News AMD demonstrates Havok with GPU acceleration

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2009/03/27/amd-demonstrates-gpu-physics-at-gdc/1

AMD shows that Havok physics effects can be accelerated on GPUs via OpenCL, and Nvidia says it would be happy to work with Havok.

 

Isn't Havok owned by Intel?

 

Yes it is, but ATI licensed it before Intel bought it. I think...

 

You know all I want to hear from amd right now is info on their new video card release. *sigh*

 

I don't care who or what makes my games better, as long as it's available on all platforms.
I still don't see too many games using either PhysX or Havok to create something special but realistic physics is just one of those details that seperate the good from the outstanding.

 

Doesn't the Source engine use Havok?
Although the usual question of "will this run on my PC?" will get even more complicated if we have to take physics performance into account as well.

 

Not if AMD does Havok, nVidia does Havok and ports PhysX to OpenCL. Then we can just use everything on everything.

 

physx sucks.. it did before nvidia took them over and since it's nvidia only- it still sucks.. of course they want to work with havok.. look at crysis for example, it uses the cpu for physics on it's own engine- there is nothing wrong with cpu physics if it's done right.. it's just another gimmick for nvidia to make more money

I've seen nothing physx does other than create hype.. havok been used in alot of games- porting it over to the gpu maybe add some more functionality- as long as it works on all cards as it does currently, I don't see any problem with that.. nvidia does nothing well but marketing nowdays.. all that suki suki from the 8800gtx turned them into the aig of the computer world imo

physx (before nvidia) had a demo called cellfactor.. the game played just fine on old hardware without a ppu.. I dunno if you all remember that fiasco.. I'm glad havok is going to the gpu, what's up with physx anyway, it doesn't work on ati or any other graphics card what's the point

 

I have said this many time, over and over, wont matter much once DX11 and OpenCL hit the scene with their own physics engines more companies will use that rather then physX and havok...

 

I know every game and its little sister features Havok today but I meant they didn't create anything special with it.

 

Mainly because up until now they only had a cpu with 'maybe' two cores...have to go with the masses.
A compatible ATi GPU will be a 2xxx upwards, so 300 shaders+ or so...

 

how about water and realistic fog? Mirror's Edge had better effects than that, PhysX demo by nVidia of a woman walking down a catwalk also seems more impressive.

 

Demos are rarely a good indicator of performance. Once you add in actual game logic and control it tends to go to peices.

 

I'm all for more realistic environments. Items actually behaving the way they do in RL makes the gaming experience that more immersive.

Probably not the best example, but when I first played started playing Fear 2 and heard something rolling across the floor behind me in the hospital I was a bit surprised when it turned out to be a pill bottle I had knocked over. Just the little things like that are slowly getting better. I can't wait to see what games/hardware in the next 5 years will be capable of.

 

I think thehippoz needs to move to a communist country. He doesn't understand commercial interests and competition in technology.

 

lol and you need to study up on what Communism is

 

Well I think that if NVIDIA want their solutions to be supported once DX 11 is out they really need to port it to OpenCL. It is only logical that people don't like having to choose between having one or the other. And for NVIDIA since now AMD is really showing that they also have a physics capable solution it is only logical for them to convert their solution to OpenCL and avoid a physics engine war that they would loose since developers and customers do not want closed formats. OpenCL will be used in DX11 and that is the future.

What NVIIDA wants is to sell its physics solution to developers. IT started by showing they had hardware accelerated physics but now that both companies have that it is only about middleware companies supporting one system or the other. IF a developer doesn't need to worry if that solution will work in one hardware or the other that is no longer an issue

 

The whole reason right here that GPU physics is a good thing. The game logic and control is performed on the CPU, and with the physics offloaded more can be done on the CPU. Like better AI for instance. With Havoc being coded for GPUs now it can be done on either depending on the resources available. If they have a powerful CPU and slow GFX card then it can be done on the CPU. If they have a decent CPU and a decent GFX card but run a lower res screen the physics can be offloaded to the GPU.

 

I think this is a very subjective test.
ATI licensed it before Intel bought it. But...