Why you wish the PPU to fail.

nhusby

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 1, 2006
Messages
303
I'm bored at work, so its lets start an interesting thread time.

Why is it that so many are screaming it'll fail, I hope it never sells, its useless, its worthless, its not worth $5, blah blah blah.

please tell my why its worthless and why it will hurt the consumer.
 

InorganicMatter

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
15,460
Because Havok said that their API has the capacity to provide full gameplay physics, the implementation has just not been done yet. A PPU and a GPU have similar architectures in that they are highly multithreaded and have onboard memory so they can operate in their own environment, free from the CPU. There's no need for a new product that brings nothing new to the table. Add that to the fact that I can just relegate my old GPU to physics every time I upgrade, and the PPU costs more than it provides. Ageia has got good technology, but their business model is very poor.
 
Joined
Mar 9, 2004
Messages
3,318
InorganicMatter said:
Because Havok said that their API has the capacity to provide full gameplay physics, the implementation has just not been done yet. A PPU and a GPU have similar architectures in that they are highly multithreaded and have onboard memory so they can operate in their own environment, free from the CPU. There's no need for a new product that brings nothing new to the table. Add that to the fact that I can just relegate my old GPU to physics every time I upgrade, and the PPU costs more than it provides. Ageia has got good technology, but their business model is very poor.

Have you missed the whole "effects physics" controversy? GPUs in their current state cannot provide a realistic feedback mechanism meaning can only be used for effects. Another point you brought up was cost, but you dont have to upgrade a ppu on the same cycle as a graphics card. I've been using my same graphics card for about three years, so I dont think the cost is outrageous, not that I would spend money on a ppu if another hardware department was hurting for performance. Ageia has physics that works right now, you can go to the store and buy the hardware, download the sdk and write the code. No one else provides that. I would love it if the gpus were integrated onto the cpu as the plans are, and be able to exploit that for physics, but until then ageia seems to be the only accelerated physics solution.
 

InorganicMatter

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
15,460
Lord of Shadows said:
Have you missed the whole "effects physics" controversy? GPUs in their current state cannot provide a realistic feedback mechanism meaning can only be used for effects.
Wrong sir, wrong. Havok stated in the [H]ardOCP interview that their technology is 100% capabale of providing completely interactive game physics and I quote:

Effects Physics & Gameplay Physics Explored said:
That is probably a current misconception of about how Havok FX works – it can technically affect game-play physics.
Havok just has not implemented it yet. Once they do, there is no need for a dedicated piece of hardware.

Lord of Shadows said:
Another point you brought up was cost, but you dont have to upgrade a ppu on the same cycle as a graphics card.
"Some" upgrade with a PPU is still worse than no upgrading on Havok FX once you buy the initial GPU.
 

WhyYouLoveMe

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 24, 2005
Messages
6,513
Lord of Shadows said:
Another point you brought up was cost, but you dont have to upgrade a ppu on the same cycle as a graphics card.

We haven't ever had a PPU "cycle" yet. The whole point of Aegia providing a PPU is to make money. You don't make money by putting out a physics card once and hope it sells for the next 5 years. It will cycle, my friend. Oh yes, it will cycle. :D

My reasons for hoping PPUs fail:

1. I don't want more hardware in my case. (many sub-reasons for that)
2. More money to spend to get a good "gaming" machine.
3. More instability with drivers/software as more hardware gets dumped onto the O/S.
4. I've got an SLI/Crossfire board and why not use the 2nd video card for physics if possible?
5. Integration - If the GPU/CPU starts to become integrated having one less part to deal with will make the transition easier.
 

R1ckCa1n

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 22, 2004
Messages
4,355
Since I have invested zero money in a PPU, I don't care if it fails. I actually hope it gets Nvidia/AMD/Havok off their arses and give us some better gameplay. If a PPU ends up enhancing gameplay in a way a GPU can't, I will buy one. But I am taking the "show me the games" approach.
 
Joined
Mar 9, 2004
Messages
3,318
I dont like the prefix of "technically" infront of that statement, the only way to get feedback from a shader is to render into a texture and read back the pixel information in your program, while its "technically" being done on the gpu, I would wager a fair amount to say the cpu can do it faster.

As for product cycle, sure I expect there to be future ppu cards if ageia takes off, but it wouldnt be a yearly occurance. And dont forget ageia sells their physics api, I expect them to charge a heafty amount, like havok does, if and when the ppu really takes off.

And about the "use your old gpu" argument, nvidia isnt doing it, ati was planning to do it before being acquired by amd. My guess would be that we wont see this model in use any time before gpus are physically on the cpu.
 

HOCP4ME

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 1, 2005
Messages
2,959
Reasons why I want don't want the PPU to fail:

1. If I am going to have a second GPU, I want to use it for SLI/Crossfire.
2. A GPU will cost more than $200 (unless we can use our old cards, but that might not happen).
3. I want the option to be available to use SLI and physics at the same time.
4. We need a standardized solution. AGEIA will make their hardware work with a DirectPhysics API. Havok isn't interested in doing that.
5. Dedicated hardware will surely outperform a CPU, and could eventually outperform a GPU, since R & D for it is based completely on physics and nothing else.
 

w1retap

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 17, 2006
Messages
12,335
1) Everyone on a web forum is smarter than the engineers who develop these pieces of hardware.
2) Jealousy or an inferiority complex.
3) Lack of funds to buy one so they can brag, therefore resorting to acting like it sucks so they can feel better knowing they are making people feel bad who bought one.
4) Last but not least... actual reasons for not wanting a PPU. (not another piece of hardware to buy.. won't fit.. better ways to implement physics.. etc.)
 

hardwarephreak

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 13, 2002
Messages
1,283
I don't wish it to fail...I just think it needs to be cheaper. I am willing to spend $99 on something that will provide a better gaming experience down the road when it is better supported. But $250 for physics that can be had if nvidia/ati had their shit together isn't worth it. (Current physics engine implementations do not stress the PPU at all, so in my mind, if Nvidia/ATI had physics support now, they would be able to handle the physics currently implemented in games)

In fact scale PPUs like everything else in the industry...let me buy a lower speed ppu that can handle the physics but not as well as the $250 version. Then I may buy the better card when the game support is there. After I see what I have and what it is capable of, and compare that to what the highend ppu cards can do then I may be willing to spend the full $250. The lower price/entry point would increase adoption of the tech, and with that larger installed base, developers won't be too lazy to implement it.

Not everyone buys a 7950GX2.

End of line.
 

SlamDunk

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
277
Dillusion said:
Sweeney recently revealed in an interview about the UE3 engine that multi-core CPU's and GPU's would be able to handle physics very effectively, in essence pushing ageia out of the market:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=113079
I think the correct way to put that would be:

"in essence pushing the PhysX hardware out of the market". If PPU fails then AGEIA still has the PhysX SDK which fully supports multi-core CPUs (it was mentioned in that interview also).
 

SuperGee

Gawd
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
551
That blue text is external forum posters "sunborn" own anti PPU interpretation of that interview Q&A.
I find the interview neutral and Tim S keeps all options open.
 

quadnad

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Messages
7,656
hardwarephreak said:
I don't wish it to fail...I just think it needs to be cheaper. I am willing to spend $99 on something that will provide a better gaming experience down the road when it is better supported.

I completely agree with this. The barrier for entry is incredibly high for a piece of hardware that is running on an aging interface (which most enthusiasts [Aegia's target presumably] don't have many free).

I'd like to see the PPU running PCI-E at around $100. Only then could I see someone purchasing it based on promised future support.
 

swatbat

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 25, 2001
Messages
12,967
I don't really want it to fail, I just want it to make the games better. Untill I see it make a big diffrence in game play I have no cares for it either way. Personaly I like the idea of using a old graphics card down the road to do the same thing. Big thing right now is it is a 250 dollar card that really doesn't do anything.
 

Faction

The Chairman
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
5,461
like the above poster said..

its not really about it failing as it is about noticing some real improvements.

the world just isnt ready for a PPU that cost as much as a midrange gfx card.

and by the time it is ready?

who knows.
 

sabrewolf732

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Messages
4,436
w1retap said:
1) Everyone on a web forum is smarter than the engineers who develop these pieces of hardware.
2) Jealousy or an inferiority complex.
3) Lack of funds to buy one so they can brag, therefore resorting to acting like it sucks so they can feel better knowing they are making people feel bad who bought one.
4) Last but not least... actual reasons for not wanting a PPU. (not another piece of hardware to buy.. won't fit.. better ways to implement physics.. etc.)


qft.
 

HOCP4ME

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 1, 2005
Messages
2,959
$100 would be a great price. I would probably buy one.

Or better yet, bundle it with CF:R for $150. Then everyone would buy one.
 

Moofasa~

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 13, 2003
Messages
1,571
Because they don't make a PCI-E x1 version. Couldn't get one even if I wanted one.
 

CrazyJ

Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
617
I also agree $100 would be a great price point but the problem is that I only have one PCI slot open and its gonna be meant for a audio card most likely.

This will just take up space and not be used that much, currently there aren't many applications for this card, In Ghost Recon AW its been said that the physics card didn't make their gameplay any different nor did it make their environmental effects significantly more dramatic aka explosions
 

SuperGee

Gawd
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
551
WhyYouLoveMe said:
We haven't ever had a PPU "cycle" yet. The whole point of Aegia providing a PPU is to make money. You don't make money by putting out a physics card once and hope it sells for the next 5 years. It will cycle, my friend. Oh yes, it will cycle. :D
This is a good thing. It means we get faster low mid and high-end PPU. And ultimatly a low budged onboard solution.
Just like G-card 9 month. You alway's can skip 1 or 2 nextgens. But it's nice wenn you are at a point to upgrade or buy your new rig. That the hardware avaible at that point has evoluted. To something more powerfull and afordable options. Games will be adoptive to a wide range of system configurations.
My reasons for hoping PPUs fail:

1. I don't want more hardware in my case. (many sub-reasons for that)
Well in time a lot of addon card have disapeer to onboard.
Nic's
IDE Controllers
Sound
Or become very excepted in time.
3d G-card
Hardware 3d sound-Cards

Now a new addon is introduce.
This means most of your Mobo slot will still be free. A PPU and a G-card. only.
This also means you accepted one G-card.
But would also be agianst:
A Sound card.
Extra G-cards. SLI QSLI CF also for Phycics use.
That is also extra hardware.
2. More money to spend to get a good "gaming" machine.
Games don't requier SLI also no PPU or DSP(sound) it's optional. When it will be requiered that take a long time and low budged version will be there.
Like a Sound card is well excepted. But I game with a software onboard solution. My choice.
3. More instability with drivers/software as more hardware gets dumped onto the O/S.
Drivers are stable but then again. There are a lot of hardware components intergrated still needing stable drivers That why mobo's got 10+ Bios versions. and also the number of chipsets drivers and onboard chips drivers. IRQ isue are things of the past. if that is what you mean.
4. I've got an SLI/Crossfire board and why not use the 2nd video card for physics if possible?
I thought you where agains more add-on what's a extra G-card? A extra Hardware card.
5. Integration - If the GPU/CPU starts to become integrated having one less part to deal with will make the transition easier.
I don't think not.

There are for a long time GPU onboard solutions. and the opposit off that you have Quad SLI. And a wide range in between from low to extreem budged.
where will PPU be heading for? Onboard that option is open for in the future. But a High-end Add-on or a SLI option for PPU is also a option in the future.

Plus onboard stand mostly for a low budged solution. Wich means mid and high-end will still be aviable as add-on.

But you have a extra choice. Like to choose for onbard (Software) solution like I did for sound.
 

Moofasa~

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 13, 2003
Messages
1,571
Well in time a lot of addon card have disapeer to onboard.
Nic's
IDE Controllers
Sound
Or become very excepted in time.
3d G-card
Hardware 3d sound-Cards

No? Maybe if you enjoy crappy sound. But for some of us who have higher end systems, onboard is a joke.

I have one PCI slot, and that goes to the X-Fi Elite Pro (which actually costed me less than a PPU). I do have an open PCI-E x1 slot; perhaps if the PPU was a bit cheaper and supported a PCI-E x1 version, I could actually consider it. But at this state, I don't have the room to get one, even if I wanted one.
 

J-Mag

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 21, 2004
Messages
3,640
Why would anyone here want any part of the computer enthusiast industry to fail is beyond me... Even if you don't want the product personally, it is always good to have more options and more competition. Just Ageias presence has forced Nvidia and ATI to take a view at physics and I am sure has ramped up Havok into competitive mode. If Ageia fails there will be less competitve pressure, which is bad for the consumer (as in us).
 

w1retap

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 17, 2006
Messages
12,335
J-Mag said:
Why would anyone here want any part of the computer enthusiast industry to fail is beyond me... Even if you don't want the product personally, it is always good to have more options and more competition. Just Ageias presence has forced Nvidia and ATI to take a view at physics and I am sure has ramped up Havok into competitive mode. If Ageia fails there will be less competitve pressure, which is bad for the consumer (as in us).
DING DING DING!!! omfg, give this guy a cookie, we have a winner. Brilliant. Thank you. =)
(not being sarcastic)
 

Outrigger

Gawd
Joined
Jun 8, 2006
Messages
530
agreed, just because its out there, doesn't mean you have to buy it, unless you're just tempted to buy every new piece of tech coming out whether or not it works. Options is always a good thing, it means more choices, it means more competition, price wars, hence lower prices for us. I personally think the ppu does absolutely nothing and wouldn't use it even if one was given to me for free, only because I have played GRAW with it and without it and it made 0 difference. But I'm still happy its out because you need to start somewhere in order to progress and make it better. I doubt the very first cpu or anything is as good as what they are today. this is just the first step to many revisions, upgrades, cycles...etc. I'm going to hold off til apps that will REALLY take advantage of it come out.
 

Dalrain

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 6, 2003
Messages
311
I'll add another vote that the price point is just too high for what they're offering. I'd drop $100 for a good PPU, preferably on a PCI-E 1x version - no free PCI slots for me. 4 PCI-E 1x though.
 

nhusby

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 1, 2006
Messages
303
I'm glad to see alot of inteligent replys.

The way I see it, most of the people against the PPU, are against it because they dont want to be left out if the game dev's adopt it in their future favorit games.
 

HOCP4ME

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 1, 2005
Messages
2,959
J-Mag said:
Why would anyone here want any part of the computer enthusiast industry to fail is beyond me... Even if you don't want the product personally, it is always good to have more options and more competition. Just Ageias presence has forced Nvidia and ATI to take a view at physics and I am sure has ramped up Havok into competitive mode. If Ageia fails there will be less competitve pressure, which is bad for the consumer (as in us).

QFT! This needs to be stickied and posted on the front page!

You have two choices:

1. No hardware accelerated physics. Gameplay doesn't improve.
2. PPU becomes required. You have to buy a new card.
3. Second GPU becomes required. You have to buy a new card.
4. Both a PPU and a second GPU become options for physics. They compete with each other, driving down prices, and you get to pick the one that works best for you.

Which option do you think looks best?
 

Sovereign

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
3,080
I hope someone makes a PCI cable. That way, I can use the other PCI slot that's currently covered by my 7900GTX for a PPU....otherwise I can't fit one.
 

strikeout

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
1,360
id like to see it fail in a the form of them selling rights/technology to both ati and nv. Then they could assimulate it into existing gpu standards and form factor. All at the same price as current gpu price points.
 

RAutrey

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 25, 2002
Messages
1,605
The day will come when no one posting in this forum would even consider not having hardware physics accelleration. Whether that is a PPU or GPPU... Who knows. That is to be determined by industry/consumer adoption. Unfortunately, we are just not there yet. Ageia seems to be in the lead with an available hardware solution but a stated 100000 times before, the killer ap just isn't there. Maybe CF:R will fill the role. The bundle idea is a good one. Let's hope they are listening. Why CF:R was not developed earlier to be rolled out with this card is beyond me.

Ageia also needs to move to PCI-E yesterday. A PCI solution alienates far too many potential customers who simply do not have a slot to spare.

The PPU is basically a useless piece of hardware TODAY, IMO.
 

brom42

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 1, 2004
Messages
3,980
I am another person who a PPU is completely useless until they put out a PCI-E version. After placing 1 or 2 large video cards in a system, most are lucky to have 1 free PCI slot. If the person is a serious gamer at all, that slot will be used up by a sound card. Come on Ageia, this isn't 3 years ago. If it is going to have any chance of being successful, it has to be a PCI-E solution. I stick Ageia and Bigfoot's Killer NIC in the same catagory; a great idea that is killed because it is overpriced and neutered/made useless by not making it PCI-E.


Make it $99 and PCI-E x1 and I'll buy it today, killer ap or not.
 

MrWizard6600

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 15, 2006
Messages
5,779
physics is some pretty amazing crap...

again i state the argument no one fully understands what physics processing is and how big an impact on gaming it will have. imho, it could shape up to be the biggest revolution in gaming since the introduction of 3D games, or perhalps even bigger then that.

weve prooven ATi and Nvidia gpus arent optimized for physics, better to buy a rock crawler then a hummer and jack up the suspension (IE better to get a PPU then to mod a GPU)..

i am hoping with every strand that Agiea will partner with someone, and sign a contract with EA (or some other game developer, EAs just the powerhouse) to develop a game that can fully show off every gun that the PPU has. a game that allows non-pre-videoized and non-track-set fires, explosions that dont damage things they arnt sposed too (ie nade kills thru walls), morphable levels including polygon changeable terrain, and just polygon collisions in general.

name the greatist game of all time, what ever you can think of, FPS, RPG, i dont care. think about how the above listed enhancements a PPU can make would change the game. i gave a big example in some other post, and bein it 4:30 am, im not willing to re-post.

Havoks flying cans are nothing compaired to what the PPU is capible of... but thats the problem isnt it... capible

as for room issues....

i dont understand how you could run outta room.

2X 2 dual slotted graphics cards, total: 4 slots
1X sound card total: 1 slot
1X PPU : 1 slot
still leaves a slot.
 
Top