Ageia responds to GPU physics

CodeWaste said:
Im wondering how sustainable this will be? Right now there is A LOT of room for improvement in graphics to get to photorealism. But say you're "rendering" gravity on a PPU,
the accelaration rate is always going to be 9.8 meters per second at 1G. even in 50 years when computers are doing things we cant even comprehend right now, accelaration will always be 9.8 meters per second at 1G.

How much room for improvement is there really going to be? is this a one trick pony?
Click to expand...

If you havne't been reading aegia's interviews... you would be missing out o nthe physics calcs they're talking about. You know japans earth quak simulator? requires one of the fastest supercomputers to calculate real physics in volved with an earthquake.

Tehre are physics equations and set of Larges equations that dictate physics movement... Interaction between air physics and water physics is enbough to starve even 4 cores of 2.5ghz athlon 64 goodness if coded correctly.

I do see aegia's cards to be beneficial only if software developers start gettign serious about physics and hire dedicated physics programmers who have degrees in physics and know OF the many types of physics equations.
 
keakdasneak said:
The PPU is just going to be plain out bad ass.
Click to expand...

LOL, I like it. End the thread! :cool:

I figure a PPU is another in a series of hardware upgrades I can get to extend the life of this rig, rather than shelling out a couple grand for a new one. My timing was perfect for an example:

- Can upgrade to multicore CPU if necessary
- Can upgrade to SLI or just get one top-of-the-line GPU
- Can get a PPU

Hell I'm set no matter what physics API/card comes out. PPU just gives me more options.
 
Malogato said:
Have you actually read any of his books?

While he does not say that in his book, you can see that there was a time where he planned for the future, "within limits" -- At the time he supposedly said it, 640k was a TREMENDOUS amount of memory (64k being the norm), so it would not be unusual for him to inflate something 10x (and to the cpu limitation... ) and say "That's enough for now"

He didn't say "That should be enough for anybody forever" It was based on the fact that the limitations imposed by hardware didn't need to be overcome for quite a while.
Click to expand...

Bring me the source of that "quote"...
Then we can talk about it *S*

Terra - but look on the web...there are only hear-say...says it all..
 
Malogato said:
Have you actually read any of his books?

While he does not say that in his book, you can see that there was a time where he planned for the future, "within limits" -- At the time he supposedly said it, 640k was a TREMENDOUS amount of memory (64k being the norm), so it would not be unusual for him to inflate something 10x (and to the cpu limitation... ) and say "That's enough for now"

He didn't say "That should be enough for anybody forever" It was based on the fact that the limitations imposed by hardware didn't need to be overcome for quite a while.
Click to expand...

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bill_Gates
http://tafkac.org/celebrities/bill.gates/gates_memory.html
http://www.addaquote.com/index.php/Bill_Gates

just thought you might like those links
 
jdLordHelmet said:
Would it? I have yet to see what should be very simple: A demo, with the following criteria:

1) Full optimization for both solution types. Let us say Havok for software, PhysX for hardware.

2) Full, high detail modern graphics. No wireframe, no 1998-quality jenga towers. I want soft shadows, bump mapping, all of it.

3) High number of high-poly objects interacting through physics.

Both modes of the demo should be the exact same, with one making calls to Havok and one making calls to PhysX. Let's see how they both measure up then (I predict both choke). So far, I have yet to see or hear of such a demo. Until it exists, all is theory.
Click to expand...

QFT!!!!!!!!!1
 
oh my god, i just realized, think about how much work physics need?

no more tricking us into thinking real physics are going on, please! I want air to slow down bullets, I want my weight on grass ot affect my movement, I want the force from a bullet to really knock someone over.

Forget ragdoll, Ageia's talking about some real stuff here..

man, i want one of these things. I don't get excited about newcomers coming out with something.. but I have a lot of faith that these AGEIA PPUs are going to kick some serious ass, I honestly BELIEVE it will change the way games are made.
 
Physics in games will start out very basic, but developers will slowly add effects we havent seen before. And hopefully some extreme simulations will take place, not that I think we will ever need to model air slowing bullets down. But you could do something like gravity affecting bullets and have it decelerate a little I guess, but you dont exactly need anything more than you have today for that.
 
ErrorS said:
oh my god, i just realized, think about how much work physics need?

no more tricking us into thinking real physics are going on, please! I want air to slow down bullets, I want my weight on grass ot affect my movement, I want the force from a bullet to really knock someone over.

Forget ragdoll, Ageia's talking about some real stuff here..

man, i want one of these things. I don't get excited about newcomers coming out with something.. but I have a lot of faith that these AGEIA PPUs are going to kick some serious ass, I honestly BELIEVE it will change the way games are made.
Click to expand...


PLAY Bet on Soilder its not as impressive as you think well atlest in FPS game
its real looking yes but dont go looking for "Hollywood" Physics were taking you shoot some one and thay just fall were thay stand
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top