Havok's response to the Tim Sweeney Interview.

[MikeC]

Havok Perspective on Tim Sweeney/Epic Comments
As posted on nVnews:http:// www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=70056

Havok Response:

We could not agree more with Tim Sweeney’s general view and vision on physics trends in the PC game industry, per his article on nVnews. ( http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=70056)

In particular, Tim seems to share our view that the most credible role for add-on hardware in PC games is to delivery astounding special effects (aka “physics effects”).

To this end, both the PPU and GPU promise to massively accelerate the computation of physically-based effects.

Havok is a cross platform provider developing for all consoles and the PC. We develop for all viable platforms. Havok believes that with regard to hardware enhanced physics the GPU is the most powerful, and cost effective technology available for accelerating physics – enabling simulations of 10’s of thousands of objects at top game speeds.

In our newest product, Havok FX, we’ve demonstrated that currently available GPU’s, priced at under $200 retail today, can accelerate physical phenomenon in very compelling ways (outperforming what has been shown to date from the PPU).

For consumers looking to spend additional $’s to accelerate physics in their games, why not spend money to purchase a new GPU for graphics, and relegate last year’s model to doing the physics via Havok FX?

This seems to us a far more meaningful investment on the part of game developers as well, since they do not face the “chicken and egg” challenge of waiting for an installed base of PPU-enabled PC’s. Today, the installed base of Havok FX compatible Shader Model 3 GPU’s in PC’s easily exceeds 50M units.

Overall, we are very confident that the trajectory for GPU technology will place the GPU above all other entrants in the hardware accelerated physics space – especially when considering the software, support, and retail momentum that GPU manufacturers bring to the table.

[OWA]

Nice response and good to see they checked out the interview as well. :)

[Marvel_us]

Agreed. Shows you the quality of our interview, a company as big as Havok took time to look at it.

[jolle]

Havok seem fast to respond to anything Ageia related, but what matters in the end is the gamesupport, atleast IMO..
Ageia has a list of some games, and claim to have alot more (over a 100) supported but unannouced titles..
So the best thing Havok could do is show us some games using Havok FX, they seem hellbent on putting people off buying PhysX boards and by that rooting Ageia in the game, but I havent really heard much about any game using Havok FX, it might be great stuff but that wont matter if noone uses it..

I could imagine devs like the idea of a "fixed" platform like the PhysX boards, where they know exactly how much power they can spend, while Havok FX would depend on what GPU your using to power it, demanding more flexible solutions..

[Daneel Olivaw]

To me it seems obvious that Havok will get the greater part of the market.

[Q]

Damn Mike....all the big shots are checking out the site now! ;)

[GlowStick]

Hm, i dont want to be the party pooper but

To this end, both the PPU and GPU promise to massively accelerate the computation of physically-based effects.Hold the phone, in the interview Tim Sweeny never says or implys that the havok use the gpu solution is better than the ageia. I rember (still looking for it) a interview where someone states that they dont like the idea because they need all of the graphics power they can get? (If someone still has the link could they pm it to me)

Jacob- Havok recently announced the ability to accelerate physics on the GPU. Is that necessarily a bad idea?

Sweeney- That’s a good approach, they have some good technology there. Havok has a physics system that runs largely on the GPU to accelerate the computations there. It seems to be a lower precision physics than you have for the rest of the game which is problematic. You really want all the physics in the world to be drawing with a constant level of precision, so you don't have to make weird trade-offs there. I guess there is also the trade-off with that, if your GPU is doing both physics and graphics, then you are not getting the full utilization out of the system.
I feel that explanes it self.

So basicly I feel havok is takeing that way out of context, and I hope that dosnet deter Tim Sweeney from future interviews with nVNews.

[Zelda_fan]

didn't sweeny actually say that you don't want physics tieing up the GPU?

at any rate I love it. Havok is using nvNews to pimp their physics engine.

[|MaguS|]

didn't sweeny actually say that you don't want physics tieing up the GPU?

at any rate I love it. Havok is using nvNews to pimp their physics engine.

Havok is saying that they will use the second GPU, not the GPU if you only have one. My question is, would this work with low end cards... I could easily see buying a cheap $100 Videocard and having 3 in my PC with one dedicated to Physics.

[slick]

Well played by Havok. A cost effective way to deliver their product, with what is going to be the backing of the entire video card industry, with which physics will go hand in hand. Well played indeed.

[Sgt_Pitt]

I can hear Aegia groaning after that Havok interview

its a big kick in the guts to em, but i agree with havok, its much easier for the consumer to use their old vid card :)

[Zelda_fan]

I can hear Aegia groaning after that Havok interview

its a big kick in the guts to em, but i agree with havok, its much easier for the consumer to use their old vid card :)

most "old video cards" capeable of dunning HavokFX are AGP. It's not like most mobos have AGP slots, and it's not like new PCIe slots have AGP either. And if I had a second video card, I'd rather use it for SLi not physics.

[|MaguS|]

most "old video cards" capeable of dunning HavokFX are AGP. It's not like most mobos have AGP slots, and it's not like new PCIe slots have AGP either. And if I had a second video card, I'd rather use it for SLi not physics.

A GeForce 4 MX would be easily able to handle the calculations for Physics. Heck, I see a 6100 PCI available on newegg for under $30, that while not as good as a PPU would be able to accel Physics calculations by a nice margin especially at that price.

Considering we haven't seen anything that is worth a PPU, I would rather run Havok off a GPU with only a 5FPS increase then a $300 PPU that gives me "sometimes" a 10+ FPS increase. If Havok can incoperate this hardware accel also in older titles that use its API then I see no reason for Aegia to even operate anymore... why would a developer go for a new costly platform with little support then one that has hundreds of titles on the market already and more in development.

But as of right now we haven't really seen how Havok will take advantage of the GPU and what class of GPU you would require.

[SH64]

Interesting .. good to see Havok commenting on Sweeney's interview :)

[CaptNKILL]

A GeForce 4 MX would be easily able to handle the calculations for Physics. Heck, I see a 6100 PCI available on newegg for under $30, that while not as good as a PPU would be able to accel Physics calculations by a nice margin especially at that price.

Considering we haven't seen anything that is worth a PPU, I would rather run Havok off a GPU with only a 5FPS increase then a $300 PPU that gives me "sometimes" a 10+ FPS increase. If Havok can incoperate this hardware accel also in older titles that use its API then I see no reason for Aegia to even operate anymore... why would a developer go for a new costly platform with little support then one that has hundreds of titles on the market already and more in development.

But as of right now we haven't really seen how Havok will take advantage of the GPU and what class of GPU you would require.
The guy said the Havok acceleration works on anything with SM 3.0 support:
This seems to us a far more meaningful investment on the part of game developers as well, since they do not face the “chicken and egg” challenge of waiting for an installed base of PPU-enabled PC’s. Today, the installed base of Havok FX compatible Shader Model 3 GPU’s in PC’s easily exceeds 50M units.

That means the Geforce 6 series or better and the Radeon x1x00 series. A GF4 MX wont work.

[jAkUp]

Wow! Amazing :D This is awesome that we got Havok to respond... I don't think UE3 is using any havok technologies though....

As for a Geforce4MX, remember guys, for HavokFX, you need a SM3.0 graphics card... so the 6100 should work :) Also, Ageia techologies is attractive to developers because to license the engine is free, as long as you support the hardware.

[CaptNKILL]

Wow! Amazing :D This is awesome that we got Havok to respond... I don't think UE3 is using any havok technologies though....

As for a Geforce4MX, remember guys, for HavokFX, you need a SM3.0 graphics card... so the 6100 should work :) Also, Ageia techologies is attractive to developers because to license the engine is free, as long as you support the hardware.
You know... this could be a good reason to get an Nforce 6150 board with integrated video :D

EDIT: Holy crap, heres a physics processor for you :)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814143058

$28 for a 128Mb 6200 PCI

Its hard to say how much this could really help though. Havok says that it works with any SM 3.0 card, but I remember back in the day when games "worked" on horribly slow graphics cards and it was probably better to just run in software mode :p

We're going to have to wait until we get some real world benchmarks to make any judgments on this Havok FX thing.

[jAkUp]

That is very interesting... however, I think that as soon as you insert a PCIe graphics card... it disables the onboard video. I'm not positive but I think thats the way it works with onboard graphics and PCIe :)

[|MaguS|]

That is very interesting... however, I think that as soon as you insert a PCIe graphics card... it disables the onboard video. I'm not positive but I think thats the way it works with onboard graphics and PCIe :)

I don't think many motherboards do it automatically yet. My friends HP has a built-in video and I had to go to the bios to disable it prior to installing his new 7900GT.

On the Geforce 4 MX comment, my bad. But the 6100 would work! :D

[CaptNKILL]

I don't think many motherboards do it automatically yet. My friends HP has a built-in video and I had to go to the bios to disable it prior to installing his new 7900GT.

On the Geforce 4 MX comment, my bad. But the 6100 would work! :D
Actually, I dont think they make a 6100 card. Thats an integrated only chip. :D

[|MaguS|]

Blah, ment the 6200... god I hate you! :p

[slick]

That is very interesting... however, I think that as soon as you insert a PCIe graphics card... it disables the onboard video. I'm not positive but I think thats the way it works with onboard graphics and PCIe :)

There's an option for "Always on" in the BIOS, so ya never know. :D

[XGas]

Alright guys, take a look at this: Traditionally(How bout now?), we have GPU and CPU, the CPU calculates all that sh*t, including geometry(its world detail, its a kind of cross between graphics and physics), physics, blah blah blah, then it feeds to the GPU part, after it feeds data to the GPU, nothing can go backwards now(on current GPU generation). So some games with lots of geometry are called CPU limited games, lol.

Ok, then imagine this: your CPU is virtually free of ALL Physics prosessing(Cause of t3h PPU), so now its has more room to prosess Geometry right? This leads to extreme increase in FPS, duh. The GPU physics is only eye-candy, unless data can go backwards in a GPU, well for now it can't, unless ATI, or Nvidia somehow found a backdoor, PPU is the way to go to both give FEATURE/GAMEPLAY and nice Physics graphics, its a nice balance.

Since games need the Ageia Physics engine in t3h game, plus developers to actually "import" it so it can be accelerated, plus, now most games dont even utilize its full POWER(PPU), I even doubt the Unreal Engine 3.0 to really put all the Physics prosessing to the PPU. GPU physics is only eye-candy as I said, so unless data in t3h shaders can go backwards, no interactive Physics that can kill you/your charactar your playing in a game.
Yeah dudes, imagine blowing up the whole block just to get/frag a guy, droool.

[|MaguS|]

Wow nice first post... I have no idea what your talking about...

A Videocard can deliver and accept all data as long as it has the software to handle it, its not a hardware limitation as how Havok has shown.

I have see no evidence of a PPU freeing up all physics from the CPU or even affecting Gameplay in anything. Even Vangaurds has gone on the record about the PPU doing nothing more then helping with their graphics physics rendering.

Before you bring up CellFactor as an example I would like to state I will ignore this game untill I see some evidence that it is using the PPU as a nessicty for gameplay rather then just an excuse to throw thousands of objects with physics simulation on screen that in no way affect gameplay.

As of right now the PPU and Havok FX do the same exact thing, they give the developers the ability to add more objects to the screen that are manipulated by physics. I have not seen any examples on both parts of gameplay affecting implementation, but if Havok FX can be backwards compatible and support older software based Havok games then its an instant win.

But as of right now since they both accomplish the same thing and Havok FX being able to be used without spending $300, I see it as a better product. Especially since users who have SLI can always have the option of disabling SLI for games and using the second card for Physics. I don't think we would require dual G80s to run HL2 at max settings. ;)

[jolle]

As of right now the PPU and Havok FX do the same exact thing, they give the developers the ability to add more objects to the screen that are manipulated by physics. I have not seen any examples on both parts of gameplay affecting implementation, but if Havok FX can be backwards compatible and support older software based Havok games then its an instant win.
They arent really comparable, I think Devs would prefer if people had PhysX cards since they all have the same amount of processing power, while a Havok FX solution depends on what GPU you´re using, ranging from a 6100 to a 7900GTX and that is a pretty big difference there.
And with HavokFX mapping ontop of Direct3D (and/or OpenGL?) there were some limitations werent there? I recall reading something about lack of writeback in the shaders or some such, limiting the possibilities..

On the other hand, for the user the HavokFX way is cheaper, and in games that doesnt use it, you could use a second video card in SLi for added rendering power (given you have identical cards).
So, both are good, the PhysX boards could stand to drop in price and really need alot more titles on the market to be very attractive.

But as I mentioned, I havent heard one title that is using HavokFX yet..
If Havok wants to do PR work, stop trying to pick on Ageia and start promoting the games using Havok FX instead, to me they come off as worried and petty really..

EDIT
Btw if havok were backwards compatible, which Im sure they wont since HavokFX is a product sold outside of any of their other licenses, it wouldnt make much different, somewhat lesser CPU utilization in older games perhaps, but whats that worth?
I doubt alot of devs would go back and add more objects, explosion effects etc to their old Havok games.