AMD to Demonstrate GPU Havok Physics Acceleration at GDC

[Ancient76]

http://www.techpowerup.com/88739/AMD_to_Demonstrate_GPU_Havok_Physics_Acceleration_ at_GDC.html

GPU-accelerated physics is turning out to be the one part of specifications AMD is yearning for. One of NVIDIA's most profitable acquisitions in recent times, has been that of Ageia technologies, and its PhysX middleware API. NVIDIA went on to port the API to its proprietary CUDA GPGPU architecture, and is now using it as a significant PR-tool apart from a feature that is genuinely grabbing game developers' attention. In response to this move, AMD's initial reaction was to build strategic technology alliance with the main competitor of PhysX: Havok, despite its acquisition by Intel.

In the upcoming Game Developers Conference (GDC) event, AMD may materialize its plans to bring a GPU-accelerated version of Havok, which has till now been CPU-accelerated. The API has featured in several popular game titles such as Half Life 2, Max Payne II, and some other Valve Source-based titles. ATI's Terry Makedon, in his Twitter-feed has revealed that AMD would put forth its “ATI GPU Physics strategy.” He also added that the company would present a tech-demonstration of Havok technology working in conjunction with ATI hardware. The physics API is expected to utilize OpenCL and AMD Stream.

How, Yes, No :)

[GamblerFEXonlin]

http://www.techpowerup.com/88739/AMD_to_Demonstrate_GPU_Havok_Physics_Acceleration_ at_GDC.html
How, Yes, No :)

Wow we might get two hardware accelerated physics standards competing, like directX and opengl. But of course they must run great on both RADEON and GEFORCE. GPU physics is many times faster then CPU physics.
http://techgage.com/article/nvidias_physx_performance_and_status_report_-_part_2/2

[nekrosoft13]

physics should be added to directx, and one standard should be made.

[bacon12]

Agreed nekro, that was everyone would benefit.

[Ninja Prime]

physics should be added to directx, and one standard should be made.

Sounds like a good plan to me. Good luck getting nv and ati to agree on a standard though... :p

[CaptNKILL]

physics should be added to directx, and one standard should be made.

Yep.

If nvidia's and ATI's physics methods both have high points, they need to agree on a standard to avoid wasting money and time researching similar technologies.

On the other hand, if ATI's has nothing to offer over nvidia's it'll simply fail and nvidia will hold the standard. This is the most likely outcome IMO.

[jolle]

It sais it uses OpenCL, so I assume it´ll run on both ATi and NV.
I mean Havok is in the business of selling physics middleware, wider GPU support is beneficial to them, more likely a developer will license the software if it has a larger potential installbase.

NV keeping PhysX locked to CUDA helps NV sell GPUs, but its hurting the physics engine.

[nekrosoft13]

Sounds like a good plan to me. Good luck getting nv and ati to agree on a standard though... :p

that is the thing about Directx, NV and ATI doesn't have to agree, MS tells them how it would work, and they have to follow the guidelines

[josiahsuarez]

DX11 will support GPU physics through the 'Compute Shader' dealie

[jolle]

DX11 will support GPU physics through the 'Compute Shader' dealie
Someone will still have to write a physics engine using CS, its just another API to write GPGPU applications, so you can do whatever you want with it.
NV runs their PhysX engine on CUDA, Havok seems to use OpenCL (which isnt restricted to windows like CS will be).
If CS is all that much better maybe one or both will port over to it at some point though.

[nutcrackr]

time to join forces, two standards = suck.

[LordJuanlo]

Who knows, maybe the partnership (http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoom/0,,51_104_543_15434~127541,00.html) between AMD and Blizzard will mean Diablo 3 and / or Starcraft II will feature GPU accelerated Havok.

If CS is all that much better maybe one or both will port over to it at some point though.

Agree, we don't need two vendor-propietary standards, things will turn like the DOS era, where games had to be coded to support different sound cards. Both PhysX and Havok should be ported to DirectX 11 (and run with any GPU), so game companies can choose whatever API they want, and no gamer would be affected no matter what graphics card is using.

[jolle]

CUDA is a propriety standard, OpenCL isnt afaik, its an open standard.
So there arent 2 propriety standards AFAIK, only one. (in the current realm of GPU physics).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenCL

AMD has decided to support OpenCL (and DirectX 11) instead of the now deprecated Close to Metal in its Stream framework.[5][6] RapidMind announced their adoption of OpenCL underneath their development platform, in order to support GPUs from multiple vendors with one interface.[7] Nvidia announced on December 9, 2008 to add full support for the OpenCL 1.0 specification to its GPU Computing Toolkit

Although it hasnt been said one way or another yet, I still firmly suspect that Havok GPU mode will run on any DX10 GPU, as they´re using OpenCL.
They ARENT selling GPUs, they´re selling middleware, so it would make alot more sense for their business.

I know the announcement "sounds" like its a ATi thing, but it doesnt specificly SAY so.

[Ancient76]

Well, somebody had to do something, in terms of physics. One year ago this was AMD's story:

Game developers will write code for the biggest installed base of hardware to ensure a big market for their games. The only certainty for the developers is that there will be a multi-core CPU in modern PCs. To write a game that supports a proprietary GPU-based physics API would mean a vastly different code base for the game developer as well as relegating this type of game experience to a small percentage of the computers. Clearly, this is not the desirable path for game developers and AMD.

Our strategy is to optimize our CPUs to run Havok’s API and libraries and then to investigate how we can improve gameplay with offloading certain forms of physics simulation to the GPU. We have our theories and models, but we will not announce our product plans until we are ready to roll them out.

And they were wrong, like so many times before.

[mtl]

according to Xbit labs
It is unclear whether any video game developer has adopted AMD’s proprietary physics effects engine for video games.

[Tuork]

OpenCL at work:

http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/27/havok-and-amd-show-off-opencl-with-pretty-pretty-dresses/#continued

Wonder what type of hardware that's running on...

[LordJuanlo]

Not bad at all, if it can run in both ATI and nVidia GPUs it's a winner

[jolle]

OpenCL at work:

http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/27/havok-and-amd-show-off-opencl-with-pretty-pretty-dresses/#continued

Wonder what type of hardware that's running on...
Think I heard a quadcore and ATi HW, unspecified.
The thing with OpenCL is that it runs on pretty much anything, CPU, GPUs, Cell, DSPs etc.
So the Havok engine can do some load balancing there and send stuff that might run alot faster on GPU to the GPU if there is headroom for it.. theoreticly atleast.