![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
chew on this
- Thread starter tomana
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- May 7, 2007
- Messages
- 13,438
lol @ PhysX. 
Hamish Campbell
2[H]4U
- Joined
- May 15, 2006
- Messages
- 2,062
It's a pretty telling article. nVidia is trying to extract any value they can out of the PhysX brand. They realize they bought a lemon with Aegia and will probably never recoup the losses. At this point all they can do is over emphasize the importance of PhysX and pray some developer releases a totally game changing title based on its use(not gonna happen).
They are definitely nice little features to have but aren't compelling enough on their own to offer any real value to 99% of people in the market for a graphics card. When you're making your next GPU purchase, these features really should be an afterthought at best. Performance and price still mean everything.
They are definitely nice little features to have but aren't compelling enough on their own to offer any real value to 99% of people in the market for a graphics card. When you're making your next GPU purchase, these features really should be an afterthought at best. Performance and price still mean everything.
SnowBeast
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2003
- Messages
- 1,312
Nope. Its a load. Not to mention I haven't ran across any other site that matched his benchmark numbers. Once again, its 2009 now and we are still waiting for HAVOC physics supported games. Been hearing about this since 2007. When Havoc this, when havoc that. Its really getting old. Mirror's Edge might have been only one game, but it truly showed what physX brought to the enviroment, and it was alot. And at least Nvidia and partners are trying to implement Physics. And at least PhysX exists, and is being implemented. We haven't seen crap for ATI or the "New" Havok engine, have we?
Before all the ATI fanboi's get angry, get on ATI/AMD and game partners about getting this elusive "Havoc Pysics Engine" out so it will force nvidia to go OpenCl with PhysX and make a basic Physics Engine for everyone. Till then, Anand can shove his ignorant rants where the sun doesn't shine. Not a coherent thought about why Nvidia is able to push PhysX from that Anand group.
- Joined
- May 7, 2007
- Messages
- 13,438
Nope. Its a load. Not to mention I haven't ran across any other site that matched his benchmark numbers. Once again, its 2009 now and we are still waiting for HAVOC physics supported games. Been hearing about this since 2007. When Havoc this, when havoc that. Its really getting old. Mirror's Edge might have been only one game, but it truly showed what physX brought to the enviroment, and it was alot. And at least Nvidia and partners are trying to implement Physics. And at least PhysX exists, and is being implemented. We haven't seen crap for ATI or the "New" Havok engine, have we?
Before all the ATI fanboi's get angry, get on ATI/AMD and game partners about getting this elusive "Havoc Pysics Engine" out so it will force nvidia to go OpenCl with PhysX and make a basic Physics Engine for everyone. Till then, Anand can shove his ignorant rants where the sun doesn't shine. Not a coherent thought about why Nvidia is able to push PhysX from that Anand group.
I agree. AMD/ATI really need to get off their ass and start producing some actual results. PhysX along with CUDA won't really impress me until I start seeing some real results, not crappy demos/games and near-worthless transcoders.
to be fair here game developers are part of the issue, I really haven't seen anyone make good use (that is a real difference in game play) using physics period. its hard to showcase a technology that isn't really being exploited for anything other then marketing. having said that I am no more likely to buy a physx card then I am a DX10.1 card,
- Joined
- May 7, 2007
- Messages
- 13,438
Well, if a game that was made like Cell Factor (not a demo showcase though) which required PhysX to run and made the game better, yeah it would be cool, but it would alienate all AMD/ATI video card users, which is a good chunk of the market and game designers/producers won't risk that. That's why it's still optional and thus makes it mediocre at best.
Just goes to show you the video card MFGs dont give a shit about the consumer.Try to get anand to do the test different to try to confuse the consumers into buying nvidia cards due to phsyx.
Hey nvidia physx can kiss my ass since it is a waste of time and money.
I got tired of nvidia ripping me off so I bought a xbox 360.I cannot stay confused,frustrated,reading all kinds of shit to stay on top of pc gaming so I gave up.Way to go nvidia no more of my money for you
Hey nvidia physx can kiss my ass since it is a waste of time and money.
I got tired of nvidia ripping me off so I bought a xbox 360.I cannot stay confused,frustrated,reading all kinds of shit to stay on top of pc gaming so I gave up.Way to go nvidia no more of my money for you
unrealsword
Gawd
- Joined
- May 8, 2008
- Messages
- 825
Maybe with windows 7 will physx take off due to being able to use ati + nvidia in one pc. Unless nvidia jacks up the drivers so there's conflicts with ati.
I think that a closed physics standard won't work, meaning that if nVidia wants to get the ball rolling on PhysX, what they first have to do is to make it so that it works on ATi hardware. It doesn't have to be blazing fast, but they have to make sure that it works. I think the most they can pull off is "runs on ATi, runs BETTER on nVidia". But that's probably a lot of work for them, assuming ATi even wants to be involved in such a thing.
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2006
- Messages
- 1,830
You make no fucking sense... Some, 1, angry console fanboy on [H] forums, umm you sure you are on correct forum? (i'm not here to judge any one or to tell you what to do, just asking)
O yeah, let us know when your shit RRODs
I have been thru the pc paces and it is a waste of time.Go ahead and spend $300 on a video card so you can put it in your sig and make your e peen even bigger.
I dont care if my 360 rrods I can get it replaces for free.Still cheaper then the price of a video card
i got my 4870 for $107 brand new and it crushes the 360 in terms of graphics power
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2006
- Messages
- 1,830
You been? Kid you sound like a 14 year old. You are definitely on the wrong forum.
Most of the people come here because they like to build high end PCs - ITS A HOBBY, discuss high end PC hardware, and well of coarse latest PC games. There is a small tiny tiny section on Consoles/games.
I feel sorry that you can not afford a decent PC and/or its too complicated for you to get in to the PC gaming.
And the $300 video card is for the games that average console can not handle at the highest settings and high resolutions. If i would want to have a big epeen, i would go for 295 in SLI.
but then again money doesnt grow on trees.And how tha f*** do you know this? Huh?
InvisiBill
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2003
- Messages
- 2,608
Agreed. If all else is equal, then CUDA/PhysX add value above what the other card offers. However, I don't know of anyone who bought a lesser Nvidia card (compared to a better ATI card) just for that.
Yup, the old chicken and egg. Nobody wants to make games that rely on PhysX because it will alienate owners without PhysX. Users don't care about PhysX because it doesn't offer anything game-changing.
I think I remember reading that Nvidia offered to license it to ATI, but they wanted nothing to do with it. I'm a fan of open source in general, but I think that opening PhysX up would allow more companies to support it (both hardware and software), and cause it to take off. Allowing others into the market will relinquish Nvidia's exclusive hold on it, but they should theoretically be able to be the best at it, allowing them to keep their crown even with some competition. If more software supports it (due to more hardware supporting it), and they can retain their dominance, it could mean more sales. All due to letting in some competition...
KaptainKhaos
Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2008
- Messages
- 703
Hope the point of physx becomes moot with the advent of DX11. But we like to add our physx hardware to our growing pile of useless tech like 3d-glassed VR Helmets and other ideas that sounded cool for a short time at least.
i get that people do not like how hard nvidia is trying to dress physx up as something it isn't yet, but i don't get why people hate on the tech so bad. bottom line is gpu's do handle some calculations better than cpu's. whether it's physx, havoc or some tech that grows from the base idea/concept of those technologies, it will push gaming tech/software to another level. people should be more excited about the advancement or attempt of.
Unless Microsoft has some secret physics library embedded in DX11 I don't see what they have to do with each other.....
The problem with anything like this, is incorporation into the game without making it feel either gimmicky, or plain useless.
It has to be something thats done from the ground up, not " oh man we gotta make this window blow up cool so Physx looks better".
It has to be "This would look great, and Physx could improve on that "
A lot of these cases I seen in the video's was basically more chicken before egg in concept, and it felt thrown in.
Mirrors Edge in reality was the only thing that made a diff. Did it make the game different, yes, did it change gameplay, yes, did it detract from the game while incorporating it, no.
That = a win in my book, and as much as I despise Anandtech, he was right on the mark on that statement.
Its kinda like anymore when you watch a movie, and all of a sudden its a full screen shot of a fast food restaurant and the star of the movie is gulping down one of their drinks and doing that AHHHHHHH sound. You know its blatant bullshit thrown in for the express purpose of advertising.
Physx, and anything of that sort cannot be that, or its merit gets deflated, and its chances of being a valuable addition, end up being garbage, no matter how good the hardware.
It has to be something thats done from the ground up, not " oh man we gotta make this window blow up cool so Physx looks better".
It has to be "This would look great, and Physx could improve on that "
A lot of these cases I seen in the video's was basically more chicken before egg in concept, and it felt thrown in.
Mirrors Edge in reality was the only thing that made a diff. Did it make the game different, yes, did it change gameplay, yes, did it detract from the game while incorporating it, no.
That = a win in my book, and as much as I despise Anandtech, he was right on the mark on that statement.
Its kinda like anymore when you watch a movie, and all of a sudden its a full screen shot of a fast food restaurant and the star of the movie is gulping down one of their drinks and doing that AHHHHHHH sound. You know its blatant bullshit thrown in for the express purpose of advertising.
Physx, and anything of that sort cannot be that, or its merit gets deflated, and its chances of being a valuable addition, end up being garbage, no matter how good the hardware.
There is no reason for ATI to do so, at best it would run a lot slower on their cards and detract from their parent companies core business. CPU physics is starting to make a showing now. And while Nvidia offered to license it to ATI it was still going to be a closed system. not to mention that it would have been a LOT of work on ATI part to support a platform that to my knowledge not a single good game for it. DX10.1 is really in the same boat, there wasn't really a lot of reason for them to jump on it (esp after the issues they had with the original DX10 standards if true) when it was so marginally supported. They are supporting it now (why?) but that is at least a generation late. And supporting havock makes more sense to AMD anyways, much better developer support, should be able to run via gpu or cpu if they are to be believed, and there are already some big titles that use.
well for myself its because I am sick of hearing about it. Sorry it just isn't worth much and much like vista I resent having it forced feed. much like DX10.1 its nice when its there (and unlike physx things actually run better with it) but there isn't a game that I am going to be willing to buy that is going to use it. and like Britteny, Micheal or Obama I am sick of see them (not nearly as bad, I will actually turn off other peoples TV if they are on it) but enough already.
- Status