also need to simulate fog, smoke, explosion, dust effects... I have to confirm that such is achievable with the high-end engines, DVI output 1024x1024 at 200Hz frame rate. Posted Image Posted Image
If anyone has experience or know a system that can handle these requirements, please let me know. Thanks! Posted Image

#4 L. Spiro   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 13575

Like
1Likes
Like

Posted 03 January 2012 - 11:18 PM

While it is certainly possible, you need to also consider how you manage all of these particles, objects, etc.
You will need to sort by shaders, textures, and depth from view. You will need a fast way to update particles (on the GPU is one way) and cull objects from view (unless this is for a very specific purpose).

If the objects all use the same attributes you don’t need to do much shader swapping.

Your CPU will have some work to do as well.

However my old engine gave me 240,000,000 triangles per second and it was using the slower fixed-function pipeline and a CPU and GPU that are 2 years old.
With newer cards (many of which are over twice as fast as mine) and using shaders efficiently, there is no reason not to expect that you will be able to get far more than 200,000,000 triangles per second, especially on such a low resolution.


L. Spiro
It is amazing how often people try to be unique, and yet they are always trying to make others be like them. - L. Spiro 2011
I spent most of my life learning the courage it takes to go out and get what I want. Now that I have it, I am not sure exactly what it is that I want. - L. Spiro 2013
I went to my local Subway once to find some guy yelling at the staff. When someone finally came to take my order and asked, “May I help you?”, I replied, “Yeah, I’ll have one asshole to go.”
L. Spiro Engine: http://lspiroengine.com
L. Spiro Engine Forums: http://lspiroengine.com/forums

#5 Crowley99   Members   -  Reputation: 178

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 03 January 2012 - 11:25 PM

500 000 vertices * (12byte pos + 4byte uv + 4byte packed normal + 4 byte packed tangent + 4 byte material data (assuming nothing to fancy here) + 4 for for "mystery attribute" ) = ~16 MB/frame

Assuming triangle:vertex ratio is on average is 2:1, 16MB/frame is what is neede for 1m triangles.

=> 200*16 = ~3GB/s bandwidth. This is roughly 1/2 of what PCIE Gen2 is capable of, bit this is still a bit on the high side - even though the theory pans out, pulling geometry from system memory doesn't always reach peak performance (not to mention that things like particules, dynamic textures, etc. may also be pulled from system memory, and may be impacted similarly).

My suggestion would be to keep the raw data on the GPU and use shaders to modify them from a base representation at run-time or incrementally via stream out or UAVs.

#6 Vorel512   Members   -  Reputation: 130

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 04 January 2012 - 01:04 AM

I would like to add a simple opinion.
Why would you like 200Mhz frame rate? 30 frames / sec needed for smooth "movement". That is about 30 Mhz. LCD monitors usually use 75Mhz, they will never run on 200Mhz, even if your program say so (37.5% of the frames will be displayed).

#7 bzroom   Members   -  Reputation: 646

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 04 January 2012 - 02:51 AM

i think you mean "hz" not "Mhz." There is no GPU that i know of that runs frames on the "Mhz" level. You're talking about 30,000,000 frames per second. Which is MUCH more than 30 frames per second. (hz means "cycles per second")

I'm assuming that LCD's are refreshing at an interval of 60hz in the United states. Besides the whole mega, not mega thing, your post is very accurate.

#8 Vorel512   Members   -  Reputation: 130

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 05 January 2012 - 02:54 AM

Yeah, sorry my bad. :D

#9 Krypt0n   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 2565

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 05 January 2012 - 07:19 AM

DVI output at 1024x1024 pixels at 200Hz frame rate?

1024x1024 pixel at 32bit at 200Hz are about 6.7GBit/s, DVI is specified for 4.9GBit/s.
You might be not able to push that, I suggets you'll use dual-dvi oder hdmi to overcome that limit.
1Mio tri/frame actually means you have mostly 1pixel sized triangles, is that really needed? there are usually other ways to get this detail without a noticeable quality loss.

#10 Krohm   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 3117

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 06 January 2012 - 02:54 AM

In my experience, going over 120-140 hz is going to be really hard no matter what. Drivers appear to be just throttling down after a certain point. I'd consider to review this requirement.




Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS