|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#1 |
|
Pewlius Caesar
bit-tech Staff
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ascot, Berks
Posts: 18,021
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
EA and 2K Games license Nvidia PhysX technology
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2008/12...x-technology/1
Electronic Arts and 2K Games have announced that they will both license Nvidia's PhysX technology across all of their worldwide studios.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Vapourmodder
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Cambridge, UK
Posts: 363
![]() |
This would be why I bought me a GTX 280 instead of a 4870X2 recently for my new PC. AMD have a loooooong way to go to catch up on nVidia's CUDA
__________________
Current setup: Hiper Osiris | Core i7 920 (Cooled by Noctua NH-U12P) | Foxconn Renaissance | 2x GTX280 | Cooler Master UCP | Corsair Dominator 3GB (soon to be 9GB) | Creative X-Fi Titanium | Vista Home Premium x64 | OS Drive: WD Velociraptor 300GB. Storage: 1x 160GB, 1x 250GB, 1x 300GB, 1x500GB (incremental additions over the years! All Maxtor) | Monitor: Dell 2709W |
|
|
|
| ChaosDefinesOrder |
| View Public Profile |
| Find More Posts by ChaosDefinesOrder |
|
|
#3 | |
|
quad fuelled, GTX200 powered
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: in a room near Soton Uni. UK
Posts: 3,938
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
__________________
of Corsair Dominators @ 1528Mhz 8-8-8-24 // BFG gtx260+ OC2 MaxCore 216SP 896MB // Samsung 64GB SSD // WD Raptor 74GB + Black 1TB + Green 1TB // Corsair Hx620w // Antec p182 // Samsung 24" T240 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Multimodder
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 207
![]() |
Yay, more games with fancy physics effects and no gameplay.....
__________________
Phenom II X4 955 @ 3.2ghz | Asus Crosshair III Formula | Coolermaster V8 CPU Cooler |4Gb Corsair Dominator DDR3 at 1333mhz | Sapphire Radeon 5870 | Crucial M225 128Gb SSD | Samsung SyncMaster 226BW |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Multimodder
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Surrey, UK
Posts: 248
![]() |
Its like as soon as people begin to catch onto the fact that shiny graphics are covering up bad games, publishers rush to find a new bone to throw to the masses in place of quality.
EDIT: complete sentences help sometimes |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Hypermodder
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Burford, Oxfordshire
Posts: 866
![]() |
I was under the impression that DX11 did it all 'out of the box' on DX11 cards.
I know it's very early to talk about this, but if that's the case, CUDA and PhysicX will die... As I doubt a developer - given the choice - would pick just Nvidia, when DX11 allows physics calculations to be done on both (or should I say all!).
__________________
Jimmy Carr - "It's easier to get forgiveness than permission" |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Supermodder
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Idaho U.S.A
Posts: 343
![]() |
DX11 and AMD's current processor at the time is whats going to get my money... If what Wharrad said is true, I have a very good reason for waiting.
__________________
(Phenom II 940)(Foxcon A7DA)(8gb OCZ DDR2 800 )(8800gt aka hair dryer)(Big yellow case, CPU, GPU)(Enermax Liberty 500w)(lite-on DVD-RW w/LightScribe)(Seagate 300gb sata)(Seagate 320gb x2)(WD 200gb)(Dell 3007WFP 30"LCD, 19" Samsung, Acer 1280x720 projector) |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Bwahahahahaha
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Salford
Posts: 607
![]() |
Interestingly enough, you all forget that Bit themselves reported on Nvidia helping the community hackers with their attempts to run PhysX on ATI cards.
![]() However, I do agree that between DirectX and OpenCL, we aren't going to see much support for CUDA in the future. ATI have made their bed, and Nvidia will need to support DX11 anyway. As nice as CUDA is, there will need to be hard decisions made on the use of precious transistors at some point in next few years. I just hope Nvidia see it before it's too late... Because when Larrabee hits, we'll probably end-up with ATI and Intel on one side and Nvidia fighting a losing war. Just keeps it interesting though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 566
![]() |
LOL, there is what 1 game that supports this? By the time Physics catches on (If it does at all) we won't be using these cards.
|
|
|
|
| Lepermessiah |
| View Public Profile |
| Find More Posts by Lepermessiah |
|
|
#10 | |
|
Supermodder
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 491
![]() |
Quote:
Even as an Nvidia user, I'm really unhappy that adoption of PhysX in games seems to be ramping up. With AMD leaking billions every quarter they need all the advantages they can get, and I assume there will be hefty licensing fees if AMD ever does choose to use PhysX
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 | ||
|
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 566
![]() |
Quote:
|
||
|
|
|
| Lepermessiah |
| View Public Profile |
| Find More Posts by Lepermessiah |
|
|
#12 | ||
|
Multimodder
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Home
Posts: 160
![]() |
Quote:
+1 I think AMD will license PhysX if they see the need for it, even if these two companies licensed PhysX tech, we can't assume that all their next games will use the tech, I won't be surprised if only games released in the next 1 or 2 years just begin to use this technology
__________________
[FONT=Lucida Console]picture this..[/FONT] // [FONT=Tahoma][FONT=Fixedsys]picture that..[/FONT][/FONT]
|
||
|
|
|
| dyzophoria |
| View Public Profile |
| Find More Posts by dyzophoria |
|
|
#13 |
|
regular bit-tech reader
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Brnicko, CZ
Posts: 219
![]() |
Clever move from nVidia - impress publishers instead of developers. They'll force it into their games no matter how useless it might be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 | |
|
Hypermodder
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 731
![]() |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Pewlius Caesar
bit-tech Staff
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ascot, Berks
Posts: 18,021
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
CUDA isn't going anywhere any time soon - I think you guys will be surprised how similar DX11 Compute and OpenCL are to CUDA. All Nvidia hardware since G80 already supports OpenCL and I've got good reason to believe that at least the current generation also supports DX11 Compute.
Although Nvidia skirts around the question, I believe PhysX will be ported to either DX11 Compute or OpenCL. It needs to if Nvidia wants to continue controlling the game physics middleware market (why else would it have bought Ageia?) because with compute APIs coming thick and fast, a developer can create their own 'accelerated' physics engine using the Compute Shader in DX11.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Ultramodder
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,218
![]() |
So Cuda isn't going anywhere? What about this then. Looks like it's going everywhere. And do not forget some video editing, cad/cam and renderer developers are working on Cuda powered versions. adding to that, the Physics engine Nvidia got a nice deck of cards.
I think it is wrong to think Cuda is not going anywhere. Take for example TMPGEnc 4.0 Xpress. With Cuda it goes 300 times faster! This saves enormous amount of time. I use it to convert the AVCHD cam recorders to a more editable format for my videoeditor. Now all i need is the videoeditor to go the Cuda way and i'm happy like a bird because it saves me to buy a expensive quadcore.
__________________
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. Last edited by [USRF]Obiwan; 9th Dec 2008 at 09:32. |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 | |
|
Pewlius Caesar
bit-tech Staff
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ascot, Berks
Posts: 18,021
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
However, I wouldn't be surprised if PhysX moved to DirectX 11 Compute because I am pretty certain that's where Havok will probably go once Larrabee has launched. At that point, PhysX would become an also-ran because one runs on every DX11 compliant hardware, the other only runs on GeForce. Publishers care about installed bases, so which would you choose as a publisher?
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Multimodder
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Norway
Posts: 203
![]() |
big question is if OpenCL and DX11 Compute can offer the same features as direct CUDA. CUDA has in fact been developed by NVIDIA for use with their own line of GPUs. No way a GENERIC API can offer the same features. It has to support a common subset only.
__________________
- I'm the troll who bumps page 2 topics - |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Pewlius Caesar
bit-tech Staff
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ascot, Berks
Posts: 18,021
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
GT200 supports newer features in CUDA than G80 (think Double Precision), so yes, current and future APIs could in fact support many of CUDA's features... the thing with CUDA is that Nvidia will just release a compiler specific to API X, Y, Z, which translates the new code into something its GPUs understand.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Hypermodder
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 682
![]() |
When Nvidia had a couple big companies demoing impressive gains using Physx/cuda (not ones that most consumers would notice, granted, but impressive nonetheless) and all AMD had on how theres would work was "no comment, come back later" I kinda figured Nvidia had it in the bag.
__________________
Athlon 64 X2 3800+ @ 250x10 (1.475v) | EVGA GTX 260 55nm SSC | A8N-SLI Premium | 2x(4GB) Corsair Twinx2048-PC3200C2 | Asus Xonar DX | Antec truepower 550w | Akasa Eclipse-62 DDC12VPlus1, DD TDX, 3/8 tygon r3603 tubing, PA120.2, DD double floppy bay res |
|
|
|
| Bladestorm |
| View Public Profile |
| Find More Posts by Bladestorm |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|