| raytracing test by Minimalanimal [web] | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|||||||
|
popularity : 60% |
|||||||
alltime top: #4907 |
|
|||||||
added on the 2006-11-12 01:13:31 by texel  |
||||||||
popularity helper
comments
This is just a test of my raytracer. It should be faster with up to 4 cores. In two resolutions, for slow computers
added on the 2006-11-12 01:14:57 by texel
Where is the noise?!!! ;)
not bad, well optimised. try texturing next time and better scenes to test it. good work.
Nice!!
Very impressive!
What do you think´bout it Preacher?
What do you think´bout it Preacher?
picture looks very good!
Nice work, even 1024 runs fine here. It seems you are ray-bouncing (1 reflected ray) with no shadows. With a limited depth of stack I guess a GPU raytracer would be easy to write and would be faster ??? Less compatible though.
Looks nice.
nice
nice
Wow! Really good. :)
so sweet
First scene prod to push my pc over 90% cpu usage! Runs pretty nicely at 1024 here. Obviously, major suckage as a demo, but thumb up for the code. Now make something good with it :D
Not work
BiTL, could you write your system configuration? Thanks.
Wow, it's preety fast for the ammount of spheres/reflections and resolution!
impressive!
yep
Pretty. Although this is not an intro, and a proper colorscheme would make it a lot nicer.
cool and fast, and works on my "shitty 3d-card"
Seems good, stay on.
well done
kewl
code
cool : now do a proper intro
It's just a silent routine.
reet racen!!
is this multi-threaded? is see some small differences between CPU1 and CPU2 usage in the windows task manager (P4 Hyper-threading).
is this multi-threaded? is see some small differences between CPU1 and CPU2 usage in the windows task manager (P4 Hyper-threading).
earx, I suppose differences are due buffer updating and some little things that are not done multi-threaded. Anyway I've only tested it on my computer wich is a Pentium D (dual core) at 3 ghz every core. Closing all programs (including messenger and that), I can hardly see any difference in core usage (it looks as being less than 1% of difference in my computer).
And well, yes, it is multi-threaded. I've divided the work in four threads, so it could use the coming soon quadcores. I've not added more threads because in any quadcore it should be fast enough to get more than 60 fps
And well, yes, it is multi-threaded. I've divided the work in four threads, so it could use the coming soon quadcores. I've not added more threads because in any quadcore it should be fast enough to get more than 60 fps
what i see on prod window is not so cool, what i see in task manager is.
raytracing is ok for speed testing but what i long for is something innovative. gpu cores can also be exploited, not necessarily for strict rendering.
kudos for experimenting anyway :)
raytracing is ok for speed testing but what i long for is something innovative. gpu cores can also be exploited, not necessarily for strict rendering.
kudos for experimenting anyway :)
Well done! And xmas-ish. :D
Did not work on 3 machines tested.
TS, could you post the machines you used and configuration!?
hope to see an intro featuring this rt soon
Very nice! Very well optimized!
The window doesn't close on my computer :|
Like a 3D version of link me beauiful \o/
He's got balls ... and he's not afraid to use them ... :-X
Optimised !
Runs great!. Q6660.
1024: 25+ fps all the way
640: 40+ fps all the way
spex: demobox vista³²
only downside: had to close it via taskmanager including "program doesnt work anymore,wanna close?", bitching a lot so to say, but thats vista !
640: 40+ fps all the way
spex: demobox vista³²
only downside: had to close it via taskmanager including "program doesnt work anymore,wanna close?", bitching a lot so to say, but thats vista !
cOcOOn, did you tried to press ESC? I have had the same problem now, and it is just that the X to close is not enabled... just shitty code, sorry.
About the fps, I've been taking a look again of the code, and it have some silly unoptimized things... I believe I can make it a bit faster (10-20% maybe). I will try any day to do it...
About the fps, I've been taking a look again of the code, and it have some silly unoptimized things... I believe I can make it a bit faster (10-20% maybe). I will try any day to do it...
Yeah, i like the idea...
hehe, obviously NOT... i´m crinklering right now and didnt want to fuck sth up, haha.
i hope we meet once ;) GPU does the job very fast !
i hope we meet once ;) GPU does the job very fast !
WOW, very nice!
it's just a simple raytracer...
trasor de raze
Why are we thumbing up single-parters with no sound and no design? Make a proper intro with this, then we'll see
meh
meh
tt_o
runs smoothly on a 1.9ghz turion x2
submit changes
if this prod is a fake, some info is false or the download link is broken,
do not post about it in the comments, it will get lost.
instead, click here !