@@Dayumms it tells the amount to light or darkness of a color in any game.. for example in Minecraft it upgrades graphics to a whole new level, by adding better shadows, lightning etc.
I actually wonder about that. With the quantum computer we already reached an absolute limit of how small processors can be. It’s only a matter of time before we reach more limits.
They remote into it with a desktop or laptop, or even a cellphone if they wanted to. I've ran programs on a supercomputer before. SSH for headless, and teamviewer or some other RDP for a desktop (if available)
Oh shit, yeah right. NVIDIA Scammed NASA as well. Good Luck Beta testing! Tbh I think they use Titan for such projects. This is one of the whole reasons a card called Titan exists. It's catered towards 3D Cad simulations and stuff.
When i remember that once we went pn the moon with 64MB database, and now we‘re at 150TB, i wonder how it will be in 20 years... if u got this recommended in 20years, you can answer me
This makes you realize how many skills you don´t know. I can only imagine what terrific amounts of time is needed to understand what the hell you are doing using that software correctly.
@@Frilabird see that's what i'm confused about. If I had not provided enough context to my original comment, it'd make a lot more sense if NASA was using 3090's in their supercomputers rather than 3070's.
@@perseagatuna5386 you can ad more vram to your Intel GPU you can do that by change it in the BIOS it Will decrese your ram integrated GPU vram is your ram
BUT THE REAL QUESTION IS. CAN IT RUN MINECRAFT WITH SHADERS AT 1000 CHUNKS? WHILE FLYING IN SPECTATOR MODE? I NEED ANSWERS edit: 1k chunks 1k likes. You've made it.
@@lothrican3825 But the thing is that having a supercomputer does not mean your programs run faster. Supercomputers can only work properly if a program is parallelized. Imagine it like a thousand individual computers. You can play Minecraft on all of them. And all of them can load a few thousand chunks. Meaning you can load a few million in total. But not a single computer can load all of those chunks on its own. And because of how the game is programmed, playing it on a supercomputer would be like forcing one of those computers to run on ridiculous settings while all the other ones do nothing at all. Btw since the single core performance (which matters for Minecraft) or a supercomputer is usually not as good, it would likely be even slower than the average gaming pc.
Nvidia: *Giving me a lecture on the whole sending humans to Mars thing.* Me: What does this have to do with a visualisation of 150 terabytes? Nvidia: Let me finish, prick.
The music used in this video is *Krosia* - *Lost* *Signal* , which was featured on the Dive EP. Go give Krosia some love over at krosia.bandcamp.com if NVIDIA ain't gonna
at hypersonic speeds (mach 5+) if you dont have that saucer (flat sphere) shape then your spaceship instantly burns up. From what i can remember from my research (done long time ago), the flat shape creates a shock barrier between the spacecraft and the hot ionised gasses (hot cuz ur hitting it at mach 5+)
Liked it! Any idea as to its predictive value? I mean does this provide 80% of needed data, or maybe even 95%? How much other research is eliminated. Looks really powerful.
Kid, its not your fortnite, these machines literally takes hundreds of gigs of memory at once and processes it in real time to give this simulation And its not a game that fps would matter anyway
I think these kinds of processing speeds are going to be normal in a few years. Everything is going so fast nowadays. Did you know you can store 250petaBytes so 250.000.000GB on 1 gramm if DNA. With this high density you could store all of youtubes storage for videos on just 4gramm of dna. Just imagine that. Its unbelieveble
I like how you can briefly see 3 nVidia logos on the screen at the same time during 3:13. Shill on, nVidia, monopolize that market until it's dead and can't support you anymore.
@@Pos3id0n. it's half way done, don't you watch the news, where NASA took decades from A to A2 elon musk does that in weeks which only makes it more faster. But if you want to go to Mars and plant a flag ONCE and never return there because Russians gave up to do so, you are welcome aboard the lost of money and pointless trip. And I know that they make a trailer that say wE aRe gOiNg tO ThE mOoN tO sTaY but they won't do much more then some scientific researchs, which are needed but they aren't truly passionate about it and don't have solid goals, but for elon it's do or die. And all I'm saying is that NASA should not use their own rockets, but just keep sending probs and rovers to conduct science and if they want to do manned missions they should use spacex. Not the first ticket to Mars but after starship is relatively safer, Because NASA'S way is expensive bla bla bla. And also help with the moon and Mars colony because they are progressing alright in it. And you say it safer to use tested tech, you have a good point but like shuri says: just because something works doesn't mean it can't be better. And there is no progress without risk that's why NASA is NASA and spacex is what it is. Sorry this is a big ass reply but they are facts.
@@Pos3id0n. and also if you make it work more efficiently even if you made it from scratch it's gonna save you more money in the long run and SPACEX ROCKETS ARE REUSABLE NASA's rockets aren't. Google the cost per launch of spacex and NASA you reget this reply
The progression of technology is amazing. One day you'll be able to render this in real time at 120fps on your phone. It may take 15 to 20 years but it'll happen eventually.
Na i think it will be faster than that in 2001 we had cpus with 500mhz and now we have cpus with 5.5 ghz in 2001 we had gpus with 300mil transistors now we have GPUs with 7.5bil transistors i think if we go on up this scale we can reach that level of processing power quite quickly
