Test Visualization for Windows

Need help? We are here.
41

Glad you didn’t tell me to shut it! Thanks!

Yes. It’s deffo a GPU-maker “biz”. I shouldn’t name anyone, but NVIDIA is doing an amazing job, and as crazy at is may sound, they’re close to replicating QED (Quantum Electrodynamics) “reality”. The main problem with light as a natural phenomenon is the quantum field. Outside of Earth, light behaves in a most specific and awfully intricate way.

Once it reaches us, it has already been “filtered”, plus there’s only so much left for our senses to perceive. A full spectrum perception would drive us bats. It’s way too much for a brain to process. Hence my questioning…

What’s truly an issue is not so much the cost (dough, time, etc.). Quantum computing is not necessary, either. That said, most people were skeptical about “neural networks/engines” like those used by state-of-the-art CPUs… I trust you’ve seen the same as I do: there’s a global adoption and fast development of such a paradigm. One can question the validity (especially long-term one) of this, sure.

Spot on with AI, DLSS, etc. I still have to tell about Unreal Engine 4. It’s intended for high-FPS gaming (up to 120 fps), but it can be used for “regular” modeling and visualization without any slowdowns and/or losses or any kind. I’m not mastering such software, but from what I can tell, results are astounding, and weigh very few.
UE5 is out, but without an overly powerful setup, it’s not even worth mentioning.

Glad we tackled a few things already. You know, it’s great discussing thorny math-and-physics-infested issues with you. Open-minded and knowledgeable folks are rare. “Meeting” you is a blessing!
If you ever want to further discuss this matter (one never knows), I’m always there, and I’m not going to be rid of this topic anytime soon, hehe.

Well. Now that I’ve got this off my chest, I guess I could start with ideas (no physics insanity this time)! Let me gather my thoughts. A list can’t harm. It’s easier to go through.

42

hey there man, I would like to try beta version with visualization on windows to
Samsung laptop with touch screen, until now Shapr3d worked perfectly.
would like to use it on interior design, architecture, woodworking project and more.
have a nice day

43

Smooth sailing for me. I think it helps to have a workstation that is already CAD ready. Shapr3D loves Nvidia graphics cards.

1 Like
44

It’s a real pleasure to use the vizulaizations on PC because you can get more powerful GPUs. I just love where this program is growing into. Thumbs up devs.

3 Likes
45

The GPU doesn’t matter too much at this point (as long as it’s from the last 6 years or so) and as it’s somewhat decent, we are very CPU bottlenecked at the moment (which we are planning to improve). There are no specific optimalizations for any GPU vendor.

46

Definitely interesting topic.

I’m not sure about this, since there are people who are able to see a wider spectrum (there are even painters who really saw things in different color, therefore their special style), so I think it’s more about the evolution of our eye. Our brain should be able to handle the wider spectrum.

2 Likes
47

Really? I mean you are the devs, so you would know but… its just that I am seeing heightened GPU activity when I’m using materials

GPU
GPU992×674 78.8 KB

1 Like
48

It will use the GPU, it’s just that most of the time we can’t utilize them fully yet. E.g. you could see the GPU have 30-40% utilization, but you might still only get around 30 fps, instead of 60+, with higher GPU usage. This is one of the fields we will work on.

2 Likes
49

I’m not going to argue, but my holistic approach is again kicking in.
I only meant to say that: if the “average brain” had to process the full light spectrum and its peculiarities plus at the same time process all of its usually perceived earthly matters by all other senses and then some not much considered, like bone-conductivity of vibrations (we don’t only hear with cochlear systems), it would be quite a serious load. Not impossible, but seriously taxing.

A simplified and understandable way to put it all could be this one:

“Visible light is electromagnetic radiation
whose wavelength falls within the range to
which the human retina responds, i.e.,
between about 390 nm (violet light) and
740 nm (red). White light consists of a
roughly equal mixture of all visible
wavelengths, which can be separated to
yield the colors of the spectrum, as was
first demonstrated conclusively by
Newton. In the 20th century it has become
apparent that light consists of energy
quanta called photons that behave partly
like waves and partly like particles. The
velocity of light in a vacuum is 299,792 km
per second.”

My focus is on the “ partly
like waves and partly like particles” behavior of photons**.** We humans do already process that, but CPUs and GPUs have still a long way to go to even get close. It’s coming, but it’s not ready yet.

I’m not the smartest person on earth and I know it, but learning and sharing are things I couldn’t live without. It’s perhaps only cultural.
Once again, thanks for making time to discuss quite debatable and thorny topics/issues like this one! As I’m discussing with you and others, I trust we are always learning from each other. Now, making something out of it is another story!

1 Like
50

Just chiming in again since I stumbled upon this:

It’s quite interesting so far (there’s a huge amount of stuff to read, uff).
Obsessed, me? Not at all. :nerd_face:

It’s a strange coincidence, don’t you think? I’m rambling rumbling tumbling about QED, and what do I get as news from NVIDIA?

Looks promising, but it’s a bit early to invest anything in it. I’ll keep an eye on it.

1 Like