3 ms·

otoy was more open earlier; they've since locked it down a bit, but with some googling you can dig it out (eg: http://raytracey.blogspot.com/2008/08/otoy-transf

by frig 17y ago

otoy was more open earlier; they've since locked it down a bit, but with some googling you can dig it out (eg: http://raytracey.blogspot.com/2008/08/otoy-transformers-and-ray-tracing.html http://raytracey.blogspot.com/2008/08/otoy-transformers-and-... , links-> http://ompf.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=882 http://ompf.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=882 ). In earlier interviews Urbach spoke about a very fast gpu-assisted transform from polygon meshes -> voxels for use in their raytracer (and some hybrid meshes); the use of such a thing for making demo videos should be pretty obvious. The video compression aspect is also interesting and probably works as you say; the point of raytracing isn't that it's faster per-se but that not having to keep transforming your scene data means you can more-easily share scene data between multiple simultaneous users on the same box (loosely: you don't need space for N translated copies of the scene data if you have N simultaneous users).

greendestiny 17y ago
I had read about their stuff a while ago, I'm not sure if thats what they are using in this example though. I don't know that I believe that the voxel representation would be a win without a sufficiently large N on a single computer, which I doubt is really doable. N copies of the transformed data is still not that much data compared to rendering it.
- frig 17y ago
  You'd naively calculate per-player requirements at 720p to be 1,000,000 pixels/frame x 30 frames/sec x 10x rays/pixel == per-player you need 3 giga-rays / sec (+ video compression hardware). Maybe the video compression blurs stuff enough that you get pseudo-aa for free, letting you chop some of that 10x off. Either way, their 'fusion render cloud' is supposed to be targeting the petaflop range, and @ an extremely generous 1ray = 1flop calculation (bear with me) you'd be able to handle ~333,333 simultaneous players (720p frames) @ 1 petaflop (and with more-realistic flops-per-ray you're looking @ a lot fewer). You'd definitely need a breakthrough.

by frig 17y ago

greendestiny 17y ago

I had read about their stuff a while ago, I'm not sure if thats what they are using in this example though. I don't know that I believe that the voxel representation would be a win without a sufficiently large N on a single computer, which I doubt is really doable. N copies of the transformed data is still not that much data compared to rendering it.

frig 17y ago
You'd naively calculate per-player requirements at 720p to be 1,000,000 pixels/frame x 30 frames/sec x 10x rays/pixel == per-player you need 3 giga-rays / sec (+ video compression hardware). Maybe the video compression blurs stuff enough that you get pseudo-aa for free, letting you chop some of that 10x off. Either way, their 'fusion render cloud' is supposed to be targeting the petaflop range, and @ an extremely generous 1ray = 1flop calculation (bear with me) you'd be able to handle ~333,333 simultaneous players (720p frames) @ 1 petaflop (and with more-realistic flops-per-ray you're looking @ a lot fewer). You'd definitely need a breakthrough.