CUDA Accelerated Particle Engine in OpenGL - 12 Million Particles

Discussion in 'Videocards vs General Purpose - NVIDIA Ageia PhysX' started by ricardonuno1980, Aug 31, 2010.

  1. ricardonuno1980

    ricardonuno1980 Banned

    Messages:
    4,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX 780Ti Classified :D
    ok. I got 54fps while the particles already are stopped. and did you get 55fps!?! :)
    you want to record this demo by "fraps" but this program may drop performance.

    note: sorry for bad english. ;)
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2010
  2. Arctucas

    Arctucas Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,137
    Likes Received:
    44
    GPU:
    eVGA RTX2080 FTW3
    Yes, 55fps when the particles stop.
     
  3. Mohammad.Taheri

    Mohammad.Taheri Master Guru

    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    MSI GTX1070TI Nuke
    Gtx260 sp216

    Particles: 1600
    Geforce GTX260 SP216 @ 720MHz Core & 1150MHz Memory Clock
    45fps
    Particles: 2600
    28.5 fps
    Particles: 3600
    21fps
    Particles: 4096 max particles
    5.3fps
     
  4. Mohammad.Taheri

    Mohammad.Taheri Master Guru

    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    MSI GTX1070TI Nuke
    Particles: 1600
    47.5 FPS
    with 750MHz core clock
     

  5. ricardonuno1980

    ricardonuno1980 Banned

    Messages:
    4,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX 780Ti Classified :D
    ok. I got 84 fps and you 55 fps. these performances are not average but yes, its are "current". ;)
     
  6. ricardonuno1980

    ricardonuno1980 Banned

    Messages:
    4,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX 780Ti Classified :D
    minimum your performances - between "run to start" and before particles stopped? Or your performances (not minimum) when the particles are stopped?

    you try 4095 (maximum limit) because 4096 has problem = particles "freeze" = point on center of window.
     
  7. Arctucas

    Arctucas Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,137
    Likes Received:
    44
    GPU:
    eVGA RTX2080 FTW3
    I get:

    1600 (6,553,600 particles)=99fps

    2600 (10,649,600 particles) =61fps

    3600 (14,745,600 particles) =45fps

    4095 (16,773,120 particles) =39fps
     
  8. ricardonuno1980

    ricardonuno1980 Banned

    Messages:
    4,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX 780Ti Classified :D
    I mistaked. I got 84 fps - bad but yes I got 54 fps. sorry!! ;)
     
  9. ricardonuno1980

    ricardonuno1980 Banned

    Messages:
    4,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX 780Ti Classified :D
    aah! sorry. I got 54fps on win7 x64 but I get 84fps (geforce driver 263.09beta) on win xp-sp3 x86. therefore, xp is faster than win7. lool :)
     
  10. Moshing

    Moshing Master Guru

    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    EVGA GTX580 BOE@900core
    Not really. Win7 runs legacy code (Dx9) in emulation so scores are always lower then WinXP, but makes up for it with tricks that does more in Dx11 mode ;)
     

  11. ricardonuno1980

    ricardonuno1980 Banned

    Messages:
    4,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX 780Ti Classified :D
    this demo hasn't dx but yes OpenGL w/ CUDA. lol :)
     
  12. ricardonuno1980

    ricardonuno1980 Banned

    Messages:
    4,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX 780Ti Classified :D
    Almost 4 years later.... woww! I remember this! :D

    On new GTX 580@ref-stock with 344.65WHQL (HQ) and on i5-2500K@4.5GHz, I get 69 fps at 12.288M particles running Win 7 x64 SP1, 5 months after GTX 480 died. :)

    I will try XP... :)
     
    Last edited: Nov 27, 2014
  13. ricardonuno1980

    ricardonuno1980 Banned

    Messages:
    4,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX 780Ti Classified :D
    XP x86 SP3 running same specs with 344.48WHQL (see my previous message):
    3000 (12.288M): 97 fps
    4095 (16.8M): 71 fps

    :D

    Do not forget...!! - RULES: you get current performance when the particles are stopping. ;)

    NOTE: XP is faster than Win 7. ;)
     
    Last edited: Nov 27, 2014
  14. fellix

    fellix Member Guru

    Messages:
    198
    Likes Received:
    37
    GPU:
    KFA² GTX 1080 Ti
    Another good old GTX580 here.

    Driver -- 344.48; OS -- Win8 x64;

    3000 (12.288M): 69 FPS
    4095 (16.8M): 50 FPS

    p.s.: The CPU cores are loaded at 35% during the run, if that matters.
     
  15. ricardonuno1980

    ricardonuno1980 Banned

    Messages:
    4,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX 780Ti Classified :D
    I have same videocard but 3GB VRAM edition version. :D


    ---> Is Kepler (or newer GeForce) slower than Fermi in this sample?
     

  16. -Tj-

    -Tj- Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    17,237
    Likes Received:
    1,958
    GPU:
    Zotac GTX980Ti OC
    Its capped @ vsync 60fps, 1600 or 4095 particles..



    This is with 4095 particles

    Factory OC 1097mhz boost.
    [​IMG]
     
  17. ricardonuno1980

    ricardonuno1980 Banned

    Messages:
    4,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX 780Ti Classified :D
    Framerate capped!? lool No, should disable vsync in NVCP due to vsync enabled as default running OpenGL (more all samples/demos OpenGL). ;)
     
  18. -Tj-

    -Tj- Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    17,237
    Likes Received:
    1,958
    GPU:
    Zotac GTX980Ti OC
    1600: 185fps;
    1600: 202.7fps @ 1215mhz.

    4095: 74.5fps;
    4095: 81.5fps @ 1215mhz.


    But yes Im @ win8.1, winxp is history to me :p
     
  19. Extraordinary

    Extraordinary Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    19,562
    Likes Received:
    1,629
    GPU:
    ROG Strix 1080 OC
    How are we benchmarking this? If I leave it alone, I get higher FPS than if I move the particles around obviously...
     
  20. ricardonuno1980

    ricardonuno1980 Banned

    Messages:
    4,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GTX 780Ti Classified :D
    maximum framerate = particles stopping :)

    @-Tj-: Ok but XP isn't as faster as Win 8.1.
    Very likely Fermi is better optimized than Kepler or newer GeForce.
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2014

Share This Page