Are Gaming Consoles Solving PDEs for Realistic Animations?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around whether gaming consoles utilize numerical solutions to partial differential equations (PDEs) with complex boundary conditions to create realistic animations in video games. Participants explore the relationship between computational physics and video game graphics, particularly in the context of fluid dynamics and particle movement.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that gaming consoles may be solving PDEs to create animations, noting the computational demands of simulating phenomena like a vibrating string.
  • Another participant expresses skepticism, arguing that video games often use algorithms that prioritize visual appeal over accurate physical simulation, referring to this as "sophisticated cheating."
  • Several participants mention specific physics engines, such as PhysX, which claim to incorporate real-life physical computations for simulating various effects in games.
  • There is a discussion about the nature of boundary conditions in PDEs, with one participant clarifying that they meant a variety of conditions influenced by user input rather than obscure ones.
  • One participant points out that while gaming hardware benefits from advancements in numerical computing, the objectives of video game simulations differ significantly from those in engineering simulations, which prioritize accuracy over real-time performance.
  • Another participant shares their experience with long-duration simulations in molecular dynamics, expressing interest in transitioning to classical simulations like fluid flow.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the extent to which gaming consoles solve PDEs for realistic animations. Some believe that while there are elements of real physics involved, many techniques prioritize visual fidelity over strict physical accuracy. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the specific methods used in gaming versus engineering simulations.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the differences in objectives between gaming graphics and engineering simulations, highlighting that real-time performance is often prioritized in games, while engineering simulations focus on accuracy, which may require extensive computation time.

cytochrome
Messages
163
Reaction score
3
I was numerically solving the wave equation earlier just to produce a simple illustration of a vibrating string and my computer was working pretty hard. Then I realized how many video games nowadays have such awesome graphics with things like water, waves, motion in general, etc... Are these consoles numerically solving PDEs with obscure boundary conditions to make these animations? If that's the case, it really makes you appreciate how powerful these consoles can be (especially when user input can alter the equations and boundary conditions and run so smoothly).My question: Are gaming consoles numerically solving PDEs with obscure boundary conditions to make animations?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
cytochrome said:
My question: Are gaming consoles numerically solving PDEs with obscure boundary conditions to make animations?

Highly doubtful. As far as I am aware in most cases they don't simulate real water behavior, they rather use algorithms that make the surface "look good". Sophisticated cheating in other words.

See if this page: http://vterrain.org/Water/ doesn't help.
 
Last edited:
there was this video in which they used what they call " real physics engine "
i then went on to read more about this engine , it claims that it uses real-life physical computations to compute the movement of particles like dust , bullets and whatsoever , i don't remember the name of the video
but it was for one of UnReal games * no pun its just the name of the game :p *
also check this PhysX engine
to quote wikipedia
" It supports rigid body dynamics, soft body dynamics, ragdolls and character controllers, vehicle dynamics, volumetric fluid simulation and cloth simulation including tearing and pressurized cloth. "
 
B4ssHunter said:
there was this video in which they used what they call " real physics engine "
i then went on to read more about this engine , it claims that it uses real-life physical computations to compute the movement of particles like dust , bullets and whatsoever , i don't remember the name of the video
but it was for one of UnReal games * no pun its just the name of the game :p *
also check this PhysX engine
to quote wikipedia
" It supports rigid body dynamics, soft body dynamics, ragdolls and character controllers, vehicle dynamics, volumetric fluid simulation and cloth simulation including tearing and pressurized cloth. "


Yes that's what I was looking for. That is truly amazing if you ask me... I wonder if physicists and engineers working in computational mechanics realize that their work is also being used in video games? LOL...
 
No, they're totally oblivious to such things.

I'm curious as to what you mean by 'PDEs with obscure boundary conditions'. Most of the PDEs describing fluid flow and such have relatively simple and quite common boundary conditions.
 
SteamKing said:
No, they're totally oblivious to such things.

I'm curious as to what you mean by 'PDEs with obscure boundary conditions'. Most of the PDEs describing fluid flow and such have relatively simple and quite common boundary conditions.

Obscure was the wrong word, I meant seemingly random or a wide variety of boundary conditions. When you have user input and there's a bunch of possibilities you can get a wide array of boundary conditions. Sorry for the misuse of that word, I can't think of any boundary value problems that would arise in a videogame that aren't capable of being solved numerically...
 
SteamKing said:
No, they're totally oblivious to such things.

Not quite oblivious. A lot of "serous" numerical computing is taking a ride on the back of the hardware developed for mass-market computer gaming (e.g. the large scale parallel processing hardware in graphics cards), and the low hardware costs that come from large production runs.

But the objectives are very different even if the hardware and even some of the numerical methods are the same. A video game animation has to look right (or at least, not look too wrong) when it is computed in real time. And if it doesn't look quite right, adding some smoke, flames, and/or sound effects can easily ihide that fact!. An engineering simulation has to be right, not just look pretty, but getting answers in real time is usually irrelevant. At work, we use simulations that run for hundreds of hours, to compute what happens to something in a few milliseconds.
 
AlephZero said:
At work, we use simulations that run for hundreds of hours, to compute what happens to something in a few milliseconds.

I do the same thing with molecular dynamics simulations. It takes weeks to get a few nanoseconds in real time. I'd like to get into more classical simulations (even though molecular dynamics is primarily classical mechanics...) like fluid flow or vibrations.

Out of curiosity, what do you do?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 93 ·
4
Replies
93
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K