5 ms·
the brain and eyes are massively parallel devices with stochastic ray tracing simulated for free. If you can brute-force raycasts without paying the computatio
by xeonmc 3y ago
the brain and eyes are massively parallel devices with stochastic ray tracing simulated for free.
If you can brute-force raycasts without paying the computational burden then collision is an embarrassingly parallel problem.
On the other hand, calculating collision on a computer is akin to a blind man feeling his way through a scene carefully checking against every object.
The blind man has to simulate his own raytracing with his hands, unless he can perform echolocation which once again is basically lower-resolution raytracing.
It does make me wonder though whether newer generation GPU focused on raytracing could finally bring hardware acceleration to collision?
- guitarlimeo 3y agoThis is a nice analogy, never thought of it that way but it makes sense!
- battesonb 3y agoWe somewhat have this with object picking. You can render objects with unique IDs to a framebuffer, so it's all in parallel. Then you just query the buffer at your mouse coordinates. Of course you lose some properties of the object and it's on a one frame delay. There's the added complexity of collision response, working in 3-dimensions, etc. But, to the point of just "eyeballing" collision, we can actually parallelize it!
- charcircuit 3y ago>and it's on a one frame delay Reading a texture from the GPU can take more than one frame.
- ReleaseCandidat 3y ago> could finally bring hardware acceleration to collision Physx has collision detection.
- hypercube33 3y agoIs it possible to use ray tracer hardware to say raytrace polygone vertices and use that for fast collision?