Nvidia's solution is to use Physics in it's SLI format.
And that should probably cost a lot of money to configure.
As for ATI they just came out from no where and say
"we can do physics too".
Until they can proof it, then I'll believe it.
Right now as for me I'm going with Ageia.
It says the card cost aprox: $299
and updates are done on software, therefore you
won't have to buy a new physics hardware just to take advantage of future games.
I don't know about ati's Physic offer yet. it seems like SLI setup will cost
than Ageia. some of the computer comes with integrated. so there will be some
market for Ageia.
If you read the first article carefully....nvidia also supports physics in a
single video card configuration...and most likely anything nvidia does...ati
will follow and vice versa..
Then again...we dont really know anything until they showcase it...
Theres something I dont really get....if Ageia needs to be supported in the
games...doesnt that somewhat limit what games benift from it?
At the very least with physics support in video cards...wont we at least have
our games in high detail and quality?
Quote by tiki223Nvidia's solution is to
use Physics in it's SLI format.
And that should probably cost a lot of money to configure.
As for ATI they just came out from no where and say
"we can do physics too".
Until they can proof it, then I'll believe it.
Right now as for me I'm going with Ageia.
It says the card cost aprox: $299
and updates are done on software, therefore you
won't have to buy a new physics hardware just to take advantage of future games.
To be honest I see no difference; its all about how software developer design
their games. I play BF2 using two Nvidia Gforce 6800gs in SLI mode. Vehicles get
wasted just like the PhysX processor. If you get caught nearby the explosions
you will get damage from shrapnel. Funny thing is, you can accomplish the same
thing with only one 6800gs GPU.
Also by comparing both screens it seems to me you will have to add more RAM to
speed up the gameplays fps for the PhysX. And if thats the "high end"
processor, then something is amiss......this is merely a difference of
programming from what I see.
Now that I watched it more....check out the guy moving across the screen. one
the High end processor, the enemy moves in front of the car and slower....he
doesn't get caught in the blast. But on the Physx, he moves from BEHIND the car
to the front, and a little faster to get caught by the blast!
I believe that moving physics calculations to a stand-alone card will be useful
in the long run. As games use more and more processing power to keep things
running; sound, physics, and the underlying technologies behind the game itself
all chew up a considerable chunk of the processor. Moving the physics
calculations away from the CPU means more resources for other areas which can
boost game performance quite a bit more than simply upgrading to a faster CPU.
It was a similar idea when graphics cards were introduced. Sure, it's new and
yes there will be a fair amount of time before these cards are actually useful
enough to find a place in a majority of gamers PC's but the concept is sound,
especially considering the volume of calculations involved in in-game physics.
Quote: To be honest I see no
difference; its all about how software developer design their games. I play BF2
using two Nvidia Gforce 6800gs in SLI mode. Vehicles get wasted just like the
PhysX processor. If you get caught nearby the explosions you will get damage
from shrapnel. Funny thing is, you can accomplish the same thing with only one
6800gs GPU.
that's true, but having a physics prosessor makes the life all easier for the
developer. imagine that when comes to do "physics ultra mumbo-jumbo
realistic" stuff it have to write extra lines and more extra lines only to
make the CPU calculate the physics stuff which makes the game be too
"heavy", and usually it doesn't have all the features of the reality
(physics). now with this PPU (and it's propper SDK) it happens that the
developer only has to assign an atribute to the model (for example: to make a
wood box, the developer only has to set "wood" to the box atributte
and it will have the properties of a wood box) and it will work as it should. it
will save A LOT OF CODING for the developer and it will make the game (or
program) way more optimal than without it and it will have all the posibilities
to make even more realistic games
Quote by tiki223Nvidia's solution is to
use Physics in it's SLI format.
And that should probably cost a lot of money to configure.
As for ATI they just came out from no where and say
"we can do physics too".
Until they can proof it, then I'll believe it.
Right now as for me I'm going with Ageia.
It says the card cost aprox: $299
and updates are done on software, therefore you
won't have to buy a new physics hardware just to take advantage of future games.
Quote by LigerZSchnider
To be honest I see no difference; its all about how software developer design
their games. I play BF2 using two Nvidia Gforce 6800gs in SLI mode. Vehicles get
wasted just like the PhysX processor.
BF2 does not take advantage of the Ageia PhysX processor.
It's a development issue, it's not standard now but in all likelihood it will be
and as much as nvidia in all their corporate glory would like to state otherwise
a proprietary PPU card will outperform a hybrid as the cards begin to see more
use. It is going to take some time, and yes right now it's not cost effective to
purchase a PPU but down the road as developers begin to take advantage of the
massive number of new possibilities these cards will offer it may indeed become
a standard and will sit along side the GPU in everyones machines.
Then again, as WoW proved, sometimes people are content in mediocrity and it may
just slip by as a fad. It's hard to really say in this market, although I'm
quite convinced after looking over the capabilities and statistics compared to
what's out there that letting the technology slide by without taking advantage
of it will do nothing but set the advancement of the gaming world back.
oh god damn! now when im planning to buy a Ge..6800 at least, damn developers
have to come up with something better! im like so cut on money and i wanna buy
somethign that will last for about 4 years or something dam!
merged: 04-27-2006 ~ 10:37am
i owuldnt wanna see the technology about 5 years from now! phew
Quote by johann12345oh god damn! now
when im planning to buy a Ge..6800 at least, damn developers have to come up
with something better! im like so cut on money and i wanna buy somethign that
will last for about 4 years or something dam!
merged: 04-27-2006 ~ 10:37am
i owuldnt wanna see the technology about 5 years from now!
phew
I'll put in my piece. I'm tired of seeing predictable programming. Physics will
make things fun. My concern is if developers will find it worth the time to make
games that intricate.
While today's gaming PC are housed with the lastest CPU and GPU and let's you play games in a realistic environment.
Now a new member has join in and change the way how PC gaming is played to a whole new level. It's called the PPU (Physics Processing Unit)
Take a look at the comparison here
Gaming with PhysX
So what do you gals and guys think?
Edit: The title should say "Gaming with PhysX"
Do you think the Ageia Physics card will ever be used? Since both Nvidia and Ati are planning to support Physics Processing with their existing cards.
http://www.rojakpot.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=303&pgno=0
http://techreport.com/onearticle.x/8887
Like I'm sure the Ageia card will be good but who would get that over a video card that can do that and more.
I'm using ATI FIRE GL on my laptop. If the both nvidia and ATI plan to support Physics proessing then im sure Ageia will try to compete.
Nvidia's solution is to use Physics in it's SLI format.
And that should probably cost a lot of money to configure.
As for ATI they just came out from no where and say
"we can do physics too".
Until they can proof it, then I'll believe it.
Right now as for me I'm going with Ageia.
It says the card cost aprox: $299
and updates are done on software, therefore you
won't have to buy a new physics hardware just to take advantage of future games.
I don't know about ati's Physic offer yet. it seems like SLI setup will cost than Ageia. some of the computer comes with integrated. so there will be some market for Ageia.
If you read the first article carefully....nvidia also supports physics in a single video card configuration...and most likely anything nvidia does...ati will follow and vice versa..
Then again...we dont really know anything until they showcase it...
Theres something I dont really get....if Ageia needs to be supported in the games...doesnt that somewhat limit what games benift from it?
At the very least with physics support in video cards...wont we at least have our games in high detail and quality?
It's the next big thing. In another 4 years, I bet it'll be stadard, and games will have "Minimum PPU requirements".
thats cool
the best i have seen is ps3,
and that looked pretty close
To be honest I see no difference; its all about how software developer design their games. I play BF2 using two Nvidia Gforce 6800gs in SLI mode. Vehicles get wasted just like the PhysX processor. If you get caught nearby the explosions you will get damage from shrapnel. Funny thing is, you can accomplish the same thing with only one 6800gs GPU.
Also by comparing both screens it seems to me you will have to add more RAM to speed up the gameplays fps for the PhysX. And if thats the "high end" processor, then something is amiss......this is merely a difference of programming from what I see.
Now that I watched it more....check out the guy moving across the screen. one the High end processor, the enemy moves in front of the car and slower....he doesn't get caught in the blast. But on the Physx, he moves from BEHIND the car to the front, and a little faster to get caught by the blast!
"everything that glitters isn't always gold....."
I believe that moving physics calculations to a stand-alone card will be useful in the long run. As games use more and more processing power to keep things running; sound, physics, and the underlying technologies behind the game itself all chew up a considerable chunk of the processor. Moving the physics calculations away from the CPU means more resources for other areas which can boost game performance quite a bit more than simply upgrading to a faster CPU. It was a similar idea when graphics cards were introduced. Sure, it's new and yes there will be a fair amount of time before these cards are actually useful enough to find a place in a majority of gamers PC's but the concept is sound, especially considering the volume of calculations involved in in-game physics.
that's true, but having a physics prosessor makes the life all easier for the developer. imagine that when comes to do "physics ultra mumbo-jumbo realistic" stuff it have to write extra lines and more extra lines only to make the CPU calculate the physics stuff which makes the game be too "heavy", and usually it doesn't have all the features of the reality (physics). now with this PPU (and it's propper SDK) it happens that the developer only has to assign an atribute to the model (for example: to make a wood box, the developer only has to set "wood" to the box atributte and it will have the properties of a wood box) and it will work as it should. it will save A LOT OF CODING for the developer and it will make the game (or program) way more optimal than without it and it will have all the posibilities to make even more realistic games
BF2 does not take advantage of the Ageia PhysX processor.
It's a development issue, it's not standard now but in all likelihood it will be and as much as nvidia in all their corporate glory would like to state otherwise a proprietary PPU card will outperform a hybrid as the cards begin to see more use. It is going to take some time, and yes right now it's not cost effective to purchase a PPU but down the road as developers begin to take advantage of the massive number of new possibilities these cards will offer it may indeed become a standard and will sit along side the GPU in everyones machines.
Then again, as WoW proved, sometimes people are content in mediocrity and it may just slip by as a fad. It's hard to really say in this market, although I'm quite convinced after looking over the capabilities and statistics compared to what's out there that letting the technology slide by without taking advantage of it will do nothing but set the advancement of the gaming world back.
oh god damn! now when im planning to buy a Ge..6800 at least, damn developers have to come up with something better! im like so cut on money and i wanna buy somethign that will last for about 4 years or something dam!
merged: 04-27-2006 ~ 10:37am
i owuldnt wanna see the technology about 5 years from now! phew
The PhysX card should be out in 2 months or so.
here's some demo. think before you buy it.
http://www.ageia.com/physxinaction/demos.html
Here is another new footage optimized by the Ageia PhysX
footage link
I'll put in my piece. I'm tired of seeing predictable programming. Physics will make things fun. My concern is if developers will find it worth the time to make games that intricate.