G4saurus Defectus

[Silus]

Would like to mention that due to game development time the reason physx may appear has nothing to do with cuda and all to do with aegia? Also, most companies are interested in the software physx engine with hardware support tacked on so people arguing how useful cuda is is from one aspect pointless as it would have appeared in games released recently anyway. Unless someone has links saying how companies suddenly jumped on board and jeoperdised release dates and game stability to cram this "new" tech in.

And that is precisely why PhysX will take off, because it's a well known physics API that NVIDIA just ported to CUDA. And that's the beauty of it. A person with a CUDA ready GPU, just needs to flip a switch and they can accelerate their physics effects with their GPU, instead of their CPU. If they don't have power to spare, they just leave the CPU to do the calculations. It's a bonus, with no costs added. Unreal Engine 3 is PhysX ready for example and that already covers lots of games.

 

[alg7_munif]

LOL, so your proof is a thread YOU created, with YOUR opinion on why YOU think it's better ?

Have you used their SDK ? I haven't yet, but I have used NVIDIA's and it's quite mature with excellent support.

ATI has started with GPGPU long before nVidia did, just without those marketing hype Btw can you tell me what games are there actually use PhysX instead of Havok?

 

[Silus]

ATI has started with GPGPU long before nVidia did, just without those marketing hype

Does it matter who started it first, if the one that started it later has a more mature set of development tools and provides excellent support ?

 

[necrophile]

No, it will never be as prevalent as havoc, alot of the games on lists showing support use havoc as the base or another software physics tech and tack on some support, what support unreal has i am not entirely sure but it is not inergrated fully AFAIK.

See, it is very difficult to have a discussion on this as most people are blinkered and hard headed. Of couirse the misinformation doesn't help either. I always think what if the boot was on the other foot and ATI had cuda and the different arch, i know how this discussion would go, and you wouldn't be favouring ATI that is for sure.

 

[Silus]

No, it will never be as prevalent as havoc, alot of the games on lists showing support use havoc as the base or another software physics tech and tack on some support, what support unreal has i am not entirely sure but it is not inergrated fully AFAIK.

It is fully integrated: http://www.unrealtechnology.com/features.php♥♥♥♥♥♥♥physics
As for how prevalent it will be, let's see: Havok only runs on the CPU. PhysX runs on both, which would you pick ?

See, it is very difficult to have a discussion on this as most people are blinkered and hard headed. Of couirse the misinformation doesn't help either. I always think what if the boot was on the other foot and ATI had cuda and the different arch, i know how this discussion would go, and you wouldn't be favouring ATI that is for sure.

Misinformation from who ? You seem to be saying that to me for some reason. And I'm certainly not the one downplaying the advantages of PhysX done on a GPU, just because ATI is behind in that particular field.

 

[necrophile]

I ain't downplaying, just realistic. A proprietary implemenation will never reign supreme. If it is so great, why do so few use it?

How come you seek to play up it and every other nvidia "feature". There is nothing about nvidia's gpu's which make it better.

As i say, if the boot was on the other foot there is no way this conversation would be the same.

 

[Silus]

I ain't downplaying, just realistic. A proprietary implemenation will never reign supreme. If it is so great, why do so few use it?

Havok is as proprietary as PhysX...the difference is one can be run on more than one hardware component. The other one does not. And there's nothing realistic about not acknowledging the advantages of having physics calculated on the GPU.

How come you seek to play up it and every other nvidia "feature". There is nothing about nvidia's gpu's which make it better.

As i say, if the boot was on the other foot there is no way this conversation would be the same.

And I can say the same about you and your need to downplay PhysX, just because ATI doesn't have it. If the "boot" (as you say) was reversed, you would probably be here praising it to high heaven, much like you say I'm doing. The difference is I don't care about which company does it. I just care that I get more stuff, without cost and being an owner of a 8800 series card, I can enjoy PhysX effects on my GPU, if I have power to spare.

 

[alg7_munif]

Don't forget why Ageia failed, it is not because of superior performance with dedicated hardware but it is because of the limited games and I don't see anything have changed much since then.

 

[CaptainSoble]

My favorite feature of "the newer competitive species" are the shitty fucking drivers.

Seriously, AMD's behaving like apple... We never caught nVidia really gloating when they were dominating the HD2900s and 3800s.

I got a 4870x2 and I have yet to see these shitty drivers you speak of. Using the official 8.11 drivers...

 

[Crosshairs]

LMAO...Good video.....I'm rocking as G4saurus 260 GTX..

 

[kadozer]

I understand the knee jerk reaction here for the Nvidia fanbois expressing disappointment over AMD using Apple tactics but did you guys think maybe its just some ATI fanboy that made this? Eutectic feet should be High-Pb solder bump feet. Pretty sloppy if this was done by AMD marketing dept to overlook the cause of gpu failures.

 

[LawGiver]

ive never understood fanboism. ive had ati and nvidia and never have problems. as far as im concerned both companies are equal in the driver department.

 

[CaptainSoble]

Doesn't the music in this video sound like one of the early super mario bros games on the nintendo? And the G4Saurus character reminds of the villain..King Kupa or whatever his name is.

 

[noobman]

Havok is as proprietary as PhysX...the difference is one can be run on more than one hardware component. The other one does not. And there's nothing realistic about not acknowledging the advantages of having physics calculated on the GPU.



And I can say the same about you and your need to downplay PhysX, just because ATI doesn't have it. If the "boot" (as you say) was reversed, you would probably be here praising it to high heaven, much like you say I'm doing. The difference is I don't care about which company does it. I just care that I get more stuff, without cost and being an owner of a 8800 series card, I can enjoy PhysX effects on my GPU, if I have power to spare.

Havok was the best physics API available during its time.

The concept of the AGEIA PhysX card didn't really catch on, but there's no denying that their API is very good. The Unreal 3 engine uses their API, thus automatically allowing hardware acceleration in all Unreal 3 based games (from my knowledge, I could be wrong about the acceleration bit). That was huge leverage for Ageia.

Now the Euphoria engine is out, and it looks like the most capable of the three. It's already caught on in a lot of modern games, like Star Wars TFU, GTA IV, and NHL 09 (had to throw that in there lol). fFom my understanding, Euphoria integrates physics into the animation engine... allowing devs to seamlessly transition between ragdolls and canned animations.

 

[Xathian]

I bought a 4870 and like it very much and it kicks the crap out of my 8800

What a completely flawed argument, so Ill rebuttal in your fashion.

My 8800GTS totally kicks the hell out of my x800 Pro, ATI sucks!