Slashdot Mirror
Add Another Core for Faster Graphics
Dzonatas writes "Need a reason for extra cores inside your box? How about faster graphics. Unlike traditional faster GPUs, raytraced graphics scale with extra cores. Brett Thomas writes in his article Parallel Worlds on Bit-Tech, 'But rather than working on that advancement, most of the commercial graphics industry has been intent on pushing raster-based graphics as far as they could go. Research has been slow in raytracing, whereas raster graphic research has continued to be milked for every approximate drop it closely resembles being worth. Of course, it is to be expected that current technology be pushed, and it was a bit of a pipe dream to think that the whole industry should redesign itself over raytracing.' A report by Intel about Ray Tracing shows that a single P4 3.2Ghz is capable of 100 million raysegs, which gives a comfortable 30fps. Intel further states 450 million raysegs is when it gets 'interesting.' Also, quad cores are dated to be available around the turn of the year. Would octacores bring us dual screen or separate right/left real-time raytraced 3D?"
Need a reason for extra cores inside your box? No :)
-- "Genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration" - TAE --
Lemme see, at this rate I'll need: 9 cores for the raytracer, 7 cores for the physics simulation, 5 for the AI, 3 for the OS, and of course
;)
One core to rule them all
One core to find them
One core to bring them all
And in the darkness bind them
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
"going after a fly with a bazooka" + raytracing in the same game? Hell, I'D BUY IT!!! :)
So the choice for php+sql might not be such a bad idea after all ;)
molmod.com - computing tips from a molecular modeling
Nah this was a long time ago. It may have been "cutting edge" research then, but nowadays the average 3rd grade advanced calculus student could figure it out in their head. All you have to do is take an arbitrary object in 3-space, chop the volume up into little 3D blocks that can be represented by known equations, test the incident field in those little blocks by integrating the interaction of the incident field with the material and shape of the block, and calculate the far-field by performing a fourier transform on the resulting solution matrix. Piece of cake, as long as you don't forget that the incident field at a given block is the sum of the incident plane wave and the scattered nearfields from the other blocks in the mesh :)
The problem with raytracing researchers is that they are incredibly myopic.
Yes but myopia would seem to be one of those problems that ray tracing would be much better at solving since it can handle refraction directly.
Karma police, I've given all I can, it's not enough, I've given all I can, but we're still on the payroll.
That's nothing. As long as you're running an Intel chip with a class-G phase varying containment field you should be able to reverse the polarity of the fluxing core to match that of the capaciting core, and then temporally render twice that much. That's assuming that you have a 1.21 Jiggawatt PS (I would personally recommend the 1.8 Jiggawatt unit from PC Power & Cooling just to some breathing room).
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain