Borderlands 2 PhysX Demo

why damn AMD, the software makers can do that on an AMD card without "Physx" and just use the cpu or the AMD cards Nvidia just want to try and save Physx...still
 
Gah now I need to find where the hell I threw my old 8800 GTS so I can offload the PhysX processing.
 
two things.
so like, why can't my 12 core 8 ghz cpu do this?

or

isn't there a non proprietary physics engine that both manufactures cards can use?

thanks
 
yes and yes, neither of them will direct you to buy Nvidia :)
 
Putz said:
yes and yes, neither of them will direct you to buy Nvidia :)
Click to expand...
Nvidia probably paid for the work to have that included so they probably don't want anything but that buyt nvidia on your mind.
 
Lets see all the [H]'ers out there spam intel to get them to sponser AVX development of those physics.
 
stop!theradio said:
So basically shit that can be done on any system but NVIDIA paid them to slap the PhysX logo on.
Click to expand...

pretty much, hope they sponsor them well, if people are concerned about the details half the market is stuck skipping the game or not seeing the graphics.. kind of dumb, i don't see how something like that helps them sell more games
 
Fuck, much better(looking, performing) physics engines have been made w/o the need for PhysX bullshit.
 
Yeah, great. Cripple the game for users of non-nVidia hardware so that nVidia can pay part (all?) of your development costs.
No, surely these kind of effects are only possible with PhysX, it's not like there are no other cross-platform (Havok) or even free/open source (ODE, Bullet) physics solutions that can use the TFLOPS of processing power available in modern graphics cards if you don't want to write your own physics routines...
 
Well look at that, things that games have done forever with next to not performance penalty moneyhatted away.

On the other hand this means I've got $60 more to spend on hookers and coke, if I'm going to get fucked I'm going to get fucked good.
 
Bojamijams said:
They forgot to add the FPS counter to the videos

Without PhysX: 60FPS

With PhysX: 20FPS
Click to expand...

Good point. I am real curious to see these benchmarks.

Man it's a bad time to have an AMD card and be a Borderlands fan. I see how the latest review ties perfectly in with my new need for a not too expensive nvidia card to hold me over til next gen.
 
Physx is a canned mature library that probably made it quite easy to add physics, It is based on the Cuda computational libraries from Nvidia. The other option is to use a physics stack that supports an open standard like OpenCL. Havoc is another world class competitor to Physx and will be the likely candidate to support Intel's AVX instruction set...they might veer from a open implementation to restrict Havoc to AVX acceleration to sell intel processors. The most promising solution now is Bullet physics. It has been used in some high profile games, movies (yes movies) and software packages and has OpenCL support. The best thing? It is open source. GO BULLET!
 
Havoc: it will likely support AVX (intel sandy bridge+) because Intel bought Havoc a year or two ago.
 
..on the other other hand this is as useless as every other PhysX use out there and it's sad to see people buy into it..

Use PhysX to simulate physics in a racing sim and I'll buy into it. I've said that before and I'll say it again. Use that purposely crippled shit that AMD rejected because it was shit for good and it will suddenly become interesting.
 
A lot of it also has to do with the support that game companies get from Nvidia when they use PhysX. I play a very low-key MMO called Xsyon. They are implementing PhysX for a new collision system and are receiving help from Nvidia.

This is not some multi-million dollar AAA game. Its an indie studio with like 3 programmers, 2 of them outsourced in Russia, yet Nvidia still has time for them. Can the same be said of AMD?
 
AVogel said:
A lot of it also has to do with the support that game companies get from Nvidia when they use PhysX. I play a very low-key MMO called Xsyon. They are implementing PhysX for a new collision system and are receiving help from Nvidia.

This is not some multi-million dollar AAA game. Its an indie studio with like 3 programmers, 2 of them outsourced in Russia, yet Nvidia still has time for them. Can the same be said of AMD?
Click to expand...

Bingo. AMD could put a bunch of money into pushing OpenCL physics but they really haven't. Why? Because, guess what, they're not gonna make money off of a third-party open-source solution.

I know it pisses gamers (read: AMD users) off when games get PhysX, but really, what do you expect nVidia to do?
 
I have to say, that outside of a few things, such as the canvas fapping in the wind, I probably would not have noticed the difference without them point it out.

That being said, no reason why they could not actually do this with a non-video card specific middleware.
 
so the same physics effects we saw in 2001 have made it into this game? Think this propitiatory bullshit, needs to end.
 
MrLonghair said:
..on the other other hand this is as useless as every other PhysX use out there and it's sad to see people buy into it..

Use PhysX to simulate physics in a racing sim and I'll buy into it. I've said that before and I'll say it again. Use that purposely crippled shit that AMD rejected because it was shit for good and it will suddenly become interesting.
Click to expand...

Useless?! It enhances the blowing up of things in Borderlands! You ask me, that pretty much parallels simulating physics in a racing sim.
 
Crotan said:
so the same physics effects we saw in 2001 have made it into this game? Think this propitiatory bullshit, needs to end.
Click to expand...

most of the people in this thread are idiot. unlike AMD Nvidia acually tries to help its customers and wants to gain new customers. So it spends time and money helping developers use its products. This is what competent companies do, Nvidia is one, AMD is not, that simple.

Intel also help companies with havok implementation, again intel competent company, Amd is not.
 
haha, I mean yes it's nice that Nvidia helps developers implement this, in either actual development assistance or other incentives. But, when things like the havok physics engine are cross platform and don't lock you down to one manufacturer, it's kinda hard to root for it's implementation in any game, when there are better alternatives.
 
Crotan said:
haha, I mean yes it's nice that Nvidia helps developers implement this, in either actual development assistance or other incentives. But, when things like the havok physics engine are cross platform and don't lock you down to one manufacturer, it's kinda hard to root for it's implementation in any game, when there are better alternatives.
Click to expand...
Well nvidia can't like pseudo give amd phsyx because they fully have to open it to amd cards. Else if amd gpus don't perform as well or better they will still get jeered at for rigging it. So it's easier just not to do a dam thing for amd and keep the buy nvidia sticker attached, same hate more profit.
 
1) PhysX is built into the current Unreal engine. By default this game was going to use PhysX.

2)Yes, NV likely coded in the extra GPU physics for the dev, or paid for it in one fashion or another. They do this for certain AAA games, from certain devs.

3) Yes, much of the physics is either over the top, or you could get a close enough to it to not really matter with CPU physics from most any other vendor, and even PhysX.

4) GPU PhysX is a Nv marketing tool. It's adoption and use is as limited now as it was in the past. Plenty of games use CPU PhysX, few AAA titles that come out each year use GPU accelerated PhysX.

Nothing has changed.
 
I can't really buy into this crap.

There isn't much there except a few more splashes and some flapping cloth.

This junk dates back to the first GhostRecon PC game when the Physx people were trying to sell their cards....."wow look at how cool our explosions are".....:eek:

It does nothing for the game play, which will still be good.

meh.physx.meh.
 
featsdontfailme said:
I can't really buy into this crap.

There isn't much there except a few more splashes and some flapping cloth.

This junk dates back to the first GhostRecon PC game when the Physx people were trying to sell their cards....."wow look at how cool our explosions are".....:eek:

It does nothing for the game play, which will still be good.

meh.physx.meh.
Click to expand...

It's going be awhile before that, it doesnt look like even multi core cpus are powerful enough do gameplay physics yet. I could all change prehaps if the new consoles have powerful GPU's. since pretty much console dictate the entirity of modern techical advancement of games today- rip in peace the crysis era.
 
WOOHOO!!!

My EVGA GTX 280 FTW sitting inside my pc dedicated to physx isn't going to waste!

680 sli + 280 physx = overkill for Borderlands 2. Woot.
 
Avatar82 said:
two things.
so like, why can't my 12 core 8 ghz cpu do this?

or

isn't there a non proprietary physics engine that both manufactures cards can use?

thanks
Click to expand...

Because 12 core 8GHz CPUs don't exist?
 
nvidia gives developer money for supporting physx. it is just a win win business solution that the hardware and software company does.
 
AMD just needs to cough up the cash to a game developer to give them a killer game with physics processing we can all enjoy. Their only other choice is to pay up and license PhysX from NVIDIA.
 
Honestly, density of particles doesn't make it worth it. It looks awful, the cloth, while... rippy doesn't fit at all. Even though I'm on nvidia I'd probably turn it off for a better experience.
 
Haters gonna hate...

The only way great physics processing is going to make it into games as mainstream options is for gimmicky implements like this to occur. Can it be done via other means, ala CPU, AMD GPUs, etc? Yes. The fact that they AREN'T doing it speaks volumes. Fact is this will sell more nVidia GPUs. People like their shiny shit. Always have, always will. ;)
 
Crest said:
Honestly, density of particles doesn't make it worth it. It looks awful, the cloth, while... rippy doesn't fit at all. Even though I'm on nvidia I'd probably turn it off for a better experience.
Click to expand...

I agree that PhysX isn't always super realistic. But it looks a shit load better than bland explosions where basically nothing happens. It's not always worth the FPS trade off, but having cloth beats not having cloth at all, particles beat nothing, flying debris beats an explosion that isn't dynamic at all.

Jesus people just can't be happy.
 
ikarinokami said:
It's going be awhile before that, it doesnt look like even multi core cpus are powerful enough do gameplay physics yet. I could all change prehaps if the new consoles have powerful GPU's. since pretty much console dictate the entirity of modern techical advancement of games today- rip in peace the crysis era.
Click to expand...

I don't really agree. I have watched the intel AVX physics (alot of cloth) simulation demo and it is quite impressive. This was a major design goal of AVX...intel was afraid of more offloading of CPU intensive tasks to the GPU.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top