![[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.
Effects Physics & Gameplay Physics Explored @ [H]
- Thread starter FrgMstr
- Start date
Brent_Justice said:
I would like to ask you a few questions (and you know that I am not out to get either you or [H]ard...or so I hope)
1. You got anything to validate the claims about gameplay physics and preformance?
It's not like that ATI/NIVIDA has been the oracles of truth in the past.
2. Do you (based on your experince with hardware) believe that the current GPU's will surpass the PhysX in preformance?
Given the quite large archithectual differences that actually excists between a PPU and a GPU.
3. As a gamer reviewer, don't you think that the current lack of games, supporting GPU "physics"(or even declared support for) is a MAJOR problem?
We all know that developing games(from the bottom up) takes time...and AGEIA has a MAJOR headstart.
Terra - Say it like it is
@Terra - There is no reason a video card cannot do gameplay physics. The calculations are the same, it is just a matter of whether the data is returned to memory to update the game world (in the case of gameplay physics). Video cards are very good at reading and writing to memory at high speeds. Whether this gets implemented or not is another story. I'm willing to believe it will eventually.
Terra said:I would like to ask you a few questions (and you know that I am not out to get either you or [H]ard...or so I hope)
1. You got anything to validate the claims about gameplay physics and preformance?
It's not like that ATI/NIVIDA has been the oracles of truth in the past.
2. Do you (based on your experince with hardware) believe that the current GPU's will surpass the PhysX in preformance?
Given the quite large archithectual differences that actually excists between a PPU and a GPU.
3. As a gamer reviewer, don't you think that the current lack of games, supporting GPU "physics"(or even declared support for) is a MAJOR problem?
We all know that developing games(from the bottom up) takes time...and AGEIA has a MAJOR headstart.
Terra - Say it like it is
I know you can't read this but i will atleast make the statement.
Do you know there is actually 100+ games that will utilize the physix card that is based on anything other then PR?
Have you seen these games utilize the card?
The games that are released right now how do you know they are actually using the card and not just using more well optimized drivers that actually offloads it to the GPU?
Brent_Justice
Moderator
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2000
- Messages
- 17,755
Terra said:
And I am not out to get anyone either, I'm just here to post the facts as I know them.
I have the word of NVIDIA and ATI and Havok from the top guys from each working on physics acceleration. They all seem to gel with each other and I think it correct. I have no reason to doubt them, they aren't going to blatantly lie in public in front of millions of readers. What they are saying, and what I've heard in the tech community gels.
Technically speaking I don't see why what they are saying wouldn't be correct. GPUs wouldn't know the difference between an "effect" physics and "gameplay" physics.
Who the hell knows, I sure don't.
ATI claims 9x the performance, but I sure haven't tested that, so for right now that IS a PR claim, a bold one, but still untested by hardware reviewers like ourselves.
It will be mucho fun trying to figure out which platforms do provide the best gameplay experience, that's for sure.
I'd say this applies to the PhysX processor and GPUs at this point in time. We've made it very clear the lack of a "killer app".
The hardware is nothing without the games, I honestly don't think we are going to see many, if any, in 2006. I think 2007 is the year that things will start getting ramped up on the physics acceleration side (both for PhysX and GPUs).
An aside, it seems this whole "GPU vs. PhysX processor" is turning into a pretty hot debate right now, I personally don't see any reason to align with either side right now. This is all in its infancy, the technology is too young to take sides. I think we need to step back and realize that physics acceleration can be a very very cool thing for games. How we get there will be an interesting journey and we need to keep an open mind to all possibilities right now, and maybe even think of some new ones! I look forward to testing various hardware in various games and finding out which platforms provides the best gaming experience.
A good conversation at Beyond3d regarding physics and how useful a dedicated PPU is today and what it might mean with DX10. Looks even worse for Ageia.
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31665
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31665
Brent_Justice said:
Never said anything else....
You mean like NVIDIA's SM3.0 vs SM2.0 screenies (actually SM1.0) or ATI's "SM3.0 done right"?
Interaction is not the same as applying shaders...
The architechture is NOT the same.(GPU vs. PPU)
It sounds (to me) like trying to add SM3.0 to via software to a SM1.0 card....
So you agree it's just PR for the time?
Kinda hard when the only player on the market that has anything to show is AGEIA, wouldn't you agree?
And I point out the LACK of anything hands on from ATI / NVIDIA / AGEIA...
Why don't they SHOW what they got...instead of fluffering around?
Like I stated, games take time to make...and we all know who's got the MAJOR headstart....wouldn't you agree?
The reason why it got "hot" was a PR claim.
ATI's "9 times faster"....
IF they are 9 times faster, why don't they SHOW it?
Ockhams razor in action...
Terra - The ONLY company that has delivered so far is AGEIA...the rest is still PR...
Terra said:
If you took the blinders off and actually digested what FACTS we know you might understand. Until then you will continue to go down in a ball of flames. Maybe a new poll is in order?
Terra said:
Don't underestimate the power of a GPU, expecially one with a ton of shader horsepower. All in good time, son.
Terra said:
What exactly have we seen from AGEIA except a few techdemos and some crappy DOS looking effects in one or two games? That would explain why Frys has had them in stock for a month and the same boxes are on the shelf.
What facts?R1ckCa1n said:
Show me GPU physics on your rig , please...
I can show you PPU phycis on my rig...
Until then you will continue to go down in a ball of flames. Maybe a new poll is in order?
I fail to se any argument that has relevancy?
You think you can get steam-survey locked?
Linear data vs HEAVELY fragmented data...*chough*
And you are NOT my father...
You claim that there are only 2 games out that support the PhysX?
Sure you want to stick with that statment?
Terra...
Terra said:1. CellFactor is a DEMO..of an upcomming retail game.
You wan't deny this fact?
Or are you going to call it a "techdemo" after it's goes retail too
The real question is how will it enhance the gaming experience or is this going to be "effects physics" that might be done on the GPU's once the game is released?
Terra said:
Simple answer; I will quote directly from Ageia themself since none of this is graphics related or can be done today with a GPU.
R1ckCa1n said:
Please show me GPU physcis.
What's the problem?
"Explosions that cause dust and collateral debris"
The PPU is rendering the graphics, and putting it to the screen? YES/NO?
"Spectacular new weapons with unpredictable effects"
The PPU is rendering the graphics, and putting it to the screen? YES/NO?
"Cloth that drapes and tears the way you expect it to"
The PPU is rendering the graphics, and putting it to the screen? YES/NO?
"Lush foliage that sways naturally when brushed against"
The PPU is rendering the graphics, and putting it to the screen? YES/NO?
"Dense smoke & fog that billow around objects in motion"
The PPU is rendering the graphics, and putting it to the screen? YES/NO?
Or does the PPU calculate the collision, behaviour and interactions, while a GPU make the graphics?
Terra - Sure you know what a PPU is and what it does?
R1ckCa1n said:
Allow me to send the "argument" right back:
Funny, I just checked the top 10 games on gamespot and ebworld and your GPU Physcis has zero EFFECT on them so what exactly are you playing, techdomos?
Sticking an object to a surface is not physics?
Terra...
I give up on you Terra. You are too blind to see everything you argue can be done on a GPU and IS BEING DONE TODAY. This sub-forum should be locked until a dedicated peice of hardware is required to enhance a GAME. Since todays "dedicated hardware" do nothing but give old DOS looking effects physics while doing nothing to improve speed this is a waste of time. Sorta like putting the egg before the chicken.
So go back to playing your techdemos and looking at your drivers because it is all you can do with it today.
Here is a great example of how blinded you are. PREY doesn't require dedicated hardware and has incredible effects physics.
piece out/
So go back to playing your techdemos and looking at your drivers because it is all you can do with it today.
Terra said:
Here is a great example of how blinded you are. PREY doesn't require dedicated hardware and has incredible effects physics.
piece out/
Brent_Justice
Moderator
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2000
- Messages
- 17,755
Terra said:
Of course the architecture is not the same. That doesn't mean one can't do what the other does. The roads leading you to the goal may take a different route, but the end result will still result in that same goal.
It is stated that GPUs are hardware capable of effects physics and gameplay physics just like the PhysX processor (they don't know the difference on the hardware level). What will be the determing factor will be game support for either factor, as well as the level of gameplay experience provided by each solution.
Kinda hard when the only player on the market that has anything to show is AGEIA, wouldn't you agree?
Indeed, again I'll point out the need for a "killer app" as we have done in the past. ( i feel like i'm repeating myself)
I completely agree, as noted above, we need games to prove the technology.
Tell me, how do you measure who has the "major" headstart? And in the end does it really matter?
Hrm, I suppose it depends what level it takes for you to decide that a company has "delivered".
Personally, I don't feel anyone has delivered yet. Where's my killer game that makes me want to buy into one of the hardware pieces to accelerate physics? I'm not going to spend money on hardware that doesn't do anything for me right now. Make me as a gamer want to plop my green down.
R1ckCa1n said:
Please show me?
If you are referring to GPU-physics...
Please define "enhance"?
More effects? (GRAW)
Gameplay physics?(Bet on Soldier...yes the flametrower is interactive and INFLUENCES the enviroment)
Do I really need to repeat my question?:
Is PPU is rendering the graphics, and putting it to the screen? YES/NO?
Simple question, simple answer.
Don't blame the PhysX for graphics, it's a PPU, not a GPU!
Thank you for letting me do exactly what i do?
But tell me this:
What can you do?
Are you saying that effect-physics can be achieved without a PPU or GPU-pysics and we need neither?
Terra - You forgot about gameplay physics BTW...besides answering my question (the DOS comment)
Brent_Justice said:
Yes, but dedicated hardware has always been better compared to general purpose or "softmodded" hardware
Hardware+API preformance/accuracy/scalability is a major factor too...
And we need Hardware/API capability too...
( i feel like i'm repeating myself)
Just like with DirectX 9.0..the hardware/API needs to be there before any code can be written...
I just find it odd that ATI claims "9x preformance"..but got nothing to show?
What is the big secret that they can't seem to deliver?
Just a simple GPU-pyhsics techdemo public available would go a LONG way.
By being ahead(Hardware and API out) and the number of developers and games supporting (slated) the PhysX compared to...well...what from the GPU-physcis side?
They(AGEIA) have delivered the hardware and the API..the rest is up to the games developers...unless you think that AGEIA should also start making games?
I refeer to my above statement...but you do know that PhysX games are in the works, and not just 2 or 3 games..but a LOT of games.
It will be "9-12" months (further headstart for AGEIA) untill ATI delivers.
If you where a game developer today, what would you choose:
A solution where the Hardware and API is out..or halt and wait for ~1 year for ATI?
Terra...
Brent_Justice
Moderator
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2000
- Messages
- 17,755
Terra said:
GPUs are dedicated hardware.
1.) Hardware - GPUs capable of physics acceleration are also out, in fact I think I can safely say more people have a GPU than a PhysX processor at this particular time
2.) Software (API) - HavokFX is out
So there you go, for GPU physics acceleration the hardware and API is out there. We just need the games now
Same with the PhysX processor, the hardware and API is out, we just need the games
2.) Software (API) - HavokFX is out
So there you go, for GPU physics acceleration the hardware and API is out there. We just need the games now
Dont forget the drivers as well as even with games without drivers you still cannot see the physics.
So there you go, for GPU physics acceleration the hardware and API is out there. We just need the games now
Dont forget the drivers as well as even with games without drivers you still cannot see the physics.
Seeing how that article said that Physx cards do effects physics and they even said that developers will most likely stick with that route due to making the most compatibility for everyone one, I don't see why you think it's going to pull ahead in any real leaps and bounds. You don't know WHAT the developers who announced support for ageia are going to do with it. I think you keep thinking every game is going to be melting/exploding walls and buildings and every grenade shrapnel when it's not going to advance that fast due to everyone not going to buy a PPU card.Terra said:
That huge list of games? Tell me, what's the released date on most of those? You don't think they fall well outside of 9-12 months (Unreal3 for example)? Are they out of the box supporting or is it with a patch? I mean we had to wait almost a full year before HDR in HL2. You yourself keep saying it takes a long time for game developers.
You don't think they fall well outside of 9-12 months
No as they started work on them ages ago and 20+ are due in the next 6 months. If have not been given precise dates but they did say a good 20ish would be out before the the end of the year.
You yourself keep saying it takes a long time for game developers.
It does take a long time to develop but the developers have had a good 6 months at least head start on working on Ageia physics. The first games have already came out and a lot more are due soon ish. While GPU physics developers have not had much time to work with the API and a few games due out in 9 to 12 months. Basically where Ageia are now is where GPU physics will be in 9 to 12 months. In 9months when GPU have a handful of games Ageia should have lots of game as long as the current timeline is kept.
You don't know WHAT the developers who announced support for ageia are going to do with it.
True but we know the current trend is so we can guess at what devlopers will do. The current trend is to make extra PPU only levels or effects that come on when everyone with a PPU is around. So you do get gameplay physics and are not limited to effect physics only.
No as they started work on them ages ago and 20+ are due in the next 6 months. If have not been given precise dates but they did say a good 20ish would be out before the the end of the year.
You yourself keep saying it takes a long time for game developers.
It does take a long time to develop but the developers have had a good 6 months at least head start on working on Ageia physics. The first games have already came out and a lot more are due soon ish. While GPU physics developers have not had much time to work with the API and a few games due out in 9 to 12 months. Basically where Ageia are now is where GPU physics will be in 9 to 12 months. In 9months when GPU have a handful of games Ageia should have lots of game as long as the current timeline is kept.
You don't know WHAT the developers who announced support for ageia are going to do with it.
True but we know the current trend is so we can guess at what devlopers will do. The current trend is to make extra PPU only levels or effects that come on when everyone with a PPU is around. So you do get gameplay physics and are not limited to effect physics only.
The reason I think why ati/nvidia have yet to come out with the drivers for there physics solution is because they have no games released with the havokfx engine yet. Ageia has a list of about 60 games (there are supposedly another 40+ developers that are using the engine but have yet to announce a title so who even knows if they are going to actually use it they might just be testing) but most arn't going to be released this year. Your most likely going to see games for both types of setups within the next 9-12 months. Until then there isn't much to see here. Ageia released there hardware to early and has had crappy developers rush crappy physics into there games. If they took there time and allowed these developers to take there time then we wouldn't such crap upon first release. This isn't a game about who's first it's about who's got the best quality games. The fact is Ageia is riding on a lineup that could kill them. With no killer titles ahead and hoping for one of these no name games to become a hit is pretty risky. To me I think the reason why no big budget game has decided to fully dedicate there game to the PPU is that they can afford to use there own physic system while these cheap games with small investment ventures have to suffer with the free stuff. Oh also I think your not seeing driver release right now for Nvidia/ATi for physics is because they would rather keep working on them instead of rushing them out early. No reason to release them now when there is no games for them.
Also I am sure we all seen Crysis right? Don't you love how it dosn't need a PPU?
Also I am sure we all seen Crysis right? Don't you love how it dosn't need a PPU?
Netrat33 said:
Just for you:
Developers & Games
Akella - Captain Blood
Airtight Games
Abyss Lights Studio - Abyss Lights: Frozen Systems
Artificial Studios / Immersion Games - CellFactor: Revolution
- Preliminary information about the game
Artificial Studios - Monster Madness
ASCARON Entertainment - Sacred II (and other next-generation titles)
Atari - Dragonshard
Atomic Elbow - Switchball
Big Huge Games - Rise Of Nations: Rise Of Legends
- Click here for demo
Black Element Software - Alpha Prime
BlueTorch Studios - Open Fire (free game)
Boanerges Studios
Bongfish Interactive Entertainment - Stoked Rider featuring Tommy Brunner
- Click here for demo mirrors
ChessBase - FRITZ 9 (and other upcoming titles)
Composite Studios - Ancient Galaxy
Crazy House - Tank Killer
Cryptic Studios - City Of Villains (and other next-generation titles)
- PhysX hardware support in a patch
Cyanide Studios - Loki
Destineer Studios
DiezelPower Studios - Dogtag
DIOsoft - Pirates of the XXI Century
EGN Interactive
Epic Games - Unreal Tournament 2007
- Will have PhysX hardware support (supposedly some levels require PhysX hardware)
FAKT Software - Crazy Machines II
FAKT Software - Gunship Apocalypse
Frantic Games - 1944: D-Day
Frogwares Game Development Studio
Futuremark Corporation - 3DMark06
(- No PhysX hardware support)..and who cares about 3D-shitty-mark?
Gaijin Entertainment
Game Consulting - Arena Online
GRIN - Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter
- Click here for demo mirrors and here for the latest patches
GungHo Online Entertainment - Rondo Projects
Icarus Studios - Fallen Earth
IceHill - Empire Above All
Illusion Softworks
Kuju Entertainment - Rail Simulator
Kylotonn - Bet On Soldier: Blood Sport & Blood Of Sahara expansion pack
- Click here to download Bet On Soldier v1.3 PhysX patch, 257MB
Larian Studios
Legendo Entertainment
Meridian 93
Metropolis Software - INFERNAL (Diabolique)
MiST Land
Monte Cristo - Silverfall
Most Wanted Entertainment - Joint Task Force
Mythic Entertainment - Warhammer Online: Age Of Reckoning
Naked Sky Entertainment - RoboBlitz
NetDevil
Obsidian Entertainment
PerfectPlay Entertainment - Metathrone Project
Piranha Bytes - Gothic 3
- PhysX hardware support in a patch
Real Time Worlds
Shiny Entertainment Studio
Quantic Dream - KARMA & Heavy Rain
Ritual Entertainment
Secret Level
SEGA - GE2 Project (and other next-generation titles)
Sigil Games Online - Vanguard: Saga Of Heroes
Signature Devices
Spark Unlimited - New Pandora game *
Treehouse (Games Academy) - Fragfist
Widescreen Games
XL Games
YAGER Development - Eye Of The Storm
The list of games that will use PhysX in one way or the other...as we are speaking.
Terra - Now show me the list for GPU-physics!!!
Notice how this list is mostly studio's and developers and not games. Also i liked this
Futuremark Corporation - 3DMark06
(- No PhysX hardware support)..and who cares about 3D-shitty-mark?
so how does that count??? If they include a benchmark that dosn't include support for the hardware aspect of the physix API then how many of the other small list of games posted do aswell? I am sure I can come up with a much bigger list of games that support Havok it's just Havokfx that will seem kinda lonely. To me right now it's PR FUD that Ageia card would be neccesary to run any of those games. More like there engine is just being used.
Futuremark Corporation - 3DMark06
(- No PhysX hardware support)..and who cares about 3D-shitty-mark?
so how does that count??? If they include a benchmark that dosn't include support for the hardware aspect of the physix API then how many of the other small list of games posted do aswell? I am sure I can come up with a much bigger list of games that support Havok it's just Havokfx that will seem kinda lonely. To me right now it's PR FUD that Ageia card would be neccesary to run any of those games. More like there engine is just being used.
Brent_Justice
Moderator
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2000
- Messages
- 17,755
Using the PhysX physics engine API, and actually using the PhysX processor hardware physics acceleration are two different things.
Brent_Justice said:
True.
But I still lack a list of games for GPU-physics?
Like the old fairytale where the little boy says(to the emporer):
"But he is naked...he dosn't have any clothes on."
Any game starting development today only have 1 option for hardware accelerated physcis.
Terra - And that is a fact...
I'm sorry but is it clear some people in this thread don't understand the point conveyed from the article?
FACT: We have dedicated hardware on the market that a small handfull (one hand) actually use for "EFFECT" physics. Now granted they look like shit as stated by many [H]forum members. Can it be done by a GPU, yes.
FACT: We know GPU's have a ton of shader horsepower and technology and will, according to the manufactures, start to use physics once it is relevant in gaming. We do know current dedicated hardware is based on old technology in regards to PPU manufacturing (130nm). Makes you wonder why such revolutionary hardware isn't even produced with new or current process.....
FACT: If you want to see some nice physics, just buy the hardware and play some techdemos TODAY.
FACT: There is a long list of games that supposedly will support dedicated hardware for physics. How is will be used and to what degree is COMPLETELY UNKNOWN.
FACT: We know nothing until a "killer app", other than a techdemo or driver is released.
FACT: We have dedicated hardware on the market that a small handfull (one hand) actually use for "EFFECT" physics. Now granted they look like shit as stated by many [H]forum members. Can it be done by a GPU, yes.
FACT: We know GPU's have a ton of shader horsepower and technology and will, according to the manufactures, start to use physics once it is relevant in gaming. We do know current dedicated hardware is based on old technology in regards to PPU manufacturing (130nm). Makes you wonder why such revolutionary hardware isn't even produced with new or current process.....
FACT: If you want to see some nice physics, just buy the hardware and play some techdemos TODAY.
FACT: There is a long list of games that supposedly will support dedicated hardware for physics. How is will be used and to what degree is COMPLETELY UNKNOWN.
FACT: We know nothing until a "killer app", other than a techdemo or driver is released.
Brent_Justice
Moderator
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2000
- Messages
- 17,755
Terra said:
Lists don't impress me. What impresses me is having the game installed on my computer and playing it.
err, um, no
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2001
- Messages
- 14,455
Terra said:
Why is it so hard for you to accept the fact that GPUs can do effects/gameplay physics just like your beloved PPU can?
Terra said:Just for you:
Developers & Games
The list of games that will use PhysX in one way or the other...as we are speaking.
Terra - Now show me the list for GPU-physics!!!
Did you even finish my post? I didn't ask you to post a list. Go back and read it again.
What is the release date for most of those games and when will a patch be available? What is actually going happen in these games? Do you know?
NO
SuperGee said:
True but it can also mean that a dev is just testing with it and only considering they might use it for implementing in one of there games. They also could just be listed seperatly from the game they are making just to fluff up the list.
Also Terra will say to the day he dies that Nvidia/ATI can't handle interactive physics. *deleted personal attack against Terra*. I think we should just keep the facts out there and not worry about convicing one person and instead make sure this stays an open physics forum and not Ageiamania
Netrat33 said:
As I said earlier i think most of those games wont require the hardware anyhow I think most will just be using the physix drivers and the only thing the card will do is just offload the physic's code to the ppu and not add anything extra because they don't want to make a game that is limited by a small group of people they are just happy to use a free engine so they can spend more money on other parts of the game. These games arn't ment for high end gamers they are for wide selling games so they can't push the GPU to hard because most of the people that will buy these games won't have the gpu power nor the money to spend $300 on a PPU.
Oh also on another post they state Hellgate and Alone in the dark will have support for HavokFx so that's two big name games while Ageia only has 1.
Brent_Justice
Moderator
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2000
- Messages
- 17,755
I really don't want this thread to turn into personal attacks, so let's try to keep to discussing the technology and let's not name names.