Release date for PPU yet?

Astaroth125 said:
Look at graphics, do programmers write specifically where every pixel goes?
Click to expand...
That depends if your working in 2d =), 3d api's let you set basic shapes like a box or a sphere etc, but I doubt anyone uses primitives in their games. (They could though, if they liked spheres alot.) Most games feed each vertex into the 3d api from external model files forming polygons in whatever shape they want. (the direction of the face depends on the order you give the verticies) The api does the work of transforming a set of 3d coordinates with textures mapped etc, into a 2d image on your screen.

As for your exploding example, subdividing existing meshes would get you something that looked very unrealistic. But if you like everything blowing up into a bunch of random triangles in every game you play why not. (Not to mention subdividing everything once doubles the triangles and triples visible faces, which could be a very bad thing if you do it on a already high poly model.)

As for the worth of the sdk, I downloaded it and after looking at a few example programs they use their sdk classes, opengl, and glut in all their examples. I didnt see a cloth simulation, but the basic setup in the examples is to do all collision detection with the sdk and use the coordinate system of the sdk. The programmer has to create "Actors" (physics objects) and apply forces on them to get the effects they want. Then they have to draw the objects from the actor, which supplies thier new positions when updating the scene. So the sdk takes out all kinematic physic work and the need to manipulate the coordinate system. I didnt see anything as high level as blow something up based on assigned properties to objects.

So say you have a level, with a exploding barrel and a box on top of it. The programmer has to load the level into the sdk as a static actor, (so that objects dont fall into nothingness, acts only for collision detection) you then have to create a barrel and a box in the sdk and draw everything in your 3d api. Say later you want the barrel to explode, you go ahead and draw the boom, remove the barrel, (maybe put some barrel gibs) then in order to move your box, you tell the sdk to apply an upward force. (most likely in the opposite direction of the center of the barrel) The sdk then does its magic of moving the coordinates of the box, applying gravity, and handling all collision detections and force changes that occur when hitting the map. So you can see what I mean when I say that people are expecting way too much from ageia.
 
Astaroth125 said:
Not that I'm terribly knowledgeable in physics programming, but I think a lot of people are overlooking Aegis' SDK. Any 3d game must have physics programmed in, creating a physics engine. Aegis is handing a game developer that wants to use it a physics engine. Not only is it your standard physics engine, but it also supports PPU's. A lot of people are making this out like Aegis is handing people hardware and telling game developers to develop physics engines for it. Yes, programmers will still need to write physics for it, but they would if they used a custom engine, the havok engine, or Aegis' engine. Difference is Aegis' would have support for a whole bunch of objects.

Also, again, I'm no programming genius, but I'm not sure saying programmers would need to specifically write code for each object is fair. Look at graphics, do programmers write specifically where every pixel goes? I'd imagine similar techniques as are used in graphics processing could be used in physics development. For example, you write an 'Explosion' effect. This effect would take an object a break it into a specified variable's number of pieces. The trajectories of these pieces would be calculated of the physics card through a combination of mass and velocity of the striking object, and the mass (and possibly velocity) of the object being hit. You can then apply this one 'Explosion' function to hundreds of different explosions. That's far different, and far easier, than people saying programmers need to write this code so specifically.

Maybe I'm just not seeing how it is such a massive amount more work to add this in. A robust engine should be able to scale up for effects like this. Is it more work? Definately. Is making a 3d game more work than a 2d one...?

To me, PPU's are an evolutionary step, just like 3d. Assuming our end goal is to have as realistic as possible games, you would require something like this. Regardless of how good a video card is, it still can't replicate any kind realistic physics, and neither can current processors.

Sure, you could never buy a PPU and wait for CPU's to handle the load. Meanwhile, for the next 15 years you'll be waiting for processors to be able to match what a PPU can do now. I'll hopefully be enjoying a more realistic gaming experience, courtesy of a PPU.

Astaroth

Edit: Whole 'correct punctuation' thing doesn't always work at 3am. :(
Click to expand...


Far better put than i attempted to before, thank you for posting that, Astaroth.

As for the people who think the general gaming community at large (meaning the majority of the people who game, not the top 1% with SLI) probably wont buy this add in card right away, due to its 300 dollar price tag. of course, after a couple weeks, they will probably release a less powerful version at a cheaper price.

Though, I will be getting one, as soon as they are released, and i dont have an SLI system...
 
RaphaelVinceti said:
Far better put than i attempted to before, thank you for posting that, Astaroth.

As for the people who think the general gaming community at large (meaning the majority of the people who game, not the top 1% with SLI) probably wont buy this add in card right away, due to its 300 dollar price tag. of course, after a couple weeks, they will probably release a less powerful version at a cheaper price.

Though, I will be getting one, as soon as they are released, and i dont have an SLI system...
Click to expand...


All this above information is why I post about dual core CPU being a more logical path for additional physics in games. The percentage of adoption is far more guarenteed with this technology. Dual core is here to stay and is only going to get more common. It currently might not be as powerfull as a dedicated PPU but if a higher percentage of people own it the investment of effort on the developer side might make it more used. Think about it a current single core cpu can handle 40 objects and run a game with all the additional things going on with that. The second core with no activity should at least have the capability to run the same amount of physics objects or 40 objects. 80 objects = 100% increase. I wish graphics doubled that easily and without a $300.00 single use technology card.
 
Will it be PCIe x1? Please for the love of god let it be PCIe x1.
 
I remember seeing the PPU pictures and it being a PCIex1 and a regular old PCI as well.
 
Comments about fractures, one of the lead devs for Ageia has spent many years in the study of such, I look forward to what comes of his work :) Natural fractures are something that can be calculated, and will be... and it wont be random triangles breaking off :rolleyes:

The Ageia engine calculates center of gravity just from a model, and the SDK is rather clean and amazing... poked around the demos, and a bit of the basic code, while I couldnt implement it at my level of knowledge... I intend to in the future ;)

Those saying dual core is the path, what about multi-threaded drivers and games in the future, you'll run into the same proc usage cap. A PPU that can do, seriously 1000% effective of what a CPU can, is more than worth it...
 
Devii said:
From what I can tell Ageia is not making cards, only chips. Im sure a board maker will make 1x sooner than later.
Click to expand...

AFAIK BFG, and possibly ASUS, are making the cards.
 
RavenD said:
AFAIK BFG, and possibly ASUS, are making the cards.
Click to expand...

ASUS was the first company to sign on making the cards, they did that awhile ago. BFG was only a recent addition.



To all the naysayers out there, I dare you to download the AGEIA Rocket Demo. It has a bunch of physics simulations on it....try the "Big Bang" one. On my computer it made it drop to like 0FPS, it would probably do the same to an X2. A system with a PPU however would laugh at it and keep on crunching.

If you ever want to have more realistic games, we need the PPU. We would be playing Super Mario Bros. 28 right now with some "super cool sprites" if it weren't for the 3D card. The hardware needs to come before the software.
 
Alrighty.. I found what i was looking for. For those of you naysayers who think that developers will not want to support the Ageia PhysX processor.. here is a list of Devs who are RIGHT NOW!!

Epic Games
Ubisoft - Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter
Mythic Entertainment - Warhammer 40,000 MMO
Big Huge Games - Rise of Nations, Rise of Legends
Cryptic Studios - City of Villains
Sega - GE2 project
Bongfish Interactive Entertainment - Stoked Rider featuring Tommy Brunner
Kylotonn - Bet on Soldier
Artificial Studios
Airtight Games
Quantic Dream - Karma
Piranha Bytes
Grin
Atari
Shiny Entertainment
Destineer
Frogwares
Spark
Aspyr
Obsidian Entertainment
Secret Level


Um.. thats quite a few developers.. and two of those games are already out... (COV and Bet on Soldier) I think there will be widespread use of the Ageia SDK engine, or similar PhysX based engines.
 
RaphaelVinceti said:
Alrighty.. I found what i was looking for. For those of you naysayers who think that developers will not want to support the Ageia PhysX processor.. here is a list of Devs who are RIGHT NOW!!

Epic Games
Ubisoft - Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter
Mythic Entertainment - Warhammer 40,000 MMO
Big Huge Games - Rise of Nations, Rise of Legends
Cryptic Studios - City of Villains
Sega - GE2 project
Bongfish Interactive Entertainment - Stoked Rider featuring Tommy Brunner
Kylotonn - Bet on Soldier
Artificial Studios
Airtight Games
Quantic Dream - Karma
Piranha Bytes
Grin
Atari
Shiny Entertainment
Destineer
Frogwares
Spark
Aspyr
Obsidian Entertainment
Secret Level


Um.. thats quite a few developers.. and two of those games are already out... (COV and Bet on Soldier) I think there will be widespread use of the Ageia SDK engine, or similar PhysX based engines.
Click to expand...

They either were deliberately spreading false information or they didn't bother to research the ppu at all. Either way.....why did they even comment?
 
They either were deliberately spreading false information or they didn't bother to research the ppu at all. Either way.....why did they even comment?
Click to expand...

Apparently not.. considering all of that information is right on the Ageia website, under the Content section... Also.. BFG will be releasing 128mb PCI versions of the cards.. I could not find anything about what types of cards, or how much memory will be on them. For asus.. Asus doesnt even have the press release about the distrabution on their global site.. at least, i couldnt find it. I really hope they add a PCI-E 1x or 4x to the versions.. that would signify, finally, the beginings of the death of PCI.. which would be nice.
 
PPU's are definitly the future. Not sure that they belong on a dedicated card, but someday they should shrink and fit on an graphics card.
 
I doubt that they will ever become a part of another card. It is likely that they will advance along the lines of the Graphics cards we see now.. With new releases every six months to a year or so. It is unlikely they will ever be in a graphics card, since they would have to put two physical processors on every card, as well as dram and DDR series ram for both processors.. not very efficent.. Not saying it will not ever happen.. but i for one doubt it will. And if i am wrong, it certainly will not be anytime soon. Of course.. that could also limit computer customizability.. since if it was intergrated into a graphics card, there stands the chance that only certain companies will follow that path, and the expense for the single card would likely be greater than two cards..

Besides that.. this is the first time Physics is being handled seperatly, not in the processor. The graphics in a computer used to be handled by the processor.. and you dont see them re-intergrated into it, nor does anyone think that will ever happen.. I think this is the trend we will see with physics cards
 
I don't think they would go on graphic card becuase then there would be even more heat on the card. Leaving it as a seperate unit will let it process more and faster speeds.
 
I watched a demo of this Agia PPU in action on Attack of the show on G4.
Have to say I was impressed, seemed to make a huge dif when they disabled it.
 
On a totally immature but intriguing note, if cloth simulation is in store for PPU's, the first thing modder would do is to strip the clothe off of the models and make them all females. You know it's true. Just stating the REAL potential of PPU :D

Reminds me of that XBox game Dead or Alive Beach Volleyball.
 
AACDIRECT said:
The second core with no activity should at least have the capability to run the same amount of physics objects or 40 objects. 80 objects = 100% increase.
Click to expand...
Yes, and the first gen PPU is supposed to support 30000 objects. That is one or two more than 80.

Do you remember when the Voodoo 1 came out? Quake vs GLQuake? This should be a similar jump.

If you don't remember seeing GLQuake on a Voodoo 1 card for the time after playing quake in software mode for months you probably can't understand how big of a deal this has the potential of being.

==>Lazn
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top