PCI-E PhysX coming - bit-tech.net Forums

WilHarris · 3rd Oct 2006, 09:08

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/10..._PhysX_coming/

JADS · 3rd Oct 2006, 09:10

Any chance of some games to go with it?

TheSaladMan · 3rd Oct 2006, 09:30

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWjSJ0PHqf8&eurl=

Havok 4.0

Need I say more?

Flibblebot · 3rd Oct 2006, 12:06

Is the PhysX not going to be made superfluous by the use of additional cores in multi-core machines, a la Remedy's Alan Wake?

rupbert · 3rd Oct 2006, 12:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flibblebot

Is the PhysX not going to be made superfluous by the use of additional cores in multi-core machines, a la Remedy's Alan Wake?

Exactly.

DXR_13KE · 3rd Oct 2006, 13:30

all i can say is: its about F time. and it will die anyway with Havok 4.0.

[USRF]Obiwan · 3rd Oct 2006, 15:56

Yeah the havoc 4.0 showcase is very impresive. Also see the presentation of the just cause game on Gametrailer.com that uses the havoc engine, its not the best game out there but the fx are nice to see, especialy the smoke and explosions.

olly_lewis · 3rd Oct 2006, 16:20

I think that it will be a product that only glances on the surface of the pages of history, it'll be a stepping stone between graphics cards without physic chips designed around the physics of a game. but also the new range of CPU's with more chips, designed to create realistic physics...

M4RTIN · 3rd Oct 2006, 16:32

i know i made a thread about it but has anyone else seen the trailer for stranglehold, that has some incredible physics too. and being a console game wont be using any physx hardware

acidfire · 3rd Oct 2006, 17:57

What a lot of people seem to forget that although the consoles don't have the dedicated hardware for a PPU, Ageia did develop an API (PhysX) which the dedicated card RUNS, meaning it can be used on just about any system. Alot of people i've seen lately think that the ps3, for instance, has a dedicated ageia ppu when in reality the PhysX API is just compatible.

Then there's the arguement that a second video card would be able to run havok (Nvidia + Havok partnership irc) but why would I buy say quad sli just to lose one processor to physics calculations? Half the reason to have quad sli when doing heavy physics is to have the hardware to render everything thats going on (the other half of course is an e-penis enlargement).

The pci-e interface is where this card should have started in the first place, so for them to wait this long to get it out is a joke, especially considering the dev boards had pci AND pci-e connectors. It's too little too late for an awesome idea.

BFGunrunner · 3rd Oct 2006, 18:21

They never said if its going to be PCI Ex16 or x1, I'm assuming its PCIEx1 becuase if it was x16 most people will already have graphics cards installed and no one will bother.

Firehed · 3rd Oct 2006, 18:24

Finally. Of course, I'm still waiting for good games that'll use the thing (at least, make it worth the price), but there was no way I'd have even thought about picking up a PCI PhysX card. Still too expensive, but it sounds like a better library of titles will support the thing soon enough, which might actually make it worthwhile.

J-Mag · 3rd Oct 2006, 18:27

This is one of the only situations where I support microsoft dominating. A standardized API would benefit us, but probably put Havok and Ageia out of business (ageia might be able to get around it by redesign their hardware ot support the API).

acidfire · 3rd Oct 2006, 19:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by BFGunrunner

They never said if its going to be PCI Ex16 or x1, I'm assuming its PCIEx1 becuase if it was x16 most people will already have graphics cards installed and no one will bother.

If the dev board is anything to go by, it'll be pci-e x1

sandys · 13th Oct 2006, 11:56

Ageia have released a Physics benchmark

http://www.ageia.com/physx/rm.html

I am all for a physics accelerator when it is utilized well in a game it reaps decent rewards as the recent City of Heroes update shows with Physx, don't care much for physics being done on my GPUs as I max them out most of the time anyway but if a 3rd add in GPU can be utilized for physics thats fine for me too, don't care who wins the physics war so long as I can appreciate it in my games, I'll run all versions GPU based and Physx provided I can find a suitable mobo

Multicore CPUs can't match a PPU in the same way they can't render 3d graphics to the same level as GPUs.

[USRF]Obiwan · 13th Oct 2006, 14:51

I really dont get it with this benchmark. Let me explain:

This software benchmark the psysics hardware used in the system, correct?
Also the software stated that it requires the ageia physics hardware, correct?
So we put in the ageia physics hardware, correct?

So we now have the software and the hardware to bench the physics hardware. Lets start benching! Wow i now benched the ageia hardware. nice graph showing how good the hardware is. Ok lets compare it with other psysics hardware.... eh.... hmmzz... cant find any. And even IF i find hardware it NEEDS to be Ageia hardware! As stated in the hardware requirements.

Do you see what i'm not getting with the bench software?

sandys · 13th Oct 2006, 16:59

Read the FAQ, it does not require the physx hardware and skips the hardware test if you don't have a physics card, instead it shows you how capable your current hardware is a processing the effects that the physx cards processes, its basically more of a marketing piece to show how much more work the accelerator card could do versus your CPU in software, what so difficult to understand?

M4RTIN · 13th Oct 2006, 17:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by sandys

R what so difficult to understand?

i think the point is the test has been made to work through physx hardware, and is not enabled through your cpu or gpu.

basically its showing physx is great because without it you cant run these effects, the reason you cant run them however is necause they havent been coded to take advantage of any other hardware.

atanum141 · 13th Oct 2006, 17:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by sandys

Read the FAQ, it does not require the physx hardware and skips the hardware test if you don't have a physics card, instead it shows you how capable your current hardware is a processing the effects that the physx cards processes, its basically more of a marketing piece to show how much more work the accelerator card could do versus your CPU in software, what so difficult to understand?

http://forums.bit-tech.net/showthrea...t=physics+demo, Everyone know the physics card is a crock of poo, bearly any games support it and it dosent even improve frame rates!

The only worth physics implementation worth geting are the ones introduced by Ati/Nvidia as majority of games llready will be supported including old ones. Ati have allready got a head start by adding a extra Pci-e slot on their R600 line of mobo's which will be the dedicated physics slot.

BTW: i ran the demo on my old Stk A hardware, no dual core or high end system at the time and it worked perfectly.

3rd Oct 2006, 09:08	#1
WilHarris Just another nobody Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Oxford Posts: 2,671	PCI-E PhysX coming http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/10..._PhysX_coming/

3rd Oct 2006, 09:10	#2
JADS Et arma et verba vulnerant Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Portsmouth, UK Posts: 2,919	Any chance of some games to go with it? __________________ [AMD A64 2800+ + Zalman 7700][MSI K8N Neo Platinum][1GB Corsair PC3200][Leadtek Geforce 6600GT][Seagate Barracuda 7200.7 80GB + Maxtor Diamond Max Plus10 200GB + Maxtor Diamond Max16 120GB][Plextor PX-716 DVD-RW + 2x Plextor Premium 52x32x52 CD-RW + 16x Samsung DVD][Coolermaster ATC-201 BXT][Antec TruePower 430][Dell 2405FPW + Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 2070u][Logitech MX1000][Matias Tactile Pro][Griffin Technology PowerMate Black] Email Me

3rd Oct 2006, 09:30	#3
TheSaladMan Multimodder Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bournemouth, Uk Posts: 135	http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWjSJ0PHqf8&eurl= Havok 4.0 Need I say more? __________________ Hello there!

3rd Oct 2006, 12:06	#4
Flibblebot Free from artificial flavourings Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Right here, right now Posts: 2,233	Is the PhysX not going to be made superfluous by the use of additional cores in multi-core machines, a la Remedy's Alan Wake? __________________ My uber-system: 66Mhz 486DX2, 8Mb RAM, 20Mb hard drive, 256 colour VGA adaptor (goes all the way up to 800x600!), keyboard AND serial mouse

3rd Oct 2006, 13:30	#6
DXR_13KE Madeira's banana is the best!!! Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Madeira ; Portugal Posts: 6,485	all i can say is: its about F time. and it will die anyway with Havok 4.0. __________________ RENEGADE X CONTEST! <---- CLICK if you want to win a free Command & Conquer 4 beta key!

3rd Oct 2006, 15:56	#7
[USRF]Obiwan Ultramodder Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Netherlands Posts: 1,220	Yeah the havoc 4.0 showcase is very impresive. Also see the presentation of the just cause game on Gametrailer.com that uses the havoc engine, its not the best game out there but the fx are nice to see, especialy the smoke and explosions. __________________ Mascleta: "The most accurate simulation of thunder, humans can simulate..." The answer is 42, so... whats the question again? If you know what 'Peek' and 'Poke' represents, then you are probably as old as me.

3rd Oct 2006, 16:20	#8
olly_lewis Hypermodder Join Date: May 2006 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 756	I think that it will be a product that only glances on the surface of the pages of history, it'll be a stepping stone between graphics cards without physic chips designed around the physics of a game. but also the new range of CPU's with more chips, designed to create realistic physics... __________________ My signature dumped me... ___________

3rd Oct 2006, 16:32	#9
M4RTIN Ultramodder Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Birmingham, UK Posts: 1,257	i know i made a thread about it but has anyone else seen the trailer for stranglehold, that has some incredible physics too. and being a console game wont be using any physx hardware

3rd Oct 2006, 17:57	#10
acidfire Supermodder Join Date: May 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 254	What a lot of people seem to forget that although the consoles don't have the dedicated hardware for a PPU, Ageia did develop an API (PhysX) which the dedicated card RUNS, meaning it can be used on just about any system. Alot of people i've seen lately think that the ps3, for instance, has a dedicated ageia ppu when in reality the PhysX API is just compatible. Then there's the arguement that a second video card would be able to run havok (Nvidia + Havok partnership irc) but why would I buy say quad sli just to lose one processor to physics calculations? Half the reason to have quad sli when doing heavy physics is to have the hardware to render everything thats going on (the other half of course is an e-penis enlargement). The pci-e interface is where this card should have started in the first place, so for them to wait this long to get it out is a joke, especially considering the dev boards had pci AND pci-e connectors. It's too little too late for an awesome idea. __________________ "And when he gets to heaven, To St. Peter he will tell; One more soldier reporting sir, I served my time in hell. "

3rd Oct 2006, 18:21	#11
BFGunrunner Multimodder Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: B-Town Posts: 120	They never said if its going to be PCI Ex16 or x1, I'm assuming its PCIEx1 becuase if it was x16 most people will already have graphics cards installed and no one will bother. __________________ My Gaming rig Dell Demsion E531: x2 Althon 64 3800+/ 2 GB DDR2/BFG 7600 GT/ 250 GB HD/ 305 watt PSU/ 19" CTR

3rd Oct 2006, 18:24	#12
Firehed Why not? I own a domain to match. Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: An hour north of Boston Posts: 12,576	Finally. Of course, I'm still waiting for good games that'll use the thing (at least, make it worth the price), but there was no way I'd have even thought about picking up a PCI PhysX card. Still too expensive, but it sounds like a better library of titles will support the thing soon enough, which might actually make it worthwhile. __________________ hire me @ eric-stern.com - web developer and php ninja pics @ my smugmug :: Twitter @firehed :: blog @ firehed.net 40D\|580EXII\|285HV\|AB800\|70-200f/4LIS\|17-50f/2.8\|150f/2.8Macro\|50f/1.8 MacPro @ 8x2.8GHz, 10GB FBDDR2, 3TB HD :: MBP @ 2x2.2GHz, 4GB DDR2, 320GB HD

3rd Oct 2006, 18:27	#13
J-Mag What's a Dremel? Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Bay Area, CA Posts: 14	This is one of the only situations where I support microsoft dominating. A standardized API would benefit us, but probably put Havok and Ageia out of business (ageia might be able to get around it by redesign their hardware ot support the API).

13th Oct 2006, 11:56	#15
sandys Hypermodder Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Bristol, UK Posts: 925	Ageia have released a Physics benchmark http://www.ageia.com/physx/rm.html I am all for a physics accelerator when it is utilized well in a game it reaps decent rewards as the recent City of Heroes update shows with Physx, don't care much for physics being done on my GPUs as I max them out most of the time anyway but if a 3rd add in GPU can be utilized for physics thats fine for me too, don't care who wins the physics war so long as I can appreciate it in my games, I'll run all versions GPU based and Physx provided I can find a suitable mobo Multicore CPUs can't match a PPU in the same way they can't render 3d graphics to the same level as GPUs. __________________ Into Gaming and around Bristol, UK, Click Here

13th Oct 2006, 14:51	#16
[USRF]Obiwan Ultramodder Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Netherlands Posts: 1,220	I really dont get it with this benchmark. Let me explain: This software benchmark the psysics hardware used in the system, correct? Also the software stated that it requires the ageia physics hardware, correct? So we put in the ageia physics hardware, correct? So we now have the software and the hardware to bench the physics hardware. Lets start benching! Wow i now benched the ageia hardware. nice graph showing how good the hardware is. Ok lets compare it with other psysics hardware.... eh.... hmmzz... cant find any. And even IF i find hardware it NEEDS to be Ageia hardware! As stated in the hardware requirements. Do you see what i'm not getting with the bench software? __________________ Mascleta: "The most accurate simulation of thunder, humans can simulate..." The answer is 42, so... whats the question again? If you know what 'Peek' and 'Poke' represents, then you are probably as old as me.

13th Oct 2006, 16:59	#17
sandys Hypermodder Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Bristol, UK Posts: 925	Read the FAQ, it does not require the physx hardware and skips the hardware test if you don't have a physics card, instead it shows you how capable your current hardware is a processing the effects that the physx cards processes, its basically more of a marketing piece to show how much more work the accelerator card could do versus your CPU in software, what so difficult to understand? __________________ Into Gaming and around Bristol, UK, Click Here