PPU's Dead

[ElMoIsEviL]

Right... I take it you have not read through the rest of the thread? If you did you would know that the Alan Wake demonstration is actually a example as to why CPU physics is bad right now.

The most powerful (and expensive) quad core conroe, overclocked 1 ghz, a entire core dedicated to just physics and this is the best it can do? There are more objects and particles being spun around in the cellfactor revolution trailer than that tech demo, it didn't even cause object mesh damage it just broke apart pre made pieces. Object collision and effect particles are not anything new, even HalfLife 2 had that, it just did them at a larger scale.

What a waste, considering what else that core could have been used for. Area's such as the seamless streaming of game data in the background to allow the movement between large environments without loading screens are examples of how CPU power can be better spent. Something the CPU will be constantly doing while running this game, leaving little room to dedicate a entire core to physics. You have a core for running the game, a core for background streaming and other threaded tasks, that already covers a dual core. You will need a quad to run this game plus the physics.

This has the issue of being monstrously more expensive than anything the general audience can afford, enthusiast gamers may drool over this but it is meaningless to developers if only the minority can afford the hardware to run it. Unlike graphics physics is difficult to scale when it is related to gameplay, making it inaccessible to budget and mainstream gamers. What developer in their right mind would make a game like that? More than likely the Alan Wake tornado tech demo was a Intel sponsored demonstration rather than a actually gameplay showing, if it comes included in the final game it will probably be something optional to turn on for the few people trying to justify their quad purchase with so little software support.

Ageia is a joke, I know you own a card and wasted away ~200-300USD on one and are trying to justify it's purchase but it just won't sell. The Alan Wake demo was not an Intel showcase, yes it was at the IDF but it was Remedy (game company) who brought their own overclocked system to showcase what they can do. It was quite amazing really.

Quad Core is highend now, but Multi Cores will trickle down over time, in 2 years a Quad Core will probably be the norm with Celerons level processors all being Dual Cores.

Ageia Physics is stuck on a bad bus, not only that it's performance is badly bottlenecked by graphics card performance, where as with a dedicated Core (if you listen to the Remedy spokesperson) the whole Core is ALSO processing the graphical aspect of the physics being processed by the Tornado... something Ageia cannot do. So what you get is VERY LITTLE GRAPHICAL SLOW DOWNS.

PS.. PCI bus = Max of 132MB/s and god knows it's already saturated by the use of Higher end sound cards and other PCI devices (IDE controllers, SCSI controllers, Network controllers). Of course many PCI devices have now moved over to the new PCI Express bus.. perhaps Ageia needs to do that... in the end though I doubt Ageia will win. I strongly believe Multi Cores will overtake this segment quite easilly.

 

[SuperGee]

As we've seen with the Alan wake tech demo PPU's are dead. A dedicated Core 2 core actually can do much more then Ageia's PPU (I mean just look at the Tornado scene) I haven't seen Ageia do anything remotely close.

Ive seen that to. But make no sens a twister in a game a windhoose around the player. What gameplay use has it. Make no sense.
I'am more impressed with the Unreal 3.0 engine Destructive enviorment gameplay show off off Warmonger sneakpeak.
and that is for a game released in the near future for free.

Ageia is a joke, I know you own a card and wasted away ~200-300USD on one and are trying to justify it's purchase but it just won't sell.

Because there arn't much games out wich uses PhysX right now. But some important once come in the near future and more. While all other solution must still come out to with there first ones.
Quadcore is very expensive now and no games for it yet.
GPGPU havok FX must role out it first game to.
Wenn all is in place nextyear or more ,PPU2 is then around and a lot more PhysX games and more to come.
The situation would be way different.

The Alan Wake demo was not an Intel showcase, yes it was at the IDF but it was Remedy (game company) who brought their own overclocked system to showcase what they can do. It was quite amazing really.

Sure we saw a lot of demo's form Ageia suporting devs to nV Physics demo's why are you so impressed.By this one.
I wonder the best movie for you would be Twister.
The most Gameplay en closest Phyics features with value to a game in a demo are.
Cellfactor CT. were CF:Revolution is a enhancement off.
Warmonger wich show a peak into Destructable enviorment gameplay.
Wich is a more Prakitcal extension to the early Unreal3 engine ingame PhysX demo.
But I'am lookin forward what else alanwake has to over in Phyical way. For all I know AW features a uniek gameplay features non Phycs related.
The game that impress me most for CPU use is Crysis. Wich uses also abit of GpGPU power. Live like jungle.

Quad Core is highend now, but Multi Cores will trickle down over time, in 2 years a Quad Core will probably be the norm with Celerons level processors all being Dual Cores.

In that time allmost all 100+ would be out also the good onces and starting a nextgen wave for PPU 2 wich overs more Physics power compared to a quadcore and compete better with GPGPU power out then.

Ageia Physics is stuck on a bad bus, not only that it's performance is badly bottlenecked by graphics card performance, where as with a dedicated Core (if you listen to the Remedy spokesperson) the whole Core is ALSO processing the graphical aspect of the physics being processed by the Tornado... something Ageia cannot do. So what you get is VERY LITTLE GRAPHICAL SLOW DOWNS.

FPS hit was a early driver isue.

PS.. PCI bus = Max of 132MB/s and god knows it's already saturated by the use of Higher end sound cards and other PCI devices (IDE controllers, SCSI controllers, Network controllers). Of course many PCI devices have now moved over to the new PCI Express bus.. perhaps Ageia needs to do that... in the end though I doubt Ageia will win. I strongly believe Multi Cores will overtake this segment quite easilly.

Well for PPU it sufice, maybe not PPU2.

NIC have often a Bypass in the south bridge.
Average gamer don't have workstations to game on SCSI?
Keeps over the sound card. well combined with PPU both don't saturate PCIbus.

Unless you have bandwide numbers.
The easy way would be benching a PCIE PPU vs a PPUPCI2,2+ card and notice a difference.

 

[AnnoyedDragon]

*sigh* You really didn't read through any of this thread did you? You just brought up arguments that have already been debunked, threw in a few opinions as facts, did a little crystal ball gazing and then boasted about multi core ruling 2 years from now.

But me, the fool, is going to reply to each part of your post anyway -_-

Ageia is a joke,

Says random guy on the web, considering you haven't even bothered to read through this thread I somewhat doubt you have taken the time to research the 3 physics competitors to come to a educated decision on which is best.

I know you own a card and wasted away ~200-300USD on one and are trying to justify it's purchase but it just won't sell. The Alan Wake demo was not an Intel showcase, yes it was at the IDF but it was Remedy (game company) who brought their own overclocked system to showcase what they can do. It was quite amazing really.

What is with this mentality that you need to have invested in the PPU to actually support it? No I don't own a PPU; my motherboard only has 2 PCI slots, one for the sound card and the other being eaten by my GPU. But you are going to keep believing that I do have one aren't you? Probably thinking you can instantly disregard anything I say because I am just “trying to justify it's purchase”, how convenient for your argument. Well you aren't doing much to help your credibility, you can get a PPU in America for what? £80 now? The prices you are quoting are months old and can only really be seen at rip off retailers like Dell, another example that you have done no research on the subject.

As for it not being influenced by Intel are you sure you watched that presentation? Stop playing the tornado over and over again and watch it from the beginning forward. The demonstration reaks of Intel's influence, even when showing the physics they said “now lets unleash the forces of nature, or the Intel core 2 quad processor on this nice and quiet location here”. I mean come on! Those aren't the words of a DEV just demoing a 4 core processor, that was a product promotion right there. You go on and on about how good that tornado is but you haven't said anything on Ageia's stuff other than 'it sucks', not really being very clear on what sucks are we? Why not, you know, go look at some of Ageia's stuff?

Quad Core is highend now, but Multi Cores will trickle down over time, in 2 years a Quad Core will probably be the norm with Celerons level processors all being Dual Cores.

It has been how many years since the first commercially available dual core? I know the AMD Athlon 64s came out in 2003 but we are still not seeing much dual core utilisation even after all this time. Yet here you are telling me in 2 years quad core will magically be made the norm, I'm sure the price will drop enough for the average gamer but what will they do with it? I mean how many people need to run a dual core game, a virus scan and a video conversion all at the same time? Software takes a long time to catch up with technology so it will be a good couple of years before we actually see anything utilise quad at a level that is actually useful to the general user.

Plus there is one thing you are forgetting, that is in two years. I have already begged people to stop saying in so and so years blah blah will rule because that is meaningless! All of those arguments require the competition to sit around twiddling their thumbs while whatever method they support runs ahead. No one can tell the future, companies will not sit around and allow the competition to win, so stop crystal ball gazing and talk about right now.

Ageia Physics is stuck on a bad bus, not only that it's performance is badly bottlenecked by graphics card performance, where as with a dedicated Core (if you listen to the Remedy spokesperson) the whole Core is ALSO processing the graphical aspect of the physics being processed by the Tornado... something Ageia cannot do. So what you get is VERY LITTLE GRAPHICAL SLOW DOWNS.

...wha? Is this guy for real? Did he really just claim that “Core is ALSO processing the graphical aspect of the physics”? Jeez buddy they removed graphical processing from the CPU for a reason; yet your here saying the CPU will be doing all the textures, shaders, lighting and other stuff that should be done by the GPU? Even you couldn't have come up with something this daft. Who was it? Who filled your head this this nonsense? I'll verbally bitch slap him myself for contributing to the oh so wonderful uninformed anti PPU hoards we have to put up with.

Also does the graphical processing... jeez.

PS.. PCI bus = Max of 132MB/s and god knows it's already saturated by the use of Higher end sound cards and other PCI devices (IDE controllers, SCSI controllers, Network controllers). Of course many PCI devices have now moved over to the new PCI Express bus.. perhaps Ageia needs to do that... in the end though I doubt Ageia will win. I strongly believe Multi Cores will overtake this segment quite easilly.

You know it is very easy to claim something based on figures rather than how it works in the real world, this is how Havok FX is conning people with demonstrations of tens of thousands of objects colliding in real time to impress those who don't know better. For example; you are saying that PCI bus is not good enough because of its 132mbs, while I'll say go look at what they are doing with that and tell me again it isn't good enough.

Seriously as if I haven't said it enough already, go look at what the PPU can do. Look at the cellfactor trailers, look at the performance comparisons, look at the technical demonstrations. Your impressed by a few objects spinning around when there are far more advanced and impressive demos out there; there is allot more to physics than just objects and particles flying around, something you will have to learn to have any decent grasp on which method is best for physics.

Just keep in mind there is a reason we have not had these high level physics until now.

 

[imzjustplayin]

You know it is very easy to claim something based on figures rather than how it works in the real world, this is how Havok FX is conning people with demonstrations of tens of thousands of objects colliding in real time to impress those who don't know better. For example; you are saying that PCI bus is not good enough because of its 132mbs, while I'll say go look at what they are doing with that and tell me again it isn't good enough.

Seriously as if I haven't said it enough already, go look at what the PPU can do. Look at the cellfactor trailers, look at the performance comparisons, look at the technical demonstrations. Your impressed by a few objects spinning around when there are far more advanced and impressive demos out there; there is allot more to physics than just objects and particles flying around, something you will have to learn to have any decent grasp on which method is best for physics.

Just keep in mind there is a reason we have not had these high level physics until now.

I think you should've also mentioned the fact that physics is just a bunch of math calculations therefore being very processing intensive but not very bandwidth heavy like graphics are.. For example, F@H and Superpi require a lot of procesing power yet you don't need much ram to run them because they're simply crunching numbers, therefore it can fit into the cache of the processor it's so small opposed to graphics where it's actually moving around pictures..

It's not like the physics calculators create the visual particles, it just tells them where to go which doesn't require much bandwidth.. Not to mention that the PCIe bus isn't very suitable for low bandwidth low latency applications as it's got high bandwidth, higher latency devices in mind which is the reason why there are no soundcards based off of the PCIe bus..

They'll have to revise the PCIe specification to make it work better with sound cards and physics cards before it'll become more common on that bus, and or they'll have to work around the bus' specifications..

 

[Caffeinated]

After all of this discussion, I still have the same problem that I had yesterday - I'm out of PCI slots. So it's either the X-Fi which enhances all of my games and music, or a PPU which may or may not enhance everything.

Would I buy a PPU for $100? Or $160? Where would I put it? My motherboard uses Realtek audio, which doesn't even do EAX correctly. I know for a fact that my X-FI sounds a heck of a lot better.

So once again I ask, how do I fit a PPU in there? If it came in a PCI-e 1X flavor, or even USB, I'd probably own one, but as it stands I have no room . That is the real problem.

 

[Manny Calavera]

I suppose the best way to argue against something when you don't have any justifiable material is to make fun of it, lots of mocking smiles to make the fans feel silly. Did you refer to any factual information in that post or is it just full of crystal ball gazing like many of the others here?

Feel free to post the sale figures you somehow acquired to come to the opinion that the PPUs are not selling, or is this another local realization that was projected on the rest of the world hmm?

Everyone has some sort of personal bias in their arguments as they attempt to push forward which ever solution they wish to win, myself included. Your post really doesn't cover which side you are taking, CPU or GPU, or are you sitting on the fence and seeing who is made standard? Since you seem to know what the DEVs think I imagine you also realize that they are very cost conscious? The market is littered with examples of cost cutting or revenue boosting attempts from the feature cuts in Oblivion, the micro transaction content or the games sold as separate episodes. With this in mind when it comes to the decision between the free Ageia physics API, and the $250000 price tag on Havok (not including the separate price of Havok FX) which do you think will appeal the most? Granted that doesn't guarantee PPU support, but every developer loves a USP to separate themselves from the competition.

Did you even read my last two posts.... And if its so wonderful and cutting edge,and OH so well supported why wont Ageia's CEO just tell us the truth,and spill the beans ? How many cards have they sold !?


By the By,the Senior sales rep I spoke with,works for Ingram Micro D.I am not in sales,but talk to the guys at my work who are in charge of sales,hardware or software.

No I don't own a PPU

Why do I have a hard time with this statement ?

 

[SuperGee]

It's common sense that with the lack in numbers of PhysX games and not very populair once out that can use it right the sales are low.

Doesn't mean it's dead. But at current time low sales is a very normal fenomena. Wich could change wenn better PHysX games come out. Like Revolution and warmonger.

So sales are very low now. Over 3 to 6 month that can change drasticly. Depending if there is a Killer app if not some good using PhysX games wil push the sales up.

It's to early to draw conclusions.

Ageia sucses or downfall or being able to keeps there had up in a competative new market will unfold in the next 2 years.

It's nice that Ageia runs upfront so wen more games are becoming out in the market. The chance of something good or a killer app rises wen 30 instead lower then 10 games are out.
Same goes for HavokFX GPU solution the start from zero to 1 and on. then they are just starting to compete. But in wat stance will ageia be and how many games will be out by then.

 

[S-B]

This product was doomed from the start. How can you sell hardware that has no software to go with it? It makes no sense whatsoever.

They should have marketed this to game developers first, coming up with at least half a dozen major physics-heavy games being released within a year of Ageia's hardware hitting shelves.

One of the major faults was that no one was really interested in using the PPU to its full extent, instead opting to use it for fancy explosions. Oh, look, pretty chunks of fire. That's not interesting. We need to use the PPU for things that a CPU cannot concurrently calculate while running a game, like water/particle physics, ragdoll physics, proper collision detection, etc.

The games that are supposedly coming out to take advantage of the PPU have yet to actually be seen beyond little demos. Nothing substantial has emerged here, so as long as that continues, PhysX is dead.

 

[AnnoyedDragon]

Did you even read my last two posts.... And if its so wonderful and cutting edge,and OH so well supported why wont Ageia's CEO just tell us the truth,and spill the beans ? How many cards have they sold !?

The same reason many businesses don't leak their private information all over the place, it is no one but their own business. The only reason to release such information is to boast over the competitors which at this time are none existent; besides with the Havok FX spin on things they consider every GPU a possible PPU, the last thing you want is to put your sale figures up against something like that when a good deal of consumers are too uninformed to know the difference.

Why do I have a hard time with this statement ?

That would depend on what type of person you are, if you are the type of person to exploit anything they can to gain advantage in a argument then I must be lying and I'm only in this debate to justify my purchase. Else I am telling the truth and I don't own a PPU, but support it because my views and research has come to the conclusion that it is the best of the three methods to do physics.

As for *looks up* the doom sayers maybe they would like to put forward a better alternative to the PPU? I have already highlighted the many issues with GPU & CPU physics in my previous posts.

 

[SuperGee]

This product was doomed from the start. How can you sell hardware that has no software to go with it? It makes no sense whatsoever.

Never wil be new kind of hardware simultainliously released with lot of supporting software avaibility at the same time. That's wish full thinking. Like there arn't many SMP games out using Quad core. They are already out as long PPU are there. That's normal market behavior. As Dev's need to addopt and do there thing with games in produktion. It takes time to make a game so it take a while wenn Software catch up with hardware. GPU have the same problem but have more security of succes. Like GF3 was brand new agianst GF2U. That market is already form and demand is steady
Soon as in a few month not day's. We will have some Gameplay PhysX full games like Revolution and warmonger.
So Software is catching up it takes just some time. Let see around Xmass how it stands then.

They should have marketed this to game developers first, coming up with at least half a dozen major physics-heavy games being released within a year of Ageia's hardware hitting shelves.

They have done that, even before PPU release. PhysX is widly adopted. Doesn't mean instant games. Devs adopd and merge this API in Projects in mid development and new Projects. Projects as games take years to make. from 1 to 5 years. Support is great. The ones that must give ageia PPU a push in the right direction are some better games already far in produktion. Those will come out this year. Not next week.

One of the major faults was that no one was really interested in using the PPU to its full extent, instead opting to use it for fancy explosions. Oh, look, pretty chunks of fire. That's not interesting. We need to use the PPU for things that a CPU cannot concurrently calculate while running a game, like water/particle physics, ragdoll physics, proper collision detection, etc.

They major use with Hardware accelerated Physics will be for effect Physics. Expect a lot of games the large crop of those PhysX but also havok FX, Quantum,cuda, steam etc games be effect Physics only.
But some will be not and take te plunge in the deep to stand out off the crowed and do full gameplay Physics. And enhance the game on a deeper level. The Physics revolution in games.
So do expect more games like Graw. some worse some better with nice effects. But effects Physics it will be. That is the easy way for dev's Low risk.

Ofcourse I'am more lookin forward to the extensive gameplay Physics using games. The could stand out in uniek gameplay. Some will give that a try.

The games that are supposedly coming out to take advantage of the PPU have yet to actually be seen beyond little demos. Nothing substantial has emerged here, so as long as that continues, PhysX is dead.

Strange diffenition of Dead do you have? 3DFX is dead. Alpha Risc to. Ageia is Alive!
Dead is game over. After dead there is nothing. That will be wenn ageia close it doors.
It certenly doesn't look like that. The have a more slow start. Or a Hard time to keep aflote. But still around slumbering. ill some of the supporting Dev's suprise you, with there results.

I wait and see wat CF revolution will do and Warmonger and other UE3 titles.

It's up to the dev's.

 

[AnnoyedDragon]

The problem is people want instant satisfaction, they want to be able to access a stack of Half Life 2 quality PPU games from the moment they heard about its existence. But when they don't get that, oh dear it must be dieing! And they make a big fuss that the PPU is dead, shouting it over and over again so they cannot hear anyone who says otherwise, because they don't have AAA titles right off the bat.

Seriously how long did it take for GPUs to become standardised? How long before developers even started tapping the second core on CPUs? How long does it usually take before developers tap consoles to their full potential? Software will always take longer to advance than hardware, it has always been the case yet all the sudden lack of software for a 'brand new hardware type' means it must be failing...

People these days just aren't patient enough.

 

[quadnad]

People these days just aren't patient enough.

I hear what you're saying, and I think that most people who are saying that PPUs are dead are probably shortsighted. However, I don't think it's ludicrous for people to say that right now, there is no use for a PPU because nothing supports it.

The analogy with multicore CPUs doesn't really work though; whether or not the extra cores are being used in games doesn't mean that they're useless. Anyone who uses a multicore system can attest to the responsiveness of the system, along with its unparalleled ability to multitask (also, take into account the benefits for people who do video/photo/music editing). With a PPU however, if you buy one right now you have just about no benefit. In the future there may be a benefit, but at least with a multicore processor you can have many benefits now.

The GPU analogy holds up much better, and I think that we'll probably see a similar (albiet slower) progression with the PPU. I think that the PPU does have a disappointingly slow rate of adoption.

$150 spent on something which currently does just about nothing isn't a wise investment, especially considering you can buy an X2 3600+ along with a TForce 550 motherboard and still have money left over for that amount of money.

 

[Grimlaking]

My problem is that the ageia cards were announced when? A year... maybe two years ago? Not good enough.

When I see a product like that come out I want to see cool effects. I want to see gameplay buyin. Otherwise the product is not taking off. And is floundering.

How long can they afford to flounder?

And they have had games coming with unbelievable physix support for a long time. Too long in the game community.

 

[AnnoyedDragon]

While it is true additional CPU cores can be used for multitasking it curves away from the point I was getting at. You may be able to run two of the same cpu intensive programs on those cores; but the single program cannot benefit from both cores at the same time. It needs to be specifically programmed to be multi threaded to utilise that performance which resulted in a wait between the release of the hardware and the software that can take advantage of it. I see the PPU as being the same; we have the hardware now but the software still needs some time, good games take years to develop not months.

I don't see why people are saying it is taking too long either, it is not like anything has changed since we was told what games would take advantage of it. What has changed now from when we was told about games like Unreal Tournament 3, Project Offset and CellFactor that makes the wait unacceptable? Everyone seemed happy to wait when they was first announced, now all the sudden people are outraged by the wait even though they knew about it forehand. It is not like it's the PPUs fault if games like Unreal Tournament 3 want to take their time.

In addition I wouldn't say that the PPU is totally useless; there are titles out there that benefit from it today, whether or not people are interested in these titles however is another thing. I have also come across a few people who utilise the technology for their own needs, YouTube has a few videos of users experimenting with the card and learning how to use the tool kit to accelerate their own projects. The C4 Engine, Discover Engine, Galactic Engine 2 BSP and Ultra Tubes are a few examples of PhysX indie projects as well as a wide variety of user made tech demos.

So people are using their PPUs today, may not currently interest the mainstream but they are definitely not useless.

I wouldn't call the CPU+Motherboard comment a fair judgement either; it is like saying why buy a better graphics card when for the same price you can get a *insert PC parts here*, even if you get the alternative it still does not cover the needs of the original choice. Sure you can get a cheap motherboard and CPU with the same money, but it still won't be able to do what the PPU does.

My problem is that the ageia cards were announced when? A year... maybe two years ago? Not good enough.

When I see a product like that come out I want to see cool effects. I want to see gameplay buyin. Otherwise the product is not taking off. And is floundering.

How long can they afford to flounder?

And they have had games coming with unbelievable physix support for a long time. Too long in the game community.

Just like I said, impatient. Do you even know what the development cycle of the average game is? If you are expecting them after a year or so don't expect anything grand. As I said above you are acting like they are taking too long but we already knew when the games were due out forehand, don't blame Ageia for game delays that are totally out of their hands.

Also feel free to post these unbelievable physics games they have had for a long time, I'll be suprised if they have anything outside of basic collision detection and gravity.

 

[quadnad]

While it is true additional CPU cores can be used for multitasking it curves away from the point I was getting at.

I'm just saying that you get a helluva lot more use out of a multicore CPU today than you would out of a PPU, even if you take away all multithreaded apps. I know that things need to be written in order to take advantage of multiple cores (just like they do for the PPU), but what I'm saying is that even in spite of the fact that not many games are multithreaded there are still significant benefits to be seen out of a multicore processor (unlike with a PPU). Also, with a multicore CPU, at least we've got games on the near horizon which have them listed as almost minimum system requirements because of their huge performance increases (Alan Wake requires it [IIRC], Supreme Commander [refer to the Hard review] and Crysis).

In addition I wouldn't say that the PPU is totally useless; there are titles out there that benefit from it today, whether or not people are interested in these titles however is another thing. --SNIP-- So people are using their PPUs today, may not currently interest the mainstream but they are definitely not useless.

There are only two titles currently which are considered relatively popular that utilize the PPU (Ghost Recon and City of Heroes/Villians). Disregarding the fact that Ghost Recon has terrible reviews, both of the games benefit slightly but only in terms of effects. There is no real benefit to the gameplay, nor is there a significant benefit to the rest of the game (even as far as effects are considered); that $150 is much better spent elsewhere. As for the "indie projects," I have to tell you that just because someone has made a neat little tech demo or crap little game doesn't suddenly make it a real use for the product.

I wouldn't call the CPU+Motherboard comment a fair judgement either; it is like saying why buy a better graphics card when for the same price you can get a *insert PC parts here*, even if you get the alternative it still does not cover the needs of the original choice. Sure you can get a cheap motherboard and CPU with the same money, but it still won't be able to do what the PPU does.

I'm not saying that it will do what the PPU does; I'm saying that it's a shitload more useful than the PPU would be in the next year or so.

 

[AnnoyedDragon]

I'm just saying that you get a helluva lot more use out of a multicore CPU today than you would out of a PPU, even if you take away all multithreaded apps. I know that things need to be written in order to take advantage of multiple cores (just like they do for the PPU), but what I'm saying is that even in spite of the fact that not many games are multithreaded there are still significant benefits to be seen out of a multicore processor (unlike with a PPU). Also, with a multicore CPU, at least we've got games on the near horizon which have them listed as almost minimum system requirements because of their huge performance increases (Alan Wake requires it [IIRC], Supreme Commander [refer to the Hard review] and Crysis).

Then perhaps like you said the CPU is not a good example of what I am saying. The example I used it for was to show how software had to catch up with hardware, it didn’t need to get into a full in depth discussion on what a CPU can do specifically over a PPU.

There are only two titles currently which are considered relatively popular that utilize the PPU (Ghost Recon and City of Heroes/Villians). Disregarding the fact that Ghost Recon has terrible reviews, both of the games benefit slightly but only in terms of effects. There is no real benefit to the gameplay, nor is there a significant benefit to the rest of the game (even as far as effects are considered); that $150 is much better spent elsewhere. As for the "indie projects," I have to tell you that just because someone has made a neat little tech demo or crap little game doesn't suddenly make it a real use for the product.

Ah so its two games now? Compared to it doing absolutely nothing before. Keep in mind what I said was not intended to justify the purchase of the PPU right now, but rather show that it can be useful to some people and should not be compared to a paperweight. Just because what it is being used for now is not of interest to the average user, does not mean it can be automatically disregarded as useless.

If you want to refer to people’s personal projects as “crap”, I’m sure they will have something to say about that, but don’t paint others with your lack of need of the PPU.

I'm not saying that it will do what the PPU does; I'm saying that it's a shitload more useful than the PPU would be in the next year or so.

Yet it still does not fulfil the original need which after all is the main point.

That is quite a low end CPU, if someone has the spare cash to consider a PPU more than likely they will have at least a mid range computer setup. What will $150/£80 do for someone who already has a mid range system when they want better physics? At most for that they can get an extra gig stick of ram or a new motherboard, but they cannot get anything else that will improve their physics performance.

But of course this all boils down to one thing, the justification for purchasing a PPU. Keep in mind I have said repeatedly that the major games for the PPU have yet to be launched and people need to be patient. I understand that right now the reasons for buying one are small, unless someone wants to future proof and support Ageia by taking a risk with them it is difficult to justify a purchase at this moment. But lets look at it this way; there are worst useless crap people can spend their money on, bling bling cases and fancy gadgets to make them more l33t than thou for instance. I suppose a PPU purchase could be considered a novelty for some, something that is just cool to have, show off tech demos their mates cannot run and then one day put it to good use in supported games.

With that said I think I'll take my leave for the night.

 

[quadnad]

That is quite a low end CPU, if someone has the spare cash to consider a PPU more than likely they will have at least a mid range computer setup. What will $150/£80 do for someone who already has a mid range system when they want better physics? At most for that they can get an extra gig stick of ram or a new motherboard, but they cannot get anything else that will improve their physics performance.

Ahh, but it'll do ~3ish Ghz (thats E6600 performance, for quick reference). For $140 (for the combo) or $65 for the processor, someone stuck with a single core system could have what is essentially the best bang vs buck deal out there, providing them much better performance all around. In the case of games like Crysis and Alan Wake, this would mean improved physics because both those games use spare cores to run things like AI/physics. $150 could buy two gigs of RAM, or an extra gig and a new motherboard.

Also, although I think that Ghost Recon is the worst iteration of the R6 series (and most reviews agree), I was trying to be charitable and not ignore that there are, indeed, two relatively significant games available which use it. But even though they offer support, the physx effects are only minor effects changes, and nothing remotely close to enhancing the gameplay experience.

At this point, $150 is much better spent elsewhere, unless you like being the guy who could end up on the wrong side of a format war (seeing as the Phsyx/Havok FX thing isn't settled). Perhaps Cellfactor and UT3 will change this, and I do want to make clear that I'm not against PPUs.

 

[Mat3]

I believe the bigger reason for why there's so much negativity towards the PPU is because they haven't shown it to be as good as their initial claims when they first announced it. They claimed it was capable of tracking 32,000 rigid bodies and 40,000+ particles. They said it was "200 times" the physics power of a CPU.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1773957,00.asp

It's looking like these claims were about the same as when Sony declared the PS2 could transform "66,000 million polygons". In other words, total BS. Or they probably just calculated the maximum performance of what one of the execution units could do and multiplied it by the number of units, without actually being able to make it work that well. This article is almost two years old:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1817922,00.asp

The first demo was graphically simple, but still fairly impressive. A large rocky hillside had about 4,200 boulders dropped at the top, which all bounced, tumbled, and interacted in a realistic (and speedy) fashion. AGEIA claimed that a dual-core CPU can handle maybe 800-1,000 in a demo like this, but was quick to note that 4,200 boulders was nowhere near the capability of their chip. There's a driver issue right now where a lot of the timings need to be worked out between the massively parallel math units in the chip. Within a couple of months, the company will have a new driver which will enable them to raise the boulder count to 32,000. They're confident they can reach that number, but even if they can only get halfway there, 16,000 to 20,000 boulders is a lot better than a CPU can do.

About one year later, ATI showed a demo of 20,000 boulders running on their 1900 XTX.

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTA3OSwsLGhlbnRodXNpYXN0

It may have been only effects physics, but where was Ageia to showcase a new demo in response? To prove they had solved their "driver issue"... Where's the evidence to show this thing really is capable of 30,000+ rigid bodies?


There's also the box demo that comes with the PPU:

http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?sitesize=yes&i=2751&p=4

The PPU doesn't beat the CPU, in that case an FX-57, by much and there are much more powerful CPUs out now. Maybe the PPU would shine if there were more boxes (more work to allocate to the different units which would choke the CPU) but then why aren't there more boxes in the demo? As the article states: "Maybe in the future AGEIA will give us the ability to increase the number of boxes. For now, we get 16% higher minimum frame rates and 14% higher average frame rates by using be AGEIA PhysX card over just the FX-57 CPU. Honestly, that's a little underwhelming, considering that the AGEIA test application ought to be providing more of a best case scenario."

Cellfactor demonstrates that it can apparantly handle rigid body collisions and cloth simultaneously, but this seems to be the only test/video I've seen where it clearly outshines a multi-core CPU.

If they had demos or videos that knocked our socks off, there'd be a lot more people saying, "I can't wait for games that support this!" instead of "the PPU sucks and Ageia is dead." I think people have been let down by the real world performance which does not appear to be even close to the initial claims.

 

[Mat3]

I see a lot of people questioning the speed of the PCI bus the PPU is stuck on (according to developers and Ageia, it's not an issue), but if we're talking about technical disadvantages, the decision to manufacture the processor on older 130nm is probably the real mistake. Maybe they had no choice, based on who's actually making them, but all their competition is on 90nm or better. At 90, they could've added more vector units (or just make the whole chip smaller and cheaper) and they would've been able to ramp up the clock speed by a fairly significant margin.

 

[Ockie]

Fresh news:
http://theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=38716

Die shrink, pcie, and more stuff coming now.... finally!

 

[AnnoyedDragon]

The worst PPU game and the first tech demo provided isn't exactly a good representation of the PPU. Hell everyone knows Ghost Recon PhysX implementation was a quick add on, hence why performance actually drops with it on. Why not use Bet on Solider, Joint Task Force, City of Villains or that snow boarding one to show performance? Hell even if CellFactor is a beta it is still a better implementation of the PPU than Ghost Recon.

I also find most reviewers have no idea what they are talking about, the PPU is a new add on and they are not quite sure how to benchmark it or what is going on with physics right now. I have seen reviewers try to benchmark the PPU using none PhysX enabled games like FEAR and X3! I also came across one criticising PhysX for not having as big of a game selection as HavokFX, he even went on to list games like Oblivion and Half Life 2 as being GPU physics ready. There is even a guy at the Inquirer who is saying Crysis uses GPU physics when the developers have specifically said they are using their own multithreaded software physics engine *sigh*

You can imagine how annoying it is to have people like this spoon feeding the masses their opinion on the PPU.

As for those GPU physics tech demos I keep telling people not to be tricked by them; they have a entire GPU for those demonstrations so don't have to worry about running a game on top of it, Nvidia did the exact same thing with 30,000 boulders on a 7900GTX. But seriously though a 1900XTX? Both the 7900GTX and 1900XTX are many times more expensive than a PPU. They are trying to impress people with numbers in controlled environments, seeing how many colliding objects they can squeeze on to a GPU, but as I keep saying time and time again there is more to physics than just collision detection. Tell me has anyone seen a HavokFX demo demonstrating material simulation? Soft bodies? Mesh deformation? Real time mesh breaking? How about cloth tearing? Has anyone here ever seen a real time demonstration that couldn't be achieved with basic object collision? I have seen pictures of HavokFX cloth, but never in real time and being damaged.

How about this, why has HavokFX never released any of their technical demonstrations? Ageia lets anyone play with their NovodeX SDK and throw together as many objects as they like (which is many times better than the cube demo you criticise may I add.). If HavokFX is so much better why not let people see for themselves? I think only Nvidia released anything that uses GPU physics in the smoke demo and quite frankly it isn't mid range friendly, even on a 7900GT I only get 20fps with the smoke by itself.

People are not saying the PPU is dead because they have yet to be impressed by it, a quick YouTude will fix anyone's criticism of its capabilities, they are saying the PPU is dead because they want it dead. Everyone has some sort of phobia with the idea of another add on card with their system; they want their current hardware to be able to do the physics calculations and when someone says it can they follow it without question, anything that doesn't involve buying a PPU is gold to their ears and they will support it aggressively. This is why regardless of what I bring up regarding the problems with CPU/GPU physics for next gen gaming they will shoot them down with theoretical guess work and crystal ball staring were somehow their method wins in the far far future.

Fresh news:
http://theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=38716

Die shrink, pcie, and more stuff coming now.... finally!

Yeah I saw that before, but since it is the inquirer I wanted to wait till another source picked up on it.

 

[Mat3]

The worst PPU game and the first tech demo provided isn't exactly a good representation of the PPU. Hell everyone knows Ghost Recon PhysX implementation was a quick add on, hence why performance actually drops with it on. Why not use Bet on Solider, Joint Task Force, City of Villains or that snow boarding one to show performance? Hell even if CellFactor is a beta it is still a better implementation of the PPU than Ghost Recon.

I realize Ghost Recon isn't a good representation, but I've seen videos of those other games, they're not that great. And the box demo is relevant. Unless they've made improvements to the drivers or how the engine works with the PPU, they'll be beat by a high-end dual core CPU in their own demo. It may just be collision detection, but for gameplay physics, it's pretty important.

As for those GPU physics tech demos I keep telling people not to be tricked by them; they have a entire GPU for those demonstrations so don't have to worry about running a game on top of it, Nvidia did the exact same thing with 30,000 boulders on a 7900GTX. But seriously though a 1900XTX? Both the 7900GTX and 1900XTX are many times more expensive than a PPU. They are trying to impress people with numbers in controlled environments, seeing how many colliding objects they can squeeze on to a GPU, but as I keep saying time and time again there is more to physics than just collision detection. Tell me has anyone seen a HavokFX demo demonstrating material simulation? Soft bodies? Mesh deformation? Real time mesh breaking? How about cloth tearing? Has anyone here ever seen a real time demonstration that couldn't be achieved with basic object collision? I have seen pictures of HavokFX cloth, but never in real time and being damaged.

They're about 2-3 times more expensive. The benefits, as touted by ATI to using the video cards is that, in theory, you could upgrade your video card and use the old one for physics. Or choose between one card for graphics and one for physcis, or for games that don't need it, set it up in regular crossfire mode. (Yes, I know these solutions are a long ways off, I mention it because you wouldn't be buying an expensive video card just for physics.) As far as running just a demo in a controlled environment, that may be the case, but so is the demo Ageia showed, and there are far fewer objects. And for the other aspects of physics you mention, are they not showing them because GPUs aren't capable or because they don't have the know-how of programming it? Those cloth videos from Ageia I've seen on Youtube must take some very smart and talented people to code.

People are not saying the PPU is dead because they have yet to be impressed by it, a quick YouTude will fix anyone's criticism of its capabilities, they are saying the PPU is dead because they want it dead. Everyone has some sort of phobia with the idea of another add on card with their system; they want their current hardware to be able to do the physics calculations and when someone says it can they follow it without question, anything that doesn't involve buying a PPU is gold to their ears and they will support it aggressively. This is why regardless of what I bring up regarding the problems with CPU/GPU physics for next gen gaming they will shoot them down with theoretical guess work and crystal ball staring were somehow their method wins in the far far future.

I disagree. I don't think most people are that impressed. When they first announced it, I think the buzz was pretty positive. And people were impressed the first time they saw Cellfactor... until they found out you could get almost the same performance without the PPU (sans cloth). I'm personnally not against the PPU. I'm just saying, based on what I've seen technically, they're not all they're cracked up to be.

 

[AnnoyedDragon]

If I had a PPU I would load up Novodex and demo as many objects as you want to try myself; but seeing how I don’t I am forced to rely on others demonstrating what it can do, please keep that in mind.

I don’t know why you are fixated on that cube demo; it is the smallest of all the PPU demos publicly available. Why use that one specifically to benchmark the PPUs performance in convex-convex collision detection? There are many others out there that are both Ageia and user made that use a far greater number of objects than the cube demo. Or better yet; forget the tech demos and observe its real world performance in the games that utilise it, I think it is safe to say that CellFactor and Stoked Rider have many more objects being physically simulated in real time than the very first cube demo.

I don’t know why you say the Ageia demos are in a controlled environment either; the tools are out there in the wild and are free for anyone to experiment with, that doesn’t sound controlled to me. Havok FX on the other hand is controlled, no one can try their tools unless they get strict permission to do so. Which sounds more likely to give a false impression of its actual performance to you? Unless people think there is a whole conspiracy with the people trying out these tools to hide the hardware’s true capabilities.

Keep in mind that the PhysX processor relies on software updates to extend its capabilities, so what it does at one time is not a accrete measurements of its abilities at another. They are always enhancing what the PPU can do; for instance they added surface generation in one patch to improve the quality of liquids on objects, they also added the ability to add and remove particles from simulations as liquids enter shapes so it is better optimised while retaining the same quality. They also improved cloth by adding self-collision detection, which fixed performance issues when complex objects collide with themselves. Ageia is not sat around waiting for their supported games to come out like some people seem to think, the PPU is being made more efficient and more capable as time passes by.

If people want to push Havok FX they better be ready to rationalise to the average Joe why they need to pay out for a SLI ready system now for technology no games currently utilise, or alternatively for single GPU systems why toning down their graphical settings in a game for physics is a good thing when they could have it all. In the meantime as said in the previous page the more efficient PCI-E x1 slot PPUs are right around the corner, I somehow doubt people will be missing that slot when they come out.

I have to say though, even though I do not like Havok FX, CPU physics isn’t any better. There is a good reason we have not seen advanced physics until now, what is the stated figure? 10%? Only 10% of a single core CPU can be dedicated to physics? So with a fully threaded game that is taking complete advantage of its second core you are looking at double that for physics processing. Sure CPU power has increased dramatically but so has CPU requirements. The enemies that bounce side to side in games like Quake 4 are not good enough anymore, players want intelligent opponents and many of them, opponents that give the player a challenge like in Crysis. CPU power is also being utilised for new uses, demands for bigger and more open-ended game worlds has made the background streaming of data more present.

So dual core is finally being utilised in next generation games, that second core is finally being put to good use. But what room is there for next generation physics? Are we really going to be happy with just dedicating another 10% to physics? If you want more than that the additional processing power is going to have to come from somewhere. The answer to this seems to be Quad core, which I believe is totally ridicules. The prices and need for more CPU power has only just convinced the average gamer to adopt dual core and now people want to tell them they need another two cores? Not forgetting the price tag that goes along with them. Sure prices drop over time, they always do, but we aren’t talking a few months here and it will take much longer than that for software to catch up. CPU power, whether people like to believe it or not, is not good enough for the level of physics we are looking at here. The industry will not wait a few years for processors to catch up, gamers have tasted next gen physics and they want it now, to me it feels like Ageia and Havok FX are the only real competitors in this.

CPUs may seem like they are enough to you; if we were only talking object collision detection and rag doll I would say you were right… but cloth? Volumetric liquids? Soft bodies? Rigid bodies? Particle physics? Mesh transformation and splitting? Material physics? And much much more, I think not.

But lets look at it this way, the PhysX API is multi core optimised. If Ageia wins CPU physics will still take advantage of multiple cores, they will just get offloaded if a PPU is present. But if Havok FX wins… unless the DEVs license both Havok and Havok FX costing a quarter of a million dollars each, CPU physics will not work in the game. When you think about it if you support CPU physics we are both on the same side, Ageia caters to both of us, it is only if Havok FX wins it becomes a problem.

 

[svet-am]

Wow! What a thread. AnnoyedDragon has said most of what I would contribute, only much more thoroughly and eloquently. It's nice to know that I'm not the only one who has his head screwed on properly when it comes to the PPU.

In the interest of full disclosure, I _do_ own a PPU, but I didn't buy it for games. I signed on as an AGEIA independent developer and have been using the PPU to model thermal and electrical properties of PSPICE simulations. I've also used it a bit for on-the-fly H.264 encode/decode. That chip is a damn powerful little piece of silicon. Much more powerful than a single x86 core by itself when it comes to _physics_ calculations. (that is, calculations that are not simple "fetch-compute-store" calculations but rather "fetch-compute-share").

And, I didn't spend $300 on mine. I spent $150 and got a $50 rebate (which I received) and got $150 in games that I was already going to by anyway. So, for me, the PPU was essentially "free".

I can understand why people are upset that there aren't more games out. That comes in time. The first "GPU" was the GeForce 256 (I bought a Guillemot one the day it came out) and their weren't games out that truly took advantage of it for a good 18 months after release. In fact, early GeForce 256 cards (the ones from Creative and ASUS IIRC weren't even true AGP -- they were PCI with a PCI-AGP bridge). So, what I'm saying is that you've got to give it time. We're seeing more and more games and developers sign on to it, so there is a wave of PPU-enabled games comin -- it's just not here yet.

Finally, as a corollary to something AnnoyedDragon alluded to, the PhysX is very akin to the X-Fi and the GeForce in that it's a hardware chip that can be dynamically reprogrammed to do different tasks. Thus, it's not outside the realm of the possible to someday see Ageia releasing a patch that will accelerate Havok and HavokFX on the PhysX. Just something to chew on there.

 

[Chaoticon]

How would one go about signing on as an AGEIA independent developer?

 

[svet-am]

How would one go about signing on as an AGEIA independent developer?

just go to devsupport.ageia.com. In order to log into this section of the site. Just follow the instructions to sign up. AGEIA has to review your application and give you a yay/nay on approval. Most folks get approved, and turnaround is usually 24-36 hours.

 

[Manny Calavera]

The same reason many businesses don't leak their private information all over the place, it is no one but their own business. The only reason to release such information is to boast over the competitors which at this time are none existent; besides with the Havok FX spin on things they consider every GPU a possible PPU, the last thing you want is to put your sale figures up against something like that when a good deal of consumers are too uninformed to know the difference.


That would depend on what type of person you are, if you are the type of person to exploit anything they can to gain advantage in a argument then I must be lying and I'm only in this debate to justify my purchase. Else I am telling the truth and I don't own a PPU, but support it because my views and research has come to the conclusion that it is the best of the three methods to do physics.

As for *looks up* the doom sayers maybe they would like to put forward a better alternative to the PPU? I have already highlighted the many issues with GPU & CPU physics in my previous posts.

AMD and Intel and ATI and Nvidia love to talk about how many chips/units they move in a given quarter... so shens on that.The one and only reason that Manju Hegde has not been open about the real numbers at retail is that he knows all to well what the fall out will be.That pubs and devs,will throw there hands up and stop putting ever more valuable resources into physics,and start putting into art and sound and ai,etc,instead.

The problem is people want instant satisfaction, they want to be able to access a stack of Half Life 2 quality PPU games from the moment they heard about its existence.... People these days just aren't patient enough.

I agree with the above,people have little to no patience these days.

I believe the bigger reason for why there's so much negativity towards the PPU is because they haven't shown it to be as good as their initial claims when they first announced it. They claimed it was capable of tracking 32,000 rigid bodies and 40,000+ particles. They said it was "200 times" the physics power of a CPU.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1773957,00.asp

It's looking like these claims were about the same as when Sony declared the PS2 could transform "66,000 million polygons". In other words, total BS. Or they probably just calculated the maximum performance of what one of the execution units could do and multiplied it by the number of units, without actually being able to make it work that well. This article is almost two years old:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1817922,00.asp



About one year later, ATI showed a demo of 20,000 boulders running on their 1900 XTX.

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTA3OSwsLGhlbnRodXNpYXN0

It may have been only effects physics, but where was Ageia to showcase a new demo in response? To prove they had solved their "driver issue"... Where's the evidence to show this thing really is capable of 30,000+ rigid bodies?


There's also the box demo that comes with the PPU:

http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?sitesize=yes&i=2751&p=4

The PPU doesn't beat the CPU, in that case an FX-57, by much and there are much more powerful CPUs out now. Maybe the PPU would shine if there were more boxes (more work to allocate to the different units which would choke the CPU) but then why aren't there more boxes in the demo? As the article states: "Maybe in the future AGEIA will give us the ability to increase the number of boxes. For now, we get 16% higher minimum frame rates and 14% higher average frame rates by using be AGEIA PhysX card over just the FX-57 CPU. Honestly, that's a little underwhelming, considering that the AGEIA test application ought to be providing more of a best case scenario."

Cellfactor demonstrates that it can apparantly handle rigid body collisions and cloth simultaneously, but this seems to be the only test/video I've seen where it clearly outshines a multi-core CPU.

If they had demos or videos that knocked our socks off, there'd be a lot more people saying, "I can't wait for games that support this!" instead of "the PPU sucks and Ageia is dead." I think people have been let down by the real world performance which does not appear to be even close to the initial claims.

Great post Mat3,well put,but all that will likely be thrown out by the AGEIA fans,as 'crystal ball gazing'

I for one do not need to gaze into any crystal balls to tell you that its not moving in the store I work for(We have 5 locations,and spend a fair bit on advertising locally),or a few other stores in town I have asked.AGEIA is likely surviving on Venture Capital funding and not sales commission...

I do want PPU's or Phsyics in PC games to succedd,but I just do not see that happening unless they start selling allot more cards,and or MS supports it the next DX,and or Nvidia/ATI push it bigtime on thier video cards.If MS does what I want,it will be way too late,as by then Ageia will have run out of steam,marketing BS,and more importantly,cold hard cash.Its hard to operate a business when your product is not selling.

 

[dotK]

"Just wait a few more months!" Sound familiar? It should, because that's all we've heard for the past many months with regards to the PPU. Now those months are now turning into years. With every successive month that passes the number of people that will actually believe the "few more months" line will decline. How many people will still believe it in February 2008 when we're STILL waiting a few more months/years for some games to justify the PPU's existence?

Defending the PPU by saying you need to be patient and you can't just want everything right away is quite simply pathetic and naive. I cannot believe anyone actually tries to use that defense. I have a great bridge for sale in Brooklyn... Nobody would buy a car that currently gets 15 MPG on promises that one day it will get 90 MPG. Nobody would buy a video card that run games at lower detail settings at 20 FPS due to claims by the manufacturer that one day it will run the games at 200 FPS at maximum details. Why would it be any different with the PPU?

The PPU's entire life cycle has been nothing but excuses and half-assed support. UT3 will support the PPU, but only time will tell as to how well it will be utilized. I don't care what was said in some interview a few months ago about what might be done with the PPU, I want to see the final product. If UT3 has amazing PPU support, fully utilizes all of its potential, and consequently sells a lot of new PPUs more developers may jump on board and spend time working with the PPU in their upcoming games. Or, maybe not.

 

[svet-am]

"Just wait a few more months!" Sound familiar? It should, because that's all we've heard for the past many months with regards to the PPU. Now those months are now turning into years. With every successive month that passes the number of people that will actually believe the "few more months" line will decline. How many people will still believe it in February 2008 when we're STILL waiting a few more months/years for some games to justify the PPU's existence?

So you're saying that all of those people (like me) that rushed out and bought the GeForce256 were naive as well. There were _no_ games that supported it at first. Sure you got a _little_ improvement because it was a very fast chip, but OpenGL and DirectX were so behind the curve at that point that it took a good 18 to 24 months before games started to have features (like bilinear/trilinear filtering and hardware T&L) that we now consider "primitive".

Also, you're saying that all of those people that bought at 387 or 487 math co-processor were naive because there were no apps that supported it at first (those procs came out in ~1988/89 and apps didn't fully utilitize them until about 1991/92). Just plugging the CPU in did _nothing_ if an app didn't know how to offload math to the MPU.

And you're saying that all of those people that bought a Sound Blaster were naive because there were no apps that supported it? Hell, beeps and bloops should be good enough for all of us, right?

My point is that the industry has been here before (and I've personally lived through all of the above). You _have_ to get an installed base before developers will begin to support new hardware. Granted, it's very much a chicken-and-egg issue, but you've got to have some set of people who see the potential in the future and are willing to make that investment.

This reminds me of a good set of comments I saw in BusinessWeek this week. Modern consumers (really read "Americans") are so damn pre-occupied with immediate return on investment. No one is able to make an investment that won't pay off _immediately_ because to them "investing" is the same as "wasting" if they cannot see an _immediate_ return. Can I guarantee that the PPU will survive in the long run? Of course not. But, if anyone wants it to have a fighting chance at all you've got to be willing to invest when the immediate return is low.

 

[Pottsey]

“About one year later, ATI showed a demo of 20,000 boulders running on their 1900 XTX.
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTA3OSwsLGhlb nRodXNpYXN0
It may have been only effects physics, but where was Ageia to showcase a new demo in response? To prove they had solved their "driver issue"... Where's the evidence to show this thing really is capable of 30,000+ rigid bodies?”

Why would Ageia need to showcase a demo when they already have that in games? Stoked Rider - Alaska Alien just go and great an avalanche while snowboarding with a PPU.

I bet that’s typical ATI PR it doesn’t look like 20,000 boulder on the screen at once it was more a few 1000 on at once as they move off the bottom of the screen more turn up at the top. I bet it's 20,000 dueing the run of the tech demo.

 

[dotK]

So you're saying that all of those people (like me) that rushed out and bought the GeForce256 were naive as well. There were _no_ games that supported it at first. Sure you got a _little_ improvement because it was a very fast chip, but OpenGL and DirectX were so behind the curve at that point that it took a good 18 to 24 months before games started to have features (like bilinear/trilinear filtering and hardware T&L) that we now consider "primitive".

The GF256 allowed current games to run faster. The PPU does nothing for current games. Huge difference.

Also, you're saying that all of those people that bought at 387 or 487 math co-processor were naive because there were no apps that supported it at first (those procs came out in ~1988/89 and apps didn't fully utilitize them until about 1991/92). Just plugging the CPU in did _nothing_ if an app didn't know how to offload math to the MPU.

And you're saying that all of those people that bought a Sound Blaster were naive because there were no apps that supported it? Hell, beeps and bloops should be good enough for all of us, right?

My point is that the industry has been here before (and I've personally lived through all of the above). You _have_ to get an installed base before developers will begin to support new hardware. Granted, it's very much a chicken-and-egg issue, but you've got to have some set of people who see the potential in the future and are willing to make that investment.

That was then, this is now. Things have changed significantly since 20 years ago (even 5-10 years ago...). What happened 20 years ago is irrelevant as the market is now completely different.

Computers and computer gaming are significantly more mainstream now. More (and different types of) people are using computers and playing computer games today. Game development is a much longer process that costs a significant amount of money and is no longer done in someone's garage, at least for most games.

This reminds me of a good set of comments I saw in BusinessWeek this week. Modern consumers (really read "Americans") are so damn pre-occupied with immediate return on investment. No one is able to make an investment that won't pay off _immediately_ because to them "investing" is the same as "wasting" if they cannot see an _immediate_ return. Can I guarantee that the PPU will survive in the long run? Of course not. But, if anyone wants it to have a fighting chance at all you've got to be willing to invest when the immediate return is low.

Consumers should not have to invest in a company/product to actually get something out of it. When you want to invest in something, make an actual investment. When you buy a product you damn well should receive something immediately. When I buy a car I want it now because that's what I'm paying for - a car. If I buy a PPU I want what I'm paying for - physics.

 

[svet-am]

Consumers should not have to invest in a company/product to actually get something out of it. When you want to invest in something, make an actual investment. When you buy a product you damn well should receive something immediately. When I buy a car I want it now because that's what I'm paying for - a car. If I buy a PPU I want what I'm paying for - physics.

So you're saying that all of those people with a Prius should automatically be getting 80+ MPG and hybrid gas stations on every corner? Reality Check. the prius gets about 40+MPG in actual usage (nice but still far off the alleged claims of toyota) and we _still_ don't have hydrogen or cold fuel stations at anywhere near the market penetration we were promised 3+ years ago. the market takes time. that's the reality of it no matter what industry you're in.

And when you say "go make an investment" you're not talking about making an investment at all -- you're talking about market speculation. Big difference there, too, man. Before you're going to throw around terms, make sure you actually know what they mean.

 

[AnnoyedDragon]

AMD and Intel and ATI and Nvidia love to talk about how many chips/units they move in a given quarter... so shens on that.The one and only reason that Manju Hegde has not been open about the real numbers at retail is that he knows all to well what the fall out will be.That pubs and devs,will throw there hands up and stop putting ever more valuable resources into physics,and start putting into art and sound and ai,etc,instead.

I already covered that; unlike those other companies Ageia doesn’t have any competitors to boast sale figures over. The only possible sale figure comparison is with GPU companies because of the claim that all GPUs are a possible PPUs, definitely not a fair comparison that Ageia can win. If you want to interrupt common business practice as Ageia hiding low sale figures then that is your choice, it is not like I can say anything to convince you otherwise.

As for your other comment I won't address that; this isn't really the right thread to attack physics in exchange for time and resources being utilised in other areas of a games development. Not that PhysX actually costs any money to licence unlike the alternatives.

Great post Mat3,well put,but all that will likely be thrown out by the AGEIA fans,as 'crystal ball gazing'

Or you could read my response to the guy and the lack of a 'crystal ball gazing' comment aimed towards him. I only bring that up when people pull information out of nowhere regarding the future, since he sourced his views I responded accordingly.

I for one do not need to gaze into any crystal balls to tell you that its not moving in the store I work for(We have 5 locations,and spend a fair bit on advertising locally),or a few other stores in town I have asked.AGEIA is likely surviving on Venture Capital funding and not sales commission...

Ah another local realisation projected on world wide sales; let's not forget that a good deal of hardware sales occur online today due to convenience and better prices, well unless the person doesn't know better or are incapable of ordering online for some reason. You know there are circumstances were Ageia does charge money for using their physics API? $50,000 for using the PhysX API per title per platform 'if' you do not add hardware support, add PPU support to your commercial game and the licence is free. Judging the number of games that use the engine without supporting the PPU Ageia is getting a fairly decent amount of revenue for a company of its size; not including PPU sales at that. However this probably explains the half assed implementation of the PPU as companies use it simply for the free physics engine.

I do want PPU's or Phsyics in PC games to succedd,but I just do not see that happening unless they start selling allot more cards,and or MS supports it the next DX,and or Nvidia/ATI push it bigtime on thier video cards.If MS does what I want,it will be way too late,as by then Ageia will have run out of steam,marketing BS,and more importantly,cold hard cash.Its hard to operate a business when your product is not selling.

*sigh*

What is with this attitude that Ageia needs other companies to save them? Why do they need Microsoft's permission to exist or to be bought out by the GPU companies who claim their cards can do it anyway? I still find the idea of strapping a affect physics processor to a effects graphics processor to be rediculess, aren't those things big and power hungry enough? Nvidia and ATI are more likely only in this because their technology has advanced faster than the need for it, so physics on a SLI/Crossfire or high end GPU is a convenient way of justifying the need to buy them.

Whichever way the market goes; CPU, GPU or PPU Ageia have said they will adopt the method and update the PPU as required. Should Microsoft decide to stick its big ugly head where it does not belong and alter natural competition by deciding for themselves who should win then Ageia will adapt to the new market standard. As for them not having enough money isn't it strange that they are preparing to launch a revised PPU? Very odd behaviour for a company that supposedly has no money to invest.

"Just wait a few more months!" Sound familiar? It should, because that's all we've heard for the past many months with regards to the PPU. Now those months are now turning into years. With every successive month that passes the number of people that will actually believe the "few more months" line will decline. How many people will still believe it in February 2008 when we're STILL waiting a few more months/years for some games to justify the PPU's existence?

[snip]

I really dislike repeating myself; but it seems in this thread it is inevitable.

Games like Unreal Tournament and CellFactor Revolution... how long have we known about the existence of these games? A year? More? Because these are the games that were promised to us, the games we have been waiting months for as you put it. Judging your take on things perhaps we should go to the makers of Bioshock and punch them in the face? Seeing how they have made us wait so long. Same for the makers of Crysis and Spore, I mean how dare they? How dare they make us wait so long when they promised us these games so long ago? Why show them to us when we cannot have them right now?

Are people getting the hint yet? Really if you are not at this point then you are acting like a spoiled child. To get so angry at Ageia for not having good game support when we already knew we would have to wait for these games to see any decent PPU support. It's not like they lied, we already knew how long it would take, why is it so unacceptable all the sudden now? If someone told you something would take 6 months to complete, 3 months in would you get angry at them even though you knew forehand it would take 6 months?

 

[Manny Calavera]

I already covered that; unlike those other companies Ageia doesn’t have any competitors to boast sale figures over. The only possible sale figure comparison is with GPU companies because of the claim that all GPUs are a possible PPUs, definitely not a fair comparison that Ageia can win. If you want to interrupt common business practice as Ageia hiding low sale figures then that is your choice, it is not like I can say anything to convince you otherwise.

As for your other comment I won't address that; this isn't really the right thread to attack physics in exchange for time and resources being utilised in other areas of a games development. Not that PhysX actually costs any money to licence unlike the alternatives.


Or you could read my response to the guy and the lack of a 'crystal ball gazing' comment aimed towards him. I only bring that up when people pull information out of nowhere regarding the future, since he sourced his views I responded accordingly.


Ah another local realisation projected on world wide sales; let's not forget that a good deal of hardware sales occur online today due to convenience and better prices, well unless the person doesn't know better or are incapable of ordering online for some reason. You know there are circumstances were Ageia does charge money for using their physics API? $50,000 for using the PhysX API per title per platform 'if' you do not add hardware support, add PPU support to your commercial game and the licence is free. Judging the number of games that use the engine without supporting the PPU Ageia is getting a fairly decent amount of revenue for a company of its size; not including PPU sales at that. However this probably explains the half assed implementation of the PPU as companies use it simply for the free physics engine.



*sigh*

What is with this attitude that Ageia needs other companies to save them? Why do they need Microsoft's permission to exist or to be bought out by the GPU companies who claim their cards can do it anyway? I still find the idea of strapping a affect physics processor to a effects graphics processor to be rediculess, aren't those things big and power hungry enough? Nvidia and ATI are more likely only in this because their technology has advanced faster than the need for it, so physics on a SLI/Crossfire or high end GPU is a convenient way of justifying the need to buy them.

Whichever way the market goes; CPU, GPU or PPU Ageia have said they will adopt the method and update the PPU as required. Should Microsoft decide to stick its big ugly head where it does not belong and alter natural competition by deciding for themselves who should win then Ageia will adapt to the new market standard. As for them not having enough money isn't it strange that they are preparing to launch a revised PPU? Very odd behaviour for a company that supposedly has no money to invest.



I really dislike repeating myself; but it seems in this thread it is inevitable.

Games like Unreal Tournament and CellFactor Revolution... how long have we known about the existence of these games? A year? More? Because these are the games that were promised to us, the games we have been waiting months for as you put it. Judging your take on things perhaps we should go to the makers of Bioshock and punch them in the face? Seeing how they have made us wait so long. Same for the makers of Crysis and Spore, I mean how dare they? How dare they make us wait so long when they promised us these games so long ago? Why show them to us when we cannot have them right now?

Are people getting the hint yet? Really if you are not at this point then you are acting like a spoiled child. To get so angry at Ageia for not having good game support when we already knew we would have to wait for these games to see any decent PPU support. It's not like they lied, we already knew how long it would take, why is it so unacceptable all the sudden now? If someone told you something would take 6 months to complete, 3 months in would you get angry at them even though you knew forehand it would take 6 months?

Double Post...sorry ladies and germs...

 

[Manny Calavera]

I already covered that; unlike those other companies Ageia doesn’t have any competitors to boast sale figures over. The only possible sale figure comparison is with GPU companies because of the claim that all GPUs are a possible PPUs, definitely not a fair comparison that Ageia can win. If you want to interrupt common business practice as Ageia hiding low sale figures then that is your choice, it is not like I can say anything to convince you otherwise.

As for your other comment I won't address that; this isn't really the right thread to attack physics in exchange for time and resources being utilised in other areas of a games development. Not that PhysX actually costs any money to licence unlike the alternatives.


Or you could read my response to the guy and the lack of a 'crystal ball gazing' comment aimed towards him. I only bring that up when people pull information out of nowhere regarding the future, since he sourced his views I responded accordingly.


Ah another local realisation projected on world wide sales; let's not forget that a good deal of hardware sales occur online today due to convenience and better prices, well unless the person doesn't know better or are incapable of ordering online for some reason. You know there are circumstances were Ageia does charge money for using their physics API? $50,000 for using the PhysX API per title per platform 'if' you do not add hardware support, add PPU support to your commercial game and the licence is free. Judging the number of games that use the engine without supporting the PPU Ageia is getting a fairly decent amount of revenue for a company of its size; not including PPU sales at that. However this probably explains the half assed implementation of the PPU as companies use it simply for the free physics engine.



*sigh*

What is with this attitude that Ageia needs other companies to save them? Why do they need Microsoft's permission to exist or to be bought out by the GPU companies who claim their cards can do it anyway? I still find the idea of strapping a affect physics processor to a effects graphics processor to be rediculess, aren't those things big and power hungry enough? Nvidia and ATI are more likely only in this because their technology has advanced faster than the need for it, so physics on a SLI/Crossfire or high end GPU is a convenient way of justifying the need to buy them.

Whichever way the market goes; CPU, GPU or PPU Ageia have said they will adopt the method and update the PPU as required. Should Microsoft decide to stick its big ugly head where it does not belong and alter natural competition by deciding for themselves who should win then Ageia will adapt to the new market standard. As for them not having enough money isn't it strange that they are preparing to launch a revised PPU? Very odd behaviour for a company that supposedly has no money to invest.



I really dislike repeating myself; but it seems in this thread it is inevitable.

Games like Unreal Tournament and CellFactor Revolution... how long have we known about the existence of these games? A year? More? Because these are the games that were promised to us, the games we have been waiting months for as you put it. Judging your take on things perhaps we should go to the makers of Bioshock and punch them in the face? Seeing how they have made us wait so long. Same for the makers of Crysis and Spore, I mean how dare they? How dare they make us wait so long when they promised us these games so long ago? Why show them to us when we cannot have them right now?

Are people getting the hint yet? Really if you are not at this point then you are acting like a spoiled child. To get so angry at Ageia for not having good game support when we already knew we would have to wait for these games to see any decent PPU support. It's not like they lied, we already knew how long it would take, why is it so unacceptable all the sudden now? If someone told you something would take 6 months to complete, 3 months in would you get angry at them even though you knew forehand it would take 6 months?

Keep dreaming...

If you dont actually own a Ageia PPU,then you certainly eithier work for them in some capacity or are Manju Hegde's secretary.... I am starting to think It is one of the prior three.Everyone here knows full well we live in an age of moles,and forum planted 'satisfied customers' Supergee is at least honest and relatively transparent in his opinions.

I did not project my local perspective onto the world stage,I again only repeated what I have seen first hand,at the local level.Stop trying to twist my words,and the words of others here.I know about online sales,I work in computer store that has five locations
in the city I reside in,and does a good chunk of thier business through online sales.

 

[svet-am]

I did not project my local perspective onto the world stage,I again only repeated what I have seen first hand,at the local level.Stop trying to twist my words,and the words of others here.I know about online sales,I work in computer store that has five locations
in the city I reside in,and does a good chunk of thier business through online sales.

Actually, you did project local experience to the world. when you say "it's not happening here so it can't be happening anywhere" then you're projecting. You're entire point was that you're making the argument that PPU's aren't selling (at all) simply because you're not seeing them sell in front of your own eyes. That's projecting, plain and simple. A better taste of this would be to question the folks at ZZF, NewEgg, and the like about how _their_ sales have been since they are not localized and deal _only_ with nationwide and global sales.

And, I know you're proud of them (obviously) but five locations is _nothing_ when it comes to impacting worldwide sales figures.

Finally, why does his supporting the PPU mean he's either on the take or a naive (closet) owner? Has it ever crossed your mind that he's evaluated the situation objectively and believes (honestly) in his opinion that PPUs are a good idea and that (in his own independent view) they will be here to stay in the long run?

this all reminds me of something Colin Powell said in his autobiography many years ago. People here are getting too personally tied up in this debate. You need to separate your ego from your position on these things. else, when your position is defeated so is your ego and you take it personally and become combative. have a spirited debate, yes. but keep your ego and personal feelings out of it so that we can remain on subject.

 

[AnnoyedDragon]

It is sad when a debate reaches a point were someone holding a opposing view accuses you of working for the company that you support, because that way your views must be biased and should be ignored. It is the ultimate cop out, like those accusing people of owning a PPU so they can disregard their pro Ageia views as being under the influence of a financial investment.

Why do you say this? Why must someone have some sort of stake in Ageia to support them? I support them for the reasons I stated earlier in this thread; to provide an alternative voice within PPU debates so that mass negative discussion of the technology doesn't hamper the chances of Ageia's success. A overall negative attitude towards a technology is enough to kill it before it can prove its worth, by actually challenging the arguments of those who criticise the PPU readers can see both views and form their own opinions without having them hampered by only one perspective on the technology.

That is why I continue to debate in this forum; not because of some hardware investment or Ageia employment I am being accused of. Believe me if I had a PPU or worked for Ageia I would have allot more material to push forward my arguments.

Now unless you have any new points you wish to bring up in this debate; I'd appreciated it if we can leave the whole PPU ownership/Ageia employment accusations here and get back on topic, it is not really a good subject for the integrity of this discussion.

 

[Manny Calavera]

Actually, you did project local experience to the world. when you say "it's not happening here so it can't be happening anywhere" then you're projecting. You're entire point was that you're making the argument that PPU's aren't selling (at all) simply because you're not seeing them sell in front of your own eyes. That's projecting, plain and simple. A better taste of this would be to question the folks at ZZF, NewEgg, and the like about how _their_ sales have been since they are not localized and deal _only_ with nationwide and global sales.

And, I know you're proud of them (obviously) but five locations is _nothing_ when it comes to impacting worldwide sales figures.

Finally, why does his supporting the PPU mean he's either on the take or a naive (closet) owner? Has it ever crossed your mind that he's evaluated the situation objectively and believes (honestly) in his opinion that PPUs are a good idea and that (in his own independent view) they will be here to stay in the long run?

this all reminds me of something Colin Powell said in his autobiography many years ago. People here are getting too personally tied up in this debate. You need to separate your ego from your position on these things. else, when your position is defeated so is your ego and you take it personally and become combative. have a spirited debate, yes. but keep your ego and personal feelings out of it so that we can remain on subject.

My personal feelings have nothing to do with this.And I never said "it's not happening here so it can't be happening anywhere" But you are free to see whatever you want in my or other posts.

It is sad when a debate reaches a point were someone holding a opposing view accuses you of working for the company that you support, because that way your views must be biased and should be ignored. It is the ultimate cop out, like those accusing people of owning a PPU so they can disregard their pro Ageia views as being under the influence of a financial investment.

Why do you say this? Why must someone have some sort of stake in Ageia to support them? I support them for the reasons I stated earlier in this thread; to provide an alternative voice within PPU debates so that mass negative discussion of the technology doesn't hamper the chances of Ageia's success. A overall negative attitude towards a technology is enough to kill it before it can prove its worth, by actually challenging the arguments of those who criticise the PPU readers can see both views and form their own opinions without having them hampered by only one perspective on the technology.

That is why I continue to debate in this forum; not because of some hardware investment or Ageia employment I am being accused of. Believe me if I had a PPU or worked for Ageia I would have allot more material to push forward my arguments.

Now unless you have any new points you wish to bring up in this debate; I'd appreciated it if we can leave the whole PPU ownership/Ageia employment accusations here and get back on topic, it is not really a good subject for the integrity of this discussion.

You are not debating,if you think what you have attempted so far is a debate,you are truly diluting yourself.But this also is a freedom I am sure you will enthusiastically continue to excercise.I have had enough of this circle jerk/psuedo intellectual 'debate' I wish you and your company well Manju.

 

[AnnoyedDragon]

What I'm doing seems to go fine with the definition of debate; I don't want you to feel like you are being chased off, this is a open discussion and I encourage you to come back whenever you want. People may feel that I criticise what is being said against the PPU too much; but as someone arguing for Ageia that is my role, just like it is the role of those against the PPU to criticise what I say.

Somewhere in between people will come to their own decisions on the PPU; I can argue against PPU problems but it is up to readers to decide if my and other peoples arguments negate them. But that cannot occur without for and against parties throwing valid points on the table.

 

[Ulrick28]

I am trying to become a PPU owner but cannot find one anywhere (I live in seattle). BestBuy and Fry's both discontinued carrying them (at least that is what they said when I asked a few days ago).

Looks like you can only online order them. There are enough games out that make use of it that I currently play or will play. I definitly want one, but I am a little concerned purchasing something that major retails have chosen not to stock anymore.