Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by WilHarris, 3 Oct 2006.
Any chance of some games to go with it?
Need I say more?
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?
all i can say is: its about F time. and it will die anyway with Havok 4.0.
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.
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...
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
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.
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.
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.
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).
If the dev board is anything to go by, it'll be pci-e x1
Ageia have released a Physics benchmark
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.
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?
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?
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.
http://forums.bit-tech.net/showthread.php?t=110928&highlight=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.
Separate names with a comma.