PDA

View Full Version : Interesting PhysX Blog


Pages : [1] 2

Rollo
09-22-10, 07:43 PM
http://scalibq.spaces.live.com/Blog/cns!663AD9A4F9CB0661!387.entry

LOL- I always crack up when I see that "CPUs could do PhysX effects just as good!" malarky.

Yet mysteriously we never see anything but scripted physics in Havoc games, wonder why?

jkmetal
09-22-10, 08:08 PM
"NVIDIA Focus Group Member
NVIDIA Focus Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the Members."

Absolutely your own opinions. No questions about it; no ifs, ands or buts about it.......

bacon12
09-22-10, 08:22 PM
Honestly scripted is fine by me. Prime example is BC2 destruction 2.0.

Ninja Prime
09-22-10, 09:05 PM
Physx is a sucky gimmick. It will never take off, and it doesn't add anything to games.

mailman2
09-22-10, 10:10 PM
Physx is a sucky gimmick. It will never take off, and it doesn't add anything to games.

+1

Rollo
09-22-10, 10:35 PM
Physx is a sucky gimmick. It will never take off, and it doesn't add anything to games.

Yes, it would be better for my games to look just like they do on my son's PS3 and 360, like they do on ATi cards?

As far as it not taking off, looks to me like it's taken off to a far greater extent than any ATi specific feature ever has. Last I saw there were about 20 games and climbing that use PhysX.

Last couple I picked up were Metro 2033 and Mafia II.

nutcrackr
09-22-10, 10:47 PM
I'd rather an open system for physics so both graphics card companies could compete for performance so the consumer wins. I'd also probably rather see it being useful, rather than a gimmick that drops performance considerably.

scripted does 90% of the job for 10% of the computing power.

LT.Schaffer
09-22-10, 11:04 PM
Physx is a sucky gimmick. It will never take off, and it doesn't add anything to games.

Take a look at the water cannon in Cryostasis and tell me the physX effects on doesn't make the stream look 100% better:)
Ill try to get a video of the effect on and off to show it.

Here You Go

I used Fraps to take these so they are not tweaked just straight out of game:)

PhysX OFF
2m2n3oCBnSY

PhysX ON
XOQ7x5eBq3Q

mailman2
09-22-10, 11:42 PM
Yes, it would be better for my games to look just like they do on my son's PS3 and 360, like they do on ATi cards?

As far as it not taking off, looks to me like it's taken off to a far greater extent than any ATi specific feature ever has. Last I saw there were about 20 games and climbing that use PhysX.

Physx is way too much of a performance hit for the added effects. Needing a second GPU to render some particles isn't a justifiable expense. I've played all the games with Physx and I've disabled it every time. I'd rather have Havoc any day.

ViN86
09-22-10, 11:53 PM
I'd rather an open system for physics so both graphics card companies could compete for performance so the consumer wins. I'd also probably rather see it being useful, rather than a gimmick that drops performance considerably.

scripted does 90% of the job for 10% of the computing power.

Enter OpenCL...

bob saget
09-23-10, 12:14 AM
cryostasis is the only game i ever played where physx is a must imo. bc2 destruction looks fine i think.

Muppet
09-23-10, 01:35 AM
Take a look at the water cannon in Cryostasis and tell me the physX effects on doesn't make the stream look 100% better:)
Ill try to get a video of the effect on and off to show it.

Here You Go

I used Fraps to take these so they are not tweaked just straight out of game:)

PhysX OFF
2m2n3oCBnSY

PhysX ON
XOQ7x5eBq3Q

The difference in that is mind boggling. Wow.:)

NaitoSan
09-23-10, 01:44 AM
PhysX is great effect if used properly. Otherwise it adds nothing. How long has PhysX been around? Yeah, it has been few years and we still don't see a huge push for it. Far few games that take advantage of it like Cryostasis. Other games that supports PhysX are usually lame and hardly worth to talk about, let alone get them to work with right drivers.

wysiwyg
09-23-10, 05:06 AM
i like physx

and its better than the fake physics scripted animated destruction in Bad Company 2

Viral
09-23-10, 05:06 AM
Until we get an open standard I doubt we'll see physics effects that have an actual effect on gameplay. This is what I'm waiting for. So far, scripted is filling the void in that regard well enough.

Vardant
09-23-10, 05:58 AM
http://scalibq.spaces.live.com/Blog/cns!663AD9A4F9CB0661!387.entry
He pretty much sums my feelings about this whole deal. Nothing I didn't know, but it's nice to see someone else with the same opinion.

Reading back, I also pretty much agree, that B3D is not what it used to be. Misinformations, full of fanATIcs...


On topic, PhysX isn't going anywhere, whether people like it or not. Siding with a company, that does nothing to further improve the gameplay experience is just dumb in my eyes.

Rollo
09-23-10, 06:46 AM
He pretty much sums my feelings about this whole deal. Nothing I didn't know, but it's nice to see someone else with the same opinion.

Reading back, I also pretty much agree, that B3D is not what it used to be. Misinformations, full of fanATIcs...


On topic, PhysX isn't going anywhere, whether people like it or not. Siding with a company, that does nothing to further improve the gameplay experience is just dumb in my eyes.

It's just annoying when people like Kanter make assertions based on the theoretical maximums of SSE.

I'm surprised he didn't add more ATi propaganda like, "It is clear the HD5870 could perform PhysX functions more than three times faster than a GTX480 because it has over three times the Stream Processors for extra parallel processing goodness! It's simple math!".

(while ignoring the inhgerent compiler inefficiency of the VLIW arch and differences in processing capacity of 4/5 of ATi's SPs)

ViN86
09-23-10, 06:56 AM
Until we get an open standard I doubt we'll see physics effects that have an actual effect on gameplay. This is what I'm waiting for. So far, scripted is filling the void in that regard well enough.

Again, OpenCL. Companies are already working on a physics engine that runs on OpenCL, and with both GPU's supporting it, voila, an open standard.

http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&=&q=physics+opencl&aq=f&aqi=g-m1&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=CNn6bAUCbTKCkHZSEygTtsoWHBQAAAKoEBU_QEmpa

This will fail if Nvidia continues to force its proprietary solution down the consumer's throat, though.

ATI demoed OpenCL physics over a year ago (Inquirer, but shouldn't change the fact that it happened)

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1051673/ati-physics-argument

Here's a video of Bullet physics. Looks like they started with OpenGL but are moving towards OpenCL based physics.

3gpcCWKyrGA

This video is remarkable.

RoIyRoANAy4

Rollo
09-23-10, 07:06 AM
There aren't ANY OpenCL Bullet games I know of, the people who are angry PhysX "only" has about 20 games out won't be happy about that.

ATi has been trotting out demos of GPU accelerated physics effects for years, then they slink away muttering that someone should do this for them, and that the companies like Intel and NVIDIA who actually invest in accelerated physics for games are "evil" for not helping them out.

Vardant
09-23-10, 07:09 AM
This will fail if Nvidia continues to force its proprietary solution down the consumer's throat, though.

ATI demoed OpenCL physics over a year ago (Inquirer, but shouldn't change the fact that it happened)


Why would PhysX fail? It's an engine, even if OpenCL GPU supported Bullet comes out, it's still gonna take a while for proper tools to be developed and probably even longer before some AAA game uses it.

NV will have plenty of time to port it to OpenCL and with superior tools, they will still make enough money out of it.

We keep hearing about some ATI alternative since the day NV bought Ageia, I wouldn't hold my breath.

ViN86
09-23-10, 07:14 AM
Why would PhysX fail? It's an engine, even if OpenCL GPU supported Bullet comes out, it's still gonna take a while for proper tools to be developed and probably even longer before some AAA game uses it.

NV will have plenty of time to port it to OpenCL and with superior tools, they will still make enough money out of it.

We keep hearing about some ATI alternative since the day NV bought Ageia, I wouldn't hold my breath.

Reading comprehension fail...

I said an open implementation of physics based on OpenCL will fail if Nvidia forces PhysX down the consumer's throat.

Either way, I'm not holding my breath, because I really couldn't care less about rendered physics.

frenchy2k1
09-23-10, 05:03 PM
The problem is a typical chicken/egg problem.
1) Physics computation would be great to improve gameplay.
2) However, you cannot implement this if the Hardware necessary to run it is not widely available (as your target audience becomes too small).
3) if no game/program implements physics in an interesting way, no one buys the hardware.

=> back to square 2)

I somewhat expects the console to break the conundrum by adding HW supporting physics. Then developers will prepare impressive games and push for adoption.

As far as support and frameworks, PhysX is the most widespread and supports the most hardware, but as a proprietary Nvidia solution it limits its usefulness. Havok has Intel behind and will probably never support GPU or special units. Bullet may be ported to OpenCL, but despite AMD's marketing, Nvidia was the first one with full OpenCL drivers out the door, so NV would benefit as much as AMD.

I guees this part of the market needs time to mature and reach enough penetration for Physics effects to be integrated in the gameplay...

Viral
09-23-10, 06:51 PM
I agree with the above.

Bottom line is that for physics to be implemented in games in a crucial way the standard needs to be open to most hardware on the market. So either an open standard is pushed (openCL), or Nvidia take significant market share. I know which one I would prefer...

Rollo
09-23-10, 08:31 PM
I agree with the above.

Bottom line is that for physics to be implemented in games in a crucial way the standard needs to be open to most hardware on the market. So either an open standard is pushed (openCL), or Nvidia take significant market share. I know which one I would prefer...

LOL- what's a "crucial" way?

They've been pushing PhysX for a couple years, and there are about 20 games out. Personally I'd be pretty happy if 20 more games came out in the next two years as well. Even ten.

While I wish every game gave me the option of using PhysX effects, I'd certainly rather have it in some than none like ATi users have. Even if OpenCL open standard physics do come out, my guess is ATi won't provide any dev support like NVIDIA does and there will still be PhysX.

Ninja Prime
09-23-10, 11:28 PM
Take a look at the water cannon in Cryostasis and tell me the physX effects on doesn't make the stream look 100% better:)
Ill try to get a video of the effect on and off to show it.

Here You Go

I used Fraps to take these so they are not tweaked just straight out of game:)

PhysX OFF
2m2n3oCBnSY

PhysX ON
XOQ7x5eBq3Q

Whats supposed to be impressive here? I don't see any physics. I see a graphics effect, that doesn't effect the environment any different than the other version. This on a game that was created to show off PhysX... all aboard the fail boat!